BRN Discussion Ongoing

[toasty]

As Sean H has previously said : not to judge him on effort but on results ........... and his other statement : watch the financials....... IMO, it will be interesting to see what evenuates in this and the next 4C before the AGM

Yes it will be interesting. A second strike at the AGM would be distracting for the board and management so I hope it doesn't happen. That said, I'll be abstaining as my own personal protest at their largesse to themselves in the face of a collapsing share price and no visible commercial/revenue improvements. I am satisfied with their ecosystem progress but gifting themselves parcels of shares when they have has not been a good look......FWIW

 

[AARONASX]

I still assume there is a lot is going on behind closed doors, firing the CEO because it's taken too long for us shareholds to see profits can have a negative effect and will not paint a good picture for Brainchip....if they are seen to unable to get their sh*t together.

Been transparent to your share holders as to what the company is doing, why delays and what the company is doing about it, or even how busy the team is...a road map / updated investor presentation is deffently needed right about now,

For all we know Sean may be signing left right and centre NDA and inking contract deals as we agrue which is better than we can hope or dream, or alternatively we have been hoodwinked..time will tell

Maybe juding on effort might have been the better option

 

[Fact Finder]

Just a few comments:

1. A second strike, a spill and election of Directors does not touch the position of CEO. His/Her position is unaffected.

2. It has been stated more than once and in some detail by the Chair at the last AGM that as Brainchip cannot afford to match market salaries dollar for dollar to attract the right people they provide shares as part of the salary package.

3. Work is such a ‘sh-t’ you have to pay people to do it.

4. I cannot name anyone from my life experience who refused to take their pay on pay day.

My opinion only DYOR
Fact Finder

 

[toasty]

Just a few comments:

1. A second strike, a spill and election of Directors does not touch the position of CEO. His/Her position is unaffected.

2. It has been stated more than once and in some detail by the Chair at the last AGM that as Brainchip cannot afford to match market salaries dollar for dollar to attract the right people they provide shares as part of the salary package.

3. Work is such a ‘sh-t’ you have to pay people to do it.

4. I cannot name anyone from my life experience who refused to take their pay on pay day.

My opinion only DYOR
Fact Finder

Except when the CEO is also a director, which I believe Sean is.............

 

[Fact Finder]

Except when the CEO is also a director, which I believe Sean is.............

It still does not remove him as CEO.
The Current Board has on its face been happy with his performance and approved his decisions.

Re-election of Directors is a simple majority vote. If they stand again highly likely they will be elected again as 51% can be garnered from the top 1,000 shareholders who hold 70% of the shares on issue.

To remove CEO it would require a majority of new Board members not aligned with the CEO to be elected.

Where will those alternate Directors come from the ranks of HC.

We do not know of any friendly institution or company sitting amongst the ranks of shareholders.

I am sure those who are calling for this vote will continue to do so and offer no answers to these questions.

My opinion only DYOR
Fact Finder

 

[Bravo]

Perhaps Rob should call Sam Altman to remind him of an available resource that isn't nuclear fusion which can help with this issue. Would be the perfect opportunity to discuss the benefits of neuromorphic computing in helping to reduce AI's massive energy consumption.


EXTRACT ONLY

Sam Altman: Age of AI will require an ‘energy breakthrough’​

Speaking at Davos, OpenAI's CEO spoke of a vague AI future made possible only by currently unavailable resources.

BY MACK DEGEURIN | PUBLISHED JAN 18, 2024 2:09 PM EST

• TECHNOLOGY

Sam Altman, chief executive officer of OpenAI, attends the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland. Halil Sagirkaya/Anadolu via Getty


Open AI CEO Sam Altman believes long-awaited nuclear fusion may be the silver bullet needed to solve artificial intelligence’s glutinous energy appetite and pave the way for an AI revolution. When that revolution does arrive, however, it might not seem quite as shocking as he once claimed.

Altman touched on AI’s growing demands earlier this week while speaking at a Bloomberg event outside of the annual World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, Switzerland. The CEO said powerful new AI models would likely require even more energy consumption than previously imagined. Solving that energy deficit, he suggested, will require a “breakthrough” in nuclear fusion.

“There’s no way to get there without a breakthrough,” Altman said at the event according to Reuters. “It motivates us to go invest more in [nuclear] fusion.”

AI’s energy problem​

Though some AI proponents believe insights gleaned from advanced models could help fight climate change in novel ways, a growing body of research suggests the up-front energy required to train these complex models is taking a toll of its own. Experts expect the vast amounts of data needed to train models like OpenAI’s GPT and Google’s Bard could increase the global data server industry, which the International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates already accounts for around 2-3% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Researchers estimate training a single large language model like GPT-4 could use around 300 tons of CO2. Others estimate a single image spit out by AI image generator tools like Dall-E or Stable Diffusion requires the same amount of energy as charging a smartphone. The massive server farms needed to facilitate AI training also require vast amounts of water to stay cool. GPT-3 alone, recent research suggests, may have consumed 185,000 gallons of water during its training period.

