Member Info for Phimx

Scottwins: You post

" Also why has FG mentioned Intel from early in QBT method development, why has he told Investors that Intel helped QBT on where to place methods on the ASIC,"

For Methods A and B no changes are required to ASICs. Those methods reduce the search space of the gigantic range of possibilities. The block header is processed and parameters are sent to the ASIC to begin hashing at some location I.e. a NONCE value. Conventional the NONCE is then continually incremented. The problem appears to be QBT does not have the flexibility over the ASIC to change NONCE values and possibly other values as they would like.

According to Gardin the methods have been changed, with greatly reduced performance, to allow them to somehow work with any ASIC - sounds far fetched !

So from that snippet above, Gardin verifies that ASICs do not have the methods 'placed' in the ASICs

Usersteve:

You beat me to it. Scottwins has deliberately mislead this board with his fanciful claims.

There is no documented evidence that mining has been conducted on Inel ASICs

Scottwins: You post

" FG has said he believes this to be based on the same architecture as the Intel chip design ..."

Archicture isn't function !

Does it have the versatility to perform method B non-standard hashing. QBT have had great difficulty interfacing with ASICs and only have greatly reduced performance from what was touted in several RNS.

You continue to ignore the fact that Gardin has stated ge is not targetting the latest ASICs and for that to be said there must be very good reasons.

Scottwins:

You mean this mention "A U.S. company, Block, Inc. has announced the release of a prototype ASIC chip which QBT believes could be suitable"

A why do QBT believe its suitable, they have no details. They couldn't get CGMiner working when all the information was available on GIThub.

Now the wave a wand and think Block's ASIC 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 be suitable.

But then along comes June and Gardin states they are not targetting the latest ASICs.

Believe old Flip-Flop in March or June, the man just spins around and around.

Scottwins:

June supersedes March !

Not the short !!6

Scottwins:

Please explain how it is exciting for QBT investors. As I pointed out earlier and you've just totally ignored, Gardin is targetting the after market control board market, using Bitmain 13Xx ASICs. Well he is this month, God knows what the target, ASIC, miner, country will be next month?

Maidit:

If Frank is sitting on great news, he's breaking the Market Abuse Regulations. Obviously that news would have a big impact on the share price.

Why do you always manage to post ridiculous ideas. You have gone and bought lorry loads of this enormous gamble. I guess when your money expires the light bulb will start to glow for you.

Good luck with your investments

So Block could become the mining leader with their new ASIC and mining rig but with no place for Method B or method C in the immediate future.

So QBT reliant upon some iffy Chinese miners now !

Scottwins:

From the presentation given, it doesn't look promising for QBT with block; they are definitely pro Open Source so won't be introducing licensed software onto their Rig.

Scottwins: You post

" This new Rig looks awsum and its open source so no aftermarket control board needed."

So that's QBT screwed then, because what Gardin said 19 June 2025 was

" QBT will, therefore, look to deploy its technology in partnership with the aftermarket control board providers mainly on miners produced by the leading Chinese mining rig manufacturers where tens of thousands of aftermarket control boards are currently installed."

Mrhanji: You post

" FG has been straight with us ..."

God alone how you can make that ridiculous claim. Gardin has written out RNS after RNS, people like you jump up and down with excitement then the claims do not appear. This is evident for all to check out and verify.

Mrhanji you are simply ignoring the obvious, apart from Gardins intial venture into the business world, he's achieved very little in his 50+ business forays.

Scottwins: You post

" Phimx, sorry I mean Allfor, so the legacy case deals must have been set up a long time ago, what were the terms back then, i mean it would be great to see the whole story, not just your agenda driven bashing."

I have no interest in the legacy deals whatsoever. I do not recall ever writing about the on going court case. This will be my first post on the subject

Scottwins: You post

" then it should just run in the new Block chips out this week as they are open source and have the same architecture ast the old Intel chips. Core Scientific have bought a ton of these chips."

Where have QBT ever said that everything worked fine on the Intel ASIC ?

What ASICs do any of the Methods work as designed ?

What ASICs/ Rigs did QBT conduct live mining recently?

????

Plutuq: You post

"Nothing less will appease everyone paying FGs extortionate 12k monthly consultancy fee."

Per final results It's £16,250 per month !

Scottwins: You post

" So Phimx, how would you show case Method B without animation or AI?"

Gardin is merely showing two figures pictorially that have been written in text. What's wrong with the text. The cartoons provide no other information whatsoever. They are pathetic and only impress fools.

Scottwins: You post

" Funny how you ignore and don’t mention any of the latest updates."

The latest updates?

Isn't that where Gardin tells unsuspecting shareholders that the methods aren't working effectively 3% instead of 10% and North of 10% for the 160% method B. Far from ignoring I think I've mentioned that a couple of times.!

Scottwins:

You are obviously easily swayed by vague and ambiguous wording. Gardin has said they are not targetting the latest ASICs so what ASICs are the targets? We can infer its the leading Chineses miners and presumably using BM13xx ASICs but why can't get he be explicit.We also know the methods are working at greatly reduced efficiciency. Does that mean for the next couple of years or more miners won't see the full benefits. Does Proto's new 3nm ASIC negate the gains provided by the reduced efficiencies ? Do the methods work correctly on any ASIC ?

Answer those questions with reference to what Gardin has said or written. Pointing to pathetic animations which simply show the numbers 10 and 26 just doesn't cut it in my book.

Scottwins: You post

“The Company is currently considering its additional hardware choices for the deployment of Method B as there are a number of viable options available ..."

Statements which mean what exactly ? Where are the hard facts ? The decisions. the results of discussions.

What exactly can the methods achieve on specific systems..

Specifics specifics

Scottwins:

Of course those childish cartoons showing numbers incrementing are totally out of data. The QBT web site must be put together by Gardin himself, its a disgrace for a AI R&D company.

So those numbers are no longer possible with Methods A and B. The current performance on God knows what platforms are 3% for Method A and North of 10% for Method B. In addition, Gardin has stated the latest ASICs are not being targeted. Again another ambiguous statement to muddy the water further.

Scottwins: Your original post, which i query was

" Scottwins: You post

" QBT based method B on the Intel BM1370 ASIC. In testing this produce a strike rate of 26 BTC mined against 10 BTC mined on the same miner without QBT software which is 160% increase in BTC mined. This is shown on the QBT web page"

Where is that stated ?"

You seem confused, the BM1370 chip is not an Intel chip