Quote from: Inaba on December 02, 2011, 12:48:37 AM

I said nothing of the sort. In fact, I said the opposite. This is yet ANOTHER straw man you are using to bolster your completely failed arguments. This is what I'm talking about... you pick and choose small points that either are outright fabrications (such as this instance), out of context or "mistakes" and then use them to demonstrate why your points are correct. This is a classical fallacy and you are repeatedly falling into it, even after I've pointed it out. There's only so much hand holding I can do here.

Actually you did say a troll and I said you seem to be in love with this company now so I just implied why dont you buy $7k worht of the boards (10 now). I pick points that seem to not add up and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. How am I using any fallacy to illustrate my point? It seems you are just pulling shit out of your ass now.

Quote from: Inaba on December 02, 2011, 12:48:37 AM

So you've absolutely no experience in operating a business and yet you are somehow qualified to make pronouncements on exactly what is required? How does that work? Heck, I guess that makes me a particle physicist, since I've read up on the subject a little bit. I notice you completely gloss over the fact that I have in the past run several start ups and currently run a full fledged corporation OUT OF MY RESIDENCE, thus disproving your point. Hiring people most definitely does NOT require office space... and often it does not even require capital - you offer stock options/portions of the company. You will find many, many people in the tech industry willing to work for "free" to own a part of a company they believe in. I don't know what BFL has done in this regards, I am simply speaking from a) experience and b) in general.

I have business experience but not a startup. You admit it requires capital and I don't know many people that would work for free or even for a portion of a business this small. People have bills to pay unless you have too much money. Does your landlord know you run a business out of your residence? If so I am sure you are violating your lease and can/will eventually be evicted. If you own thats a different story but clearly they do not. Again it seems you are speaking out your ass.

Quote from: Inaba on December 02, 2011, 12:48:37 AM

It's not my definition of the a scam, it's THE definition of a scam (feel free to look it up). It is the generally agreed on definition by the entire English speaking world; you are of course free to re-define it as you wish, but that doesn't mean people are going to agree with you. You know nothing of business and I have not seen any evidence you know much technical detail about chip fabrication and/or PCB design or FPGA / ASIC design, yet you are again trying to speak authoritatively. As a point of fact, power consumption does not rise exponentially - if it did, your board , CPU or GPU would burst into flames and your house wire would melt if you overclocked your CPU even a little bit. Power consumption typically follows an increasingly steepening curve to failure - eventually you might get into an exponential rise, but your hardware would have failed long before then.

OK I didnt break out websters but so far they have misled us either deliberately or not. Given that the people with the most experience with FPGAs on this board doubted the claims from the outright for the power consumption and output I would say it sounds deliberate (or that they don't really know what they are talking about). I never claimed to be a PCB design expert and I am going off of what the experts here are saying. Exponential power consumption occurs at some point when overclocking but a steepening curve still gets my point across. I have my CPU well overclocked and it uses a lot more power per watt than at stock settings. Same with my GPU. Either way the more hashing power the more the power consumption which means they have failed on their promise of 19.6W (quite the specific number too btw).

Quote from: Inaba on December 02, 2011, 12:48:37 AM

You can reiterate that I have somehow been "charmed" by these people all you want, but you have yet to produce any evidence or counter arguments to what I have said. You have produced a few straw men and knocked them down handily. You've provided some rhetoric. Produce something tangible by way of countering ANYTHING I've said so far and you can then potentially label me "charmed." I have reported exactly what I've seen, without bias and within the ground rules that were set forth PRIOR to the test. How is it that I've been "charmed" again?

Anyway, I'm done. I've said what I came to say and unless you have some form of rebutal that doesn't involve straw and rhetoric, there's not much point in continuing this line of discussion.

You seem to like using the word straw a lot. I am merely pointing out what I have observed. If thats being a straw man than you got me! I also did some work earlier in the thread trying to track down any signs of legitimacy to this businsess in paper form and was unable to. This could have simply been disproven by them by providing a business license which would then be confirmed? Why the secrecy with the business license? You seem to be quite biased now lashing out with insults to anyone who still questions this company, hence the question by the other user if they are paying you now. Thats more than just me who thinks this.

So how much straw are you selling Inaba? Either way im not buying. I didnt challenge your numbers at all during testing just the company itself so there is no reason for you to take offence the way you did if you were truly unbiased.

I just really dont know what else to add here because you seem to be lashing out at me for merely pointing out observations as an unbiased, uninvested observer. I think you should try and evaluate if you are truly objective anymore because I sure question it.