Bitmain's transparency policy over Zcash ASICs ended after just one month, and nobody even noticed

We have a press release stating what thier new policy is. If you intend to keep tweeting about all batches then why make a press release say that you only want to tweet about the first one?

I agree with you about the need for Innosilicon and other manufacturers to provide at least the same level of transparency as Bitmain is doing. Even if it’s just good for the first batch it’s better than nothing.

3 Likes

Ok, let’s fit it up:

  • Press releases states “first batches for first models”. I read batches, not batch, which at least for me should include at least 2, hopefully more batches. Where does it come from that we talk about only 1 batch?

  • it states clearly “experimental” which at least in my opinion should allow tweaking, improvement, whatever and is nothing final. Again, may English might not be the best, but that’s what i get out of it.

  • the subject of this topic: Bitmain’s transparency policy over Zcash ASICs ended after just one month.
    How do we know after no units are shipped since than and batch 2 even not released so far? This doesn’t sound fair to me, no way. Again, i would totally agree with the subject if batch 2 was shipped allready, but it hasn’t, hence nothing to post or announce. Can’t someone really wait another 1 or 2 weeks until batch 2 begins and than comment on it? Just doesn’t sound fair, simple as that.

  • Why posting totally wrong numbers? I found immediatly within 1 minute data for 7 shippments while the post discredites only data for 3 shipments? This leaves a bad taste of intentially discrediting.

  • Why 0 post, comment, action, whatever towards Innosilicon. Why? We have nothing from them, no numbers, no shipping date, just nothing. No post? No topic? No complain? No info? No action? How it comes that even Sonya immediatly agrees to complain to Bitmain, but nobody has taken action towards the others? Doesn’t sound fair to me either. Not only it is unfair, but Bitmain doesn’t get even the chance to provide info in 1-2 weeks after batch 2 gets shipped but is guilty allready bevor that.

  • Than we have the hashrate topic in this topic. Obviously hashrate goes up, no doubt about that. But again, everything is put towards Bitmain, no word for Innosilicon involved, Asicminer testing their Asicminers, no, just toward Bitmain as it was the only equihash producer. Damn, they have even only the less good performing asic for equihash. It’s not fair, it’s not objective and in my opinion this topic is just fake discrediting junk.

  • I personally would totally agree/support a topic that sounds like: We should try to expand Bitmain and the other asic producers policy to release data about all batches in case it’s limited only for the first batch(es). That would be objective, usefull and meaningfull, but not this topic …

Turn it as you want, it my book this topic is absolutly unfair towards a company that at least tries something, favouring the companies that did NOTHING toward the batch policy the foundation ask for.

1 Like

I think we have a small misunderstanding of the English sentence construction.

There will be more than one model of ASIC that this policy applies to, so it says " within the First Batches" Batches is plural because there is more than one model that will have a first batch.

If they had intended to mean “All Batches” then they would not have used the word “First”. They simply could have said “We will do this for all batches” but the way it is worded currently means they will only be transparent tweeting about the “First Batches” for all models of ASICs.

2 Likes

@boxalex @Vbrik I’m happy to report there is no “fake news”. Let me try explaining a different way, if you found the original post to be unclear:

  1. Bitmain’s May blog post describes their new transparency policy which applies to all units:

We have therefore decided to carry out the shipments and QA of all Antminer Z9 Mini units in the most transparent fashion possible.

  1. Bitmain’s first tweet with shipping information was on May 27 and the last tweet was on June 27.

  2. Bitmain’s July press release says their transparency policy only applies to some units:

We will publish information… for the first model of all new miners
… shipments within the first batches of those models

As @Shawn and others have alluded to, what constitutes a “model” and “batch” is completely arbitrary and upto the manufacturer to decide.

5 Likes

@bitcartel

Than again, some questions just remain for me totally unanswered:

  • has the transparency afford by bitmain officially ended allready as the subject of this topic states:
    Bitmain’s transparency policy over Zcash ASICs ended after just one month, and nobody even noticed.

  • What about the experimental transparency as it was announced. Anybody gave them some feedback? Anybody suggested them improvements? If yes, which and when?

  • Why don’t we wait to see IF the transparancy includes following batches but jump on them after they absolutly have shown good faith with batch 1 with even more information someone would ask for, including: order number, date of payment, shipping date, number of units, hashrate of tested unit.

  • What improvement do you want to have them with their transparency policy? I mean after it’s anyway questioned if they do it honest, where is the deal even to ask them to do so? Audit? Notarization? What exactly can they do so everybody is happy?

  • What actions/posts/complaints/whatever have been done so far towards Innosilicon and Asicminer? What information did we get from them? Nothing? If nothing has been undertaken so far, but Bitmain gets bashed upfront than in my opinion it’s pure biased threatment.

