Bitmain declared they would experiment with radical transparency and provide shipment information on all their Z9 mini ASIC miners using hashtag #z9qa.
Since then there have been no more updates regarding shipments. Why is this?
[Moderation edit for accuracy by @daira: this post appears to have missed some of the relevant tweets, but the overall point stands that Bitmain have ceased sending the shipping and volume updates, as made clear by Nishant Sharma’s emails quoted later in the thread.]
Well, it turns out there’s something most people, including myself, have missed:
Tucked away in the July 25th press release titled “Our Transparency Policy for Shipping and Mining Practices” we can see that when it comes to transparency, it’s only good for the first batch of the first model (not all units as described back in May).
@bitcartel , @sonya
Something is wrong with your research, seriously, some weeks ago me and another member counted all posted shipped Z9 minins from first batch their twitter post and we found, if i remember right (don’t nail me on the exact number) that than back ~10.000 units have been allready shipped. Can’t remember in which topic we posted that than back, but for sure the posts are still there with the exact number some weeks ago.
In your post now you write that it’s 2,422 + 748 = 3,178 units, which is about 1/3 which we counted than back, so the numbers are definatly wrong.
Not sure, but isn’t this the guy that made as well the claim that the Zcash dev adresses with millions of income belong to Bitmain and took down the video some weeks later after he has spread his wrong and false information?
And batch 2 isn’t shipped yet. Just writting this so we don’t look like total fools when complaining to Bitmain…
This is fake news, come on. Bitmain shipped the first batch, the 2nd batch hasn’t even been shipped yet.
You’re forgetting, or rather omitting, that Innosilicon have been shipping their A9 Equihash ASIC miners @50KH/s since July, I’ve been mining on pools with a Z9 mini and seen the large hash rates from those units.
I am sure that, whilst I personally think their practices in lowering costs on the miner and giving worthless vouchers to first batch buyers stinks, Bitmain will continue with this transparency approach Once the second batch of ASIC miners start to actually ship.
Another great example how some people that have publicity try to destroy whatever. For sure 1000’s of people allready readed this total missleading post on twitter, but maybe 5 will read the correction here. Such things make me mad, seriously. And a Zcash Team Member jumping on the fake news train, amazing…
And i bet that nobody that helps spreading such fake news and missleading information has the balls later to correct that twitter clown…
You are missing the point of the thread. Numbers can be miscounted but the discussion was more about radical transparency, which bitmain absolutly isn’t as so radical transparent…
Maybe because that 7000 units shipped on June were the first batch of Z9 mini and the second batch units are not shipped yet, therefore there is no shippment to announce? The second batch of Z9 mini is planned to be shipped on Aug. 24th-31th, and the first batch of Z9: Sep. 1st-10th.
I thought you guys found some missing Z9 shipmment or bitmain’s private mining pool or something solid. I’m slightly dissapointed.
Point of the thread? It’s clearly that Bitmain didn’t hold word with their announcement about shipping dates/numbers and it’s clearly wrong as so far they announced every single unit since than.
So what i’am missing? And what point in a post with total wrong numbers, missleading & at best fake news.
You’re not missing Anything, John the latter part of your username should be dropped as it’s a misnomer. Would be helpful for the original thread starter to get their facts straight and also realise that other manufacturers have released ASIC devices since July hence hash rate increases.
And you guy’s are talking about the specific numbers and that this thread is misleading!?
The point is: what is so radical transparent letting know custumers and competition about your first batch.
Not only data of only first batch is irrelevant, but also who is telling us that data isn’t baked? How authoritative is this data?
Giving importance to a username is much more wiser, teach me master! /s
How can someone notice it IF there is NO 2nd batch yet? You are asking for numbers ahead? Predictions? Batch 2 gets shipped soonest in 1 week, so again, what i’am missing? Left alone the total missleading wrong numbers in the post.
I would agree IF there has been allready a batch 2 that was shipped and nothing was posted, but that isn’t the case.
I can’t understand this, seriously. Now Bitmain makes an afford (we will see if it lasts or not and how far it goes), but still, they did and so far hold their word.
What do we have about the other Asic producers? What? Nothing? But nobody cares? Really? Maybe some affords should go to drive the other asic producers to announce what/when they are shipping, would make more sense…
Are you asking for an audit for each shippment? Notarization? What would fit your needs to make it believible?
Actually they are posting order number, Date of Payment, Numbers of units, Shippment Date, and tested hashrate. Mate, that’s pretty much solid information in my books, not sure about your standards …
Edit: This is so far the only afford we have seen from any producer so far. I’am not aware of any Innosilicon, Baikal, Asicminer, *placeholder for the other 20 asic producers, and some really bash and question that?
All the others that provide absolutly NOTHING are ok, that’s a joke right?
So far they are abiding by thier own policy of only tweeting about the first batch:
The Zcash Foundation requested transparency about all shipments that would affect Zcash hashrate , not just the first batch.
But Bitmains new policy, from thier own press release, says that they will only Tweet about the first batch of the first new model of miners. Which is not what the Foundation requested.
I read “first batches” not “first batch” but maybe i have some problems with English plural
terms.
Without batch 2, 3, 4, * even released we do NOT know what they will report, do we?
Why bashing on Bitmain that is the only one that made affords? Why not on Innosilicon that provided nothing? Or Asicminer, nothing. Why? I just can’t follow the argumentation that the only producer that tries some kind of transparency gets bashed but nobody else.