Sam Altman: Age of AI will require an 'energy breakthrough'

Speaking at Davos, OpenAI's CEO spoke of a vague AI future made possible only by currently unavailable resources.

www.popsci.com

 

[White Horse]

Just a few comments:

1. A second strike, a spill and election of Directors does not touch the position of CEO. His/Her position is unaffected.

2. It has been stated more than once and in some detail by the Chair at the last AGM that as Brainchip cannot afford to match market salaries dollar for dollar to attract the right people they provide shares as part of the salary package.

3. Work is such a ‘sh-t’ you have to pay people to do it.

4. I cannot name anyone from my life experience who refused to take their pay on pay day.

My opinion only DYOR
Fact Finder

Hello FF,
I can think of only two. Although they were in public office not public companies.
The most recent was Alderman Ted Mack, mayor of North Sydney.
And secondly, and probably the most industrious was Charles Moore, Lord Mayor of Sydney 1867-69.
Both of whom, refused to take a salary.

 

[Fullmoonfever]

Except when the CEO is also a director, which I believe Sean is.............

Hi Toasty,

I posted this elsewhere a while ago to hopefully add some clarity.

Highlighted a bit below to make it simple....given there doesn't appear to be a specific titled MD I would expect he is essentially the MD as part of the CEO title. So I expect a spill won't affect him imo.

The other thing is I read that whilst a second strike may be voted for by all SH, it is not a fait accompli as the below states that the company then has to put it to a vote AT the AGM to those attending and eligible to see if it is supported.

Seems to be key wording there and I could be wrong but appears only those AT the meeting can then cast an overall vote and even then it then has to go to an EGM.


What is the two strikes rule?

In summary, the two strikes rule is a staged process that works like this.

1. At its annual general meeting (AGM), the company must put a resolution to approve the remuneration report to shareholders. If more than 25 per cent of eligible shareholders vote against the resolution, the company receives a ‘first strike’.
2. At the following year’s AGM, the company must again put a resolution to approve the remuneration report to shareholders. If, in that year, more than 25 per cent of the eligible shareholders again vote against the resolution, the company receives a ‘second strike’.
3. If the company receives two consecutive ‘no’ votes on the remuneration report resolutions, then the company must immediately put to the AGM at which the second ‘no’ vote was cast a resolution to hold a spill meeting.
4. If the majority of those at the AGM eligible to vote on the spill resolution vote to support the spill resolution, then all board positions (except for the managing director) are declared vacant and become open for election, and a special meeting must then be held within 90 days of the spill resolution — the extraordinary general meeting (EGM).
5. The EGM will then consider whether to spill some or all of the board.

Each step has specific rules in relation to shareholder voting eligibility.

 

[7für7]

I keep realizing with amazement how little patience people generally have in today's time. In the stock market, the younger generation demands a startup to achieve in performance what others have accomplished in a span of 10-20 years. Just imagine that. Others think that the stock price will go to $150 overnight once invested. Nonsense. In the job market, people demand utopian salaries with a 4-day workweek, 5-hour workday, and 300 days of vacation – no wonder everything is going downhill. Due to all the YouTubers and Insta stars, people have lost touch with reality and the processes in the free market economy

 

[Damo4]

Oh man, are we really going through this again. It's not even May...

 

[toasty]

It still does not remove him as CEO.
The Current Board has on its face been happy with his performance and approved his decisions.

Re-election of Directors is a simple majority vote. If they stand again highly likely they will be elected again as 51% can be garnered from the top 1,000 shareholders who hold 70% of the shares on issue.

To remove CEO it would require a majority of new Board members not aligned with the CEO to be elected.

Where will those alternate Directors come from the ranks of HC.

We do not know of any friendly institution or company sitting amongst the ranks of shareholders.

I am sure those who are calling for this vote will continue to do so and offer no answers to these questions.

My opinion only DYOR
Fact Finder

You are correct that it does not affect the CEO position per se. However, it does affect his position as a director - his position would become vacant like the others. I think we all remember the vote against Peter a couple of years ago by at least one large holder. I don't remember ever finding out who was responsible for that vote or why it happened but it shows that large holders are willing to follow their own agendas if that does not accord with how they perceive the board to be perfoming.

 

[LuWil]

Talks about Edge/On Device AI

 

[7für7]

Major shareholders have different plans than small shareholders. Small shareholders just want a piece of the pie with the few stocks they've bought. Major shareholders want to influence the business process. Those are different matters. Major shareholders are also willing to accept a reverse split to drive away the small fish. This also benefits the company when you see the constant demands being made here. It is quite burdensome for the company. People should not complain afterwards that the echo reverberates when demanding a "second strike." It is wrong to think that it will end well for small shareholders afterward. Just my opinion

 

[Fact Finder]

Talks about Edge/On Device AI

Thanks LuWil this is a must watch.