  • What is the penalty for not following transperancy policy?

  • You mention the last shipping information to be June 27th. Batch 2 will be released for shipping in soonest 1 week, so why is it strange that the last announcement for Batch 1 was on 27th June? Sounds absolutly legit for me, what do i miss that there is a break btw. batch 1 and batch 2?

  • About: what constitutes a “model” and “batch” is completely arbitrary and upto the manufacturer to decide. Anybody contacted them and got an answer what a model and batch is? How to solve this problem? Suggestions? I mean Zcash asked Bitmain for information, they followed these request and at least try to do something (not saying it’s yet perfect) but after these press releases are available for longer now, did Zcash directly ask for more information or is it better to handle the issue in publicity without direct contact?

I know, a lot of questions, and i bet most will stay unanswered or avoided … but i give it a try …

2 Likes

I sympathize.

Bitmain are an incredible company, an iconic leader in the space, and the founders deserve their plaudits. I posted as much here: Bitmain: selling BTC, accumulating BCH, mega IPO approaching. However, being an Amazon or Goldman Sachs does bring extra scrutiny and criticism – and you are held, at times unfairly, to a higher standard than your competitors.

Personally, I think that miners and manufacturers do not need to disclose any information to the Zcash Foundation. First, if the information cannot be verified, what purpose does it serve? Second, and most importantly, Bitcoin style cryptocurrencies are supposed to be trustless, it’s the very reason why proof-of-work exists.

3 Likes

Uhm, so why did we ask for it than? Just to say later it doesn’t proof anything, it’s useless, they lie/hide anyway?

The Zcash Foundation (whom are independent) asked for the information.

2 Likes

So the biggest issue on (transparent) hashrate domination has come worse than secret mining issue.

Nishant Sharma emailed us the following:

Thank you for flagging this.

The objective of us revealing that information was to let buyers or potential buyers of the Antminer Z9 mini, which was the world’s first ASIC miner to mine Zcash, be able to plan for a sudden increase in hashrate. This is why we Tweeted the very first shipments, after which the the effect of each shipment on the network difficulty of Zcash (which now already included ASIC miners) kept becoming less significant. This is why we discontinued the Tweets after some time and also likely why nobody noticed it.

Furthermore, finding out from finance in Beijing HQ the time of payment of the orders being fulfilled by every shipment and also finding out the time of shipment from QA as well as from the shipping team in Shenzhen, then Tweeting the result required either someone working full-time to Tweet this or a training of the Chinese workers in the QA or shipping team in Shenzhen in social media used in foreign countries (and also in the rationale behind the disclosure, which would be incomplete without explaining the community-driven nature of cryptocurrencies).

This is the same rationale behind our commitment to transparently ship the very first batches of only the miners that use Bitmain’s next-gen ASIC chips in the future (our policy, with the rationale behind it).

He added in another email:

Forgot to mention that I haven’t checked when we stopped Tweeting those updates, it is possible that we did it until that batch was full shipped out. It is a Sunday and, as described, confirming this would require me to check with the teams in Shenzhen on a workday.

Nishant gave me permission to share the email here.

6 Likes

I’d love to know what numbers they are looking at to come to that conclusion.

1 Like

So that means each batch will have less volume from now on? Otherwise, if the batch sizes go up it is the opposite effect.

1 Like

Maybe they’re talking about the psychological effect, its obvious English isnt primary

I have a batch 2 z9 mini coming. They weren’t scheduled to ship until August 22- September 1 so it kind of makes sense that there hasn’t been an update yet… kind of jumping the gun here

1 Like

So, Nishant Sharma’s email makes it abundantly clear that Bitmain have stopped sending shipping and volume updates. There is no “fake news” here.

To be honest I never trusted them to continue doing this in the first place. I don’t see how we can distinguish their actions from merely an attempt to influence the PoW-change debate in their favour, rather than genuine commitment to transparency.

9 Likes

Adapt to the Chinese Mind set, it’s way different then ours.
But in all fairness, what realy got me was the fact that the coin that says to be the nr1 privacy coin, put his faith in the hand of some Chinese Asic manufactors, not only Bitmain.
I am waiting for the first big attack on these asics, going to happen sooner or later

1 Like

My Z9 mini (2nd batch) is already shipped. Just got a message from UPS, requesting my trade ID for import. But strangely, on Bitmain website, it says that my order is “unshipped”, and no official shippment announcement on their twitter. I got my tracking number and B/L number from UPS, and I checked that it was the shipment for Z9 mini.

1 Like

Oh wow I just made a UPS account and mine will be here Monday. There’s an import fee right?

That depends on what country you are in, but usually yes.

up to your country import fee and of course VAT. In most/many countries the shipping costs are included into the amount the import fee/custom tax/VAT are calculated… Just have it in mind.