More info from IRC...
He claims that punin defined "unit" as not being the full 400 Gh/s
in this post.
I disagree; punin admits the single board did not meet expectations, but he never says the ordered unit won't. On the contrary, he says an additional board will be provided to make sure the delivered specs are met.
It seems to me two boards comprise the full unit of this "first batch".
Not the advertised design, but it does meet the advertised specs the bet mentioned.
Furthermore, he also admits that he made this bet
after he though the conclusion was certain (ie, reading that post), and that he was not prepared to lose.
Betting when one is certain of the outcome is morally wrong unless the other party agrees knowing you are certain.This can clearly not be the case for everyone who bet before the forum post in question.
So, I'm not at all sympathetic, as he basically tried to steal from the other betters.
While I still wouldn't recommend trusting mircea_popescu (who runs bitbet), he clearly made the right decision in this case.
Maybe.
"I will ship your ordered hashrate regardless (ie. more hardware free of charge) until we fix this issue and can provide 400GH in one unit."
If he didn't ship the additional boards by September 1st (I have no idea) which'd get a unit up to 400GH/s, then it couldn't be considered that 400GH/s units were delivered, right? 365GH/s delivered + more later =/= 400GH/s delivered.
The additional boards were shipping with the original order. The individual boards were rated @ 25GH/s they seem to do on average 21GH/s.
Starter kits (25 GH/s total vs 42 GH/s shipped):
Advertised: 1 host + 1 board
Shipped: 1 host + 2 boards
Full Kit (400 GH/s total vs >400 GH/s shipped)
Advertised: 1 host + 16 boards
Shipped: 2 hosts + 18-21 boards (enough to ensure total output was >400 GH/s)
Still the bet was poorly worded and hopefully people in the future will start making better worded bets.
IF the bet was they will delivery hardware by date with <= 1 J/GH efficiency (as measured by 12VDC load) and <= $20 per GH (excluding shipping costs) it would be a clear "Yes.
The OP complaint isn't that not enough hashing power was delivered or it wasn't efficient enough. His complaint is that on the 400 GH/s sales it shipped as 2 hosts + 18-21 boards instead of 1 host + 16 boards. Is 2 hosts + 18-21 boards "one unit"? I would say probably yes but bets should be worded better so there is absolutely no ambiguity.
Thanks. Edited my own post to try covering that a bit. If the boards can't fit in one unit, then it's not ambiguity being a problem at all, but explicit clarity which covered this exact kind of situation, right? The quote I posted shows punin indicating he was not (at that time) able to produce a 400GH/s unit, and that 16 boards make up a unit.