My opinion only DYOR
Fact Finder

 

[Fact Finder]

Hello FF,
I can think of only two. Although they were in public office not public companies.
The most recent was Alderman Ted Mack, mayor of North Sydney.
And secondly, and probably the most industrious was Charles Moore, Lord Mayor of Sydney 1867-69.
Both of whom, refused to take a salary.

Yes and Ted Mack after being elected to Parliament resigned a couple of days short of the entitlement to a lifetime pension.

What bothers me about this constant debate run out of HC is the lie that a second strike and Board spill will in some way punish Sean Hehir the CEO.

If they were not misleading shareholders and simply saying they want to kick, Peter van der Made, Du Loan and others off the Board for poor performance so be it but constantly suggesting this is going to punish the CEO in some way is a complete lie.

The CEO and Chair claim there are all sorts of Non Discloser and Commercial in Confidence Agreements in place that they would love to tell shareholders about because if they could it would inspire confidence.

If these are truthful statements then the current Board would be privy to these details and as such know that the CEO is doing his job properly.

The recent reveal of OnSemi, Infineon and Microchip supports the fact that they are telling the truth.

So the Board gets spilled. Some new Directors are elected. They take on the requirements of the old Board and are bound by these agreements not to disclose details to shareholders.

Seeing these agreements they realise that the CEO has been doing his job and nothing changes.

The manipulators then having crushed the share price move on to their next tactic.

The ignorant, the angry and the misled wake up to the fact that nothing has changed except the share price has been crushed.

If and when it happens I will not be affected as I am a long term investor like in the olden days when shareholders on the ASX held their shares on average for at least seven years.

Strangely I am about to commence the seventh year of my investing in Brainchip. Funny that could account for why I am relaxed and others are not.

My opinion only DYOR
Fact Finder

 

[Diogenese]

Perhaps Rob should call Sam Altman to remind him of an available resource that isn't nuclear fusion which can help with this issue. Would have been the perfect opportunity to discuss the benefits of neurmorphic computing in helping to reduce AI's massive energy consumption.


EXTRACT ONLY

Sam Altman: Age of AI will require an ‘energy breakthrough’​

Speaking at Davos, OpenAI's CEO spoke of a vague AI future made possible only by currently unavailable resources.

BY MACK DEGEURIN | PUBLISHED JAN 18, 2024 2:09 PM EST

• TECHNOLOGY

Sam Altman, chief executive officer of OpenAI, attends the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland. Halil Sagirkaya/Anadolu via Getty


Open AI CEO Sam Altman believes long-awaited nuclear fusion may be the silver bullet needed to solve artificial intelligence’s glutinous energy appetite and pave the way for an AI revolution. When that revolution does arrive, however, it might not seem quite as shocking as he once claimed.

Altman touched on AI’s growing demands earlier this week while speaking at a Bloomberg event outside of the annual World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, Switzerland. The CEO said powerful new AI models would likely require even more energy consumption than previously imagined. Solving that energy deficit, he suggested, will require a “breakthrough” in nuclear fusion.

“There’s no way to get there without a breakthrough,” Altman said at the event according to Reuters. “It motivates us to go invest more in [nuclear] fusion.”

AI’s energy problem​

Though some AI proponents believe insights gleaned from advanced models could help fight climate change in novel ways, a growing body of research suggests the up-front energy required to train these complex models is taking a toll of its own. Experts expect the vast amounts of data needed to train models like OpenAI’s GPT and Google’s Bard could increase the global data server industry, which the International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates already accounts for around 2-3% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Researchers estimate training a single large language model like GPT-4 could use around 300 tons of CO2. Others estimate a single image spit out by AI image generator tools like Dall-E or Stable Diffusion requires the same amount of energy as charging a smartphone. The massive server farms needed to facilitate AI training also require vast amounts of water to stay cool. GPT-3 alone, recent research suggests, may have consumed 185,000 gallons of water during its training period.

Sam Altman: Age of AI will require an 'energy breakthrough'

Speaking at Davos, OpenAI's CEO spoke of a vague AI future made possible only by currently unavailable resources.

www.popsci.com

Hi Bravo,

Yes - Akida is much more efficient than CNN-based systems, and will avoid all Sam's con-FUSION.

Akida uses pattern recognition rather than mathematical equivalence.

Akida's one-shot on-chip learning provides massive energy saving when creating or updating models.

Creating 4-bit native SNN models will consume much less energy than native CNN models. In addition, Akida requires fewer examples of each class than a CNN model uses.

