SERA2g
Founding Member
It says we are analog and that TrueNorth is the first commercial neuromorphic chip.
Not great research lol.
It says we are analog and that TrueNorth is the first commercial neuromorphic chip.
Indeed. I'm buying more on market open Monday. Soon I'll be a top 20 holder with my 7 figure holdings. I am envisaging a triple bottom and a gradual rise back to 37 before the next Gen 2 announcement. I believe the tree shake has happened, and hopefully we can have some green days next weekYes mate, Everytime Rob likes something new I purchase more shares
I'm taking the Aussie Shiraz of course
101 shares won"t get you into the Top 20.Indeed. I'm buying more on market open Monday. Soon I'll be a top 20 holder with my triple figure holdings. I am envisaging a triple bottom and a gradual rise back to 37 before the next Gen 2 announcement. I believe the tree shake has happened, and hopefully we can have some green days next week
Multiply that number by 12,000.. my bad, I meant 7 figure holdings101 shares won"t get you into the Top 20.
I've seen several tables like this comparing the various technologies, and there are disparities I feel could be confusing to people researching this processor for potential use in their products.It says we are analog and that TrueNorth is the first commercial neuromorphic chip.
Not great research lol.
Then it’s up to our management to correct these inaccuracies - they won’t though as they’re asleep at the wheel when it comes to marketing.I've seen several tables like this comparing the various technologies, and there are disparities I feel could be confusing to people researching this processor for potential use in their products.
The earlier table posted for the Brainstack technologies listed Akida power usage as "<4W", which is a real head-scratcher too. Was that power draw a result of the components in their design, from the Akida processor, or just a typo?
When I see inconsistencies like that, I wonder what specifications they list for competing products that are dubious at best. I would rather see people post links to the actual spec sheets for products instead of showcasing (in some cases very poorly) what they see as relevant attributes for a given neuromorphic solution. Sure, summarize the highlights of each product, but at least provide a reference as to where the information was obtained.
From a technical perspective, it's frustrating to see such glaring errors, and hopefully, people will call them out on it and ask them to post a correction.
I think there's a reasonable expectation for the BrainChip to correct any inaccuracies they have published or notify any partners with errors in their marketing materials to do the same. In the cases I have seen, it appears to be more research-related and not product marketing.Then it’s up to our management to correct these inaccuracies - they won’t though as they’re asleep at the wheel when it comes to marketing.
Brainchip should enlist the help of top level specialist PR firms such as these guys or another well known firm that knows the disruptive tech sector well. (see attachment)I think there's a reasonable expectation for the BrainChip to correct any inaccuracies they have published or notify any partners with errors in their marketing materials to do the same. In the cases I have seen, it appears to be more research-related and not product marketing.
I would rather the company not spend the resources actively seeking out disinformation. Trying to do that on the internet is like cutting the head off of a Hydra. If they run across such material and can notify the actual publisher (and not someone who just shared it on a forum), then, by all means, do so.
I would prefer those publishing these comparison charts be held to a higher standard and post their sources if they want to present any semblance of credibility or appear less amateurish about their research.
Hey JD, I wouldn’t expect the company to have a role solely seeking out inaccuracies, but then I’m almost certain that the companies is well aware of everything happening in the edge/neuromorphic, and as such would see all these articles by default. Sending an email to the publisher asking to have an article corrected is a small investment in time.I think there's a reasonable expectation for the BrainChip to correct any inaccuracies they have published or notify any partners with errors in their marketing materials to do the same. In the cases I have seen, it appears to be more research-related and not product marketing.
I would rather the company not spend the resources actively seeking out disinformation. Trying to do that on the internet is like cutting the head off of a Hydra. If they run across such material and can notify the actual publisher (and not someone who just shared it on a forum), then, by all means, do so.
I would prefer those publishing these comparison charts be held to a higher standard and post their sources if they want to present any semblance of credibility or appear less amateurish about their research.
Open sourced means that anyone can copy it and profit from it. IP licenses would be useless. I am sure as a shareholder we wouldn't want that.The 10th person rule that has to be a contrarian to the prevailing theory..
What’s the chances that better tech is already available but is black shelved.
You see a Nicola Tesla 100years ago with free non- fossil fuel energy, countless more examples of zero point energy, mastering of gravity control in the 1950s.. But is hoarded by the shadow government elite.
It just makes you wonder whether BRN tech is actually really as good as is promised or ever going to see the light of day in a ubiquitous nature..
Some would say if this tech is as good as it is supposed to be, it should just be open sourced..
Prove me wrong BRN..
The 10th person rule that has to be a contrarian to the prevailing theory..
What’s the chances that better tech is already available but is black shelved.
You see a Nicola Tesla 100years ago with free non- fossil fuel energy, countless more examples of zero point energy, mastering of gravity control in the 1950s.. But is hoarded by the shadow government elite.
It just makes you wonder whether BRN tech is actually really as good as is promised or ever going to see the light of day in a ubiquitous nature..
Some would say if this tech is as good as it is supposed to be, it should just be open sourced..
Prove me wrong BRN..
Your behind on the times mate. Do some researchWhat’s the chances that better tech is already available but is black shelved.
Intel has hired Suk Lee, a former senior director of TSMC's design infrastructure marketing division in charge of TSMC's Open Innovation Platform, as its Ecosystem Development VP. Lee has been with TSMC for 13 years and was a vice president within the company's design infrastructure management division before leaving with Chang in June. He has a combined experience of 44 years working for TSMC
Strange accusation there.I thought I wouldn’t have to bring this up anymore.
This will be the last time I bring this up as I have voiced my concerns previously before the last AGM.
I think our chairman is trying play the strike down.
You know why the strike happened, you wouldn’t be doing the quarterly podcast if we shareholders didn’t voice our dissatisfaction and voted against.
It was never about the share price….it was about runs on the board and lack of communication with your shareholders.
I am sick and tired of hearing this is how the tech world operates and you Aussies need to comply with the way the USA traditionally operates.
We are listed on the asx…. You have Australian shareholders that have invested and have patiently waited to see revenue or IP deals.
I have no problem with incentives for employees, however I do have a problem when we sharesholders
Are not informed of anything.
I hope management take this on board.
That’s the last time I bring this up.
There will be another strike If we keep on getting treated this way.
Go BRN.
For a start the 2 IP deals were signed over 2 years ago.Strange accusation there.
You might want to check your post before submitting as you’re posting incorrect facts here.
- We operate in the ASX, American and Germany stock exchange
- We have had revenue come in but not as much as we like and we have 2 IP deals
- Who even said we need to comply with how the USA operates ( by the way all the tech giants are in USA)
I agree entirely with this. More transparency is needed as to where the company sites regarding negotiations and if negotiations actually exist. This silence is BS, we effectively own this company and have no idea what’s happening inside its walls, yet the bonuses keep rolling, the SP keeps dropping, and no new deals are being signed. It’s getting very old and I expect better accountability.For a start the 2 IP deals were signed over 2 years ago.
No new deals since then.
We are listed on the asx….not the nasdaq.
Have a bit of respect for the investors of the company and not play dumb to why they got the strike in the first place.
If this continues It will just become a boys club with fat salaries and bonus for no return to investors.
Instead of changing his approach after the strike at the last AGM he has continued rub shareholders up the wrong way.
He needs to stop playing dumb….the strike wasn’t because of the share price, it was because of no new IP deals.
I have always said the I’m not concerned about the share price for now.
If there’s no revenue, then they must sign new IP deals.
I will always love the company, however I will call out management BS when I see it.