Quote from: VolanicEruptor on January 15, 2014, 12:02:39 AM

Quote from: cedivad on January 14, 2014, 10:56:02 PM

Quote from: VolanicEruptor on January 14, 2014, 10:51:59 PM

They're mining with our equipment and I can prove it.

Ok. I'm listening. I'm also accepting suggestion on how to prove that HF is mining with my machines, since that and i don't have many ideas other than issuing subpoenas to every possible supplier of HF. (public note: i'm not claiming HF to be mining with my machines).

Because they have already given us test results on the chips after a testing run a week ago.
You can't do a testing run and get a GH/s value unless your mining Bitcoins. Don't try telling me they're on a testnet with fake Bitcoins.

Any bitcoins produced during the testing phase should be sent to the customers. Those are our Bitcoins.

You don't need to be validating real non-testnet blockchain headers to validate that your ASIC can perform double SHA256 operations correctly. In fact, cointerra would probably want to remove as many other dependencies from their chip testing as possible. They probably are just talking directly to the chip sending random headers to hash to test performance. This will probably also be the way they will 'burn in' any chips sold to customers. This avoids requiring any credential management, large testing infrastructure or internet access when they perform this testing.

Even if they did want to start testing with an actual mining application (to test the interface code) - they could more easily do this with testnet-in-a-box just as BFL were doing - then they wouldn't need to get working internet access, or find a pool to connect to.

Connecting the chips to the live bitcoin network will probably be the final stage of testing, and probably only done once they want to prove to their customers that the chip is working as advertised.

Will