 

[White Horse]

I keep realizing with amazement how little patience people generally have in today's time. In the stock market, the younger generation demands a startup to achieve in performance what others have accomplished in a span of 10-20 years. Just imagine that. Others think that the stock price will go to $150 overnight once invested. Nonsense. In the job market, people demand utopian salaries with a 4-day workweek, 5-hour workday, and 300 days of vacation – no wonder everything is going downhill. Due to all the YouTubers and Insta stars, people have lost touch with reality and the processes in the free market economy

Absolutely agree.
A lot of people that have invested in BRN, and are now crying fowl, are victims of there own misguided unrealistic enthusiasm.

We are dealing with technology that in the first instance, most industries new nothing about. And if they did, they had no idea how they were going to incorporate it into products and then market them to an uneducated public.
Then there is the problem of changing the status quo. The almost impossible task of of persuading people that a new minnow on the block was to be even considered, as a viable alternative to the reigning champions of the tech world.

The froth and bubble has subsided and we are finally getting down to business.
The CES this year has proved that the early enthusiasm has crossed the so called chasm. The conversations held with Nandan during the show alluded to that fact.
The conversations at DAVOS have cemented that view, of the all pervading AI, being the next revolution.

We clearly have been quietly kicking goals, in stealth mode. And whether it be to some shareholders liking or not, if the companies we deal with want to fly under the radar, then so be it.

A bit disjointed I know. But I don't feel like writing a dissertation to appease the the angry and aggrieved.

The futures bright and I'm alright.

 

[manny100]

Good Morning,

I have to say that I agree with the posts some have made in regards to Nandan's podcast series.

He has briefly interviewed a number of market players whom all send the same type of message, that is, AI is everywhere, education
has been taking a positive form, the net has been cast wide and far to the point that the questions being put forward by inquiring parties
is endless, the scope of which is being driven by the human imagination, AI has possibly changed the human prospective to the point
where nothing is impossible anymore.

It's clear to me at least that the journey we have all been on has turned a major corner, we have all become more educated to the point
where companies are now being approached to actually design and produce a product/s, meaning things have definitely moved onto the
next phase in the business cycle, not just for us, but for all companies in this space, that has to be seen as a huge positive.

"We don't make the sensors, we make them smart"

How many years ago did Brainchip achieve all 5 modalities in silicon...oh yes, AKD 1000.

Sensors were a huge part of CES this year, we are and have always been positioned at the right place in time to succeed.

And finally, for the ones who like to moan and keep focusing on how much money they have lost on paper (but strangely enough still
hold our stock) there has been no one more patient up to this point than Peter, who has been waiting a lifetime to see his dream become
reality, but money isn't his driving passion now is it, and there within lies the problem for many.

Have a positive day ahead, be assured that we are on the right track to succeed.......just my views....Tech

Agree about the serial moaners and groaners. They exist in every endeavor. In every job i have ever had the moaners and groaners brigade would constantly carry on about the employer, conditions, pay etc. Every week without fail they would proclaim they would buy Saturdays Age and find another job. In those days pre on line the Age had the biggest classified section. Most carried on like that for entire careers.
We learnt quickly to put them on ignore at work and in the never to be promoted box.
Forums having ignore choices does verify the serial moaners and groaners exist wherever people gather. You don't mind once in a while as we all do that but day, after day, after day you eventually put them in the no credibility section ie on ignore.
Strangely most wanted one thing - power without responsibily.

 

[Fenris78]

Thanks LuWil this is a must watch.

My opinion only DYOR
Fact Finder

"The best in class Edge AI." Privacy and simplicity... with many references to inference on the edge. Not sure where the reporters in this video are getting their info from, but Apple seem extremely confident they cN differentiate themselves from every other major tech company to deliver the best Edge AI. Sounds promising... wouldn't it be nice?

 

[Diogenese]

Absolutely agree.
A lot of people that have invested in BRN, and are now crying fowl, are victims of there own misguided unrealistic enthusiasm.

We are dealing with technology that in the first instance, most industries new nothing about. And if they did, they had no idea how they were going to incorporate it into products and then market them to an uneducated public.
Then there is the problem of changing the status quo. The almost impossible task of of persuading people that a new minnow on the block was to be even considered, as a viable alternative to the reigning champions of the tech world.

The froth and bubble has subsided and we are finally getting down to business.
The CES this year has proved that the early enthusiasm has crossed the so called chasm. The conversations held with Nandan during the show alluded to that fact.
The conversations at DAVOS have cemented that view, of the all pervading AI, being the next revolution.

We clearly have been quietly kicking goals, in stealth mode. And whether it be to some shareholders liking or not, if the companies we deal with want to fly under the radar, then so be it.

A bit disjointed I know. But I don't feel like writing a dissertation to appease the the angry and aggrieved.

The futures bright and I'm alright.

Sticking with the farm yard scenario, isn't that too many ewes?