BRN Discussion Ongoing

[Fact Finder]

Hi FF,

it really is comparing chalk to a laser printer.

The short answer is yes, it would double the frame rate. This is because, statistically half the data bits will be zeros and half will be ones, so by ignoring all the multiply by zeros, you reduce the number of operations to be performed by half. You only ignore the the zeros in one of the numbers, the multiplier.

Caution is needed in comparing fps depending on whether the function is as a camera or as a projector. What Akida does is classify camera images. Nvidia can act as a projector in displaying images or it can be used in an AI manner comparable with Akida.

But, alas Nvidia are still stuck in the 20th century with MACs, CNN, ALUs, 8+bits (although I did see somewhere that a couple of competitors (can't recall who?) had caught on to 4-bit quantization) ... eg:


US2020364508A1 USING DECAY PARAMETERS FOR INFERENCING WITH NEURAL NETWORKS (Priority: 20190514)

View attachment 20623

1 . A processor, comprising:

one or more arithmetic logic units (ALUs) to be configured to identify one or more digital representations of one or more objects based, at least in part, on one or more neural networks trained using one or more decay parameters.

2 . The processor of claim 1, wherein the one or more ALUs are further to be configured to:
apply the one or more decay parameters to prior state information maintained for the one or more neural networks and used for identifying the one or more objects, a weighting of the prior state information being reduced according to the one or more decay parameters.

3 . The processor of claim 2, wherein the one or more ALUs are further to be configured to:
store the state information external to the one or more neural networks and providing the state information to the one or more neural networks for each set of input to the one or more neural networks.
5 . The processor of claim 1, wherein the one or more ALUs are further to be configured to:
determine the one or more decay parameters using a hyper-optimization process and a selected decay function.

[0070] … The training manager 712 can be responsible for training the data, such as by using a LARC-based approach as discussed herein. The network can be any appropriate network, such as a recurrent neural network (RNN) or convolutional neural network (CNN), among other such options.

[0072] … If permitted and available, user data may also be collected and used to further train the models, in order to provide more accurate inferences for future requests. Requests may be received through a user interface to a machine learning application 726 executing on the client device 702 [#### ie, a software app ####] in some embodiments, and the results displayed through the same interface. The client device can include resources such as a processor 728 and memory 730 for generating the request and processing the results or response, as well as at least one data storage element 732 for storing data for the machine learning application 726 .

It isn't really fair to compare legacy equipment with the SOTA.

I have thought about your statement:

“It isn't really fair to compare legacy equipment with the SOTA.”

So assuming the State of the Art technology you are referring to is AKIDA technology if I decide not to be unfair then I will probably never need to post again on this subject.

But I reluctantly have to agree with you and I will resist the temptation to point out that compared to these up graded Nvidia Jetson entries in the Edge technology race:

1. AKIDA 1.0 is at least 50 to 150 times more power efficient,

2. AKIDA 1.0 is at least one eighth the cost of the base model Jetson,

3. AKIDA 1.0 is despite the fact that the Jetson has doubled its frames per second to 200 AKIDA 1.0 is already reaching 1670 fps,

4. AKIDA 1.0 is still unchallenged with its ability to process completely on chip without connection while one shot, few shot and incrementally learning, and

5. AKIDA 1.0 is scalable and available as IP.

Really none of these things need to be stated and of course it would be very unfair to do so, so I will say nothing further on the subject of Jetson.

My opinion only DYOR
FF

AKIDA BALLISTA

 

[Salad1]

Mate, you have an uncanny ability to make people hate you.
Your also an insult to assholes, asshole

I would of thought it is a legitimate question no malice was intended so don't know what your problem is your the one acting like an asshole.....

 

[Steve10]

Long lead time for Akida products is normal similar to ARM's IP revenue model. BRN is selling high tech Akida chip IP requiring design, engineering, validation etc to be incorporated into new products.

It usually takes around 6 months to negotiate a contract with an ARM licensee. From license acquisition to first revenue shipments can often take around 3 - 4 years. Designs can then ship for up to 20 years depending on the market segment.

Of the 320 companies that license IP from ARM, over half are currently paying a royalty - the rest are currently in period between signing a license and shipping a product. ARM signs roughly 30 - 40 new licensees per year.

About 80% of the companies that sign a license end up building a chip that they can sell in the market. The remaining 20% either get acquired or fail for other reasons. Royalties make up roughly 50% of ARM’s total revenues, licensing fees are just over 33% and the remainder is equally distributed between software tools and technical support.

The ARM Diaries, Part 1: How ARM’s Business Model Works

www.anandtech.com

 

[Steve10]

FYI - ARM market share 2007 - 2012.

 

[skutza]

Here is a nice bright, positive thought for everyone to really chew on overnight . So if we are 3 years in front of the competition and we see how long it can take for things to gain traction, then we know once we see Akida in cars, devices of anykind, we can start the clock ticking from that point. The difference being, 3 years infront doesn't mean the competition will ever actually become commercial. There's a chance that any real Akida competition is still just a glimmer in the postman's eye

 

[Deadpool]

I would of thought it is a legitimate question no malice was intended so don't know what your problem is your the one acting like an asshole.....

 

[Fact Finder]

I would of thought it is a legitimate question no malice was intended so don't know what your problem is your the one acting like an asshole.....

So accepting it is a genuine question I will give you the obvious answer which is so obvious that many might think the question it is answering is not genuine.

Unless you are a member of the ruling class and have never worked in your life you will have been an employee.

As an employee you had a contract of employment. A contract can be written or oral or a combination of both.

Under the contract of employment you agreed to do certain work and the employer agreed if you did this work to pay you on the agreed terms.

Those terms would include an hourly rate, overtime rates, shift penalties, leave loadings and bonus payments.

As a result you expected if you did what you were required to do to a reasonable standard you would be paid in accordance with your contract of employment.

When my mother died at the Funeral Directors a small family business I got on quite well with the sales person and she confided in me that as part of her employment package she received longevity bonuses in the form of shares in the business.

She loved getting the shares because she could only redeem them by selling them back to her employers on leaving the company after a certain number of years and it was a form of compulsory saving.

Share based payments as part of employment contracts are common even in small businesses.

Now coming back to you and your employment would you be happy if one day your employer said to you look even though you have done everything you were contracted to do shareholders are unhappy so we are not going to pay you until they are happy again.

Given how unhappy you are about a 4C I can imagine your reaction to this suggestion from your employer.

So as every single person you object to receiving their bonuses are employees of the company and who will only be paid their bonuses if they have fulfilled their side of their employment contract I think the answer as I said before to your question is blindingly obvious.

They are employees and deserved to be paid in accordance with their contracts of employment.

Not just my opinion but the law no research required.
FF

AKIDA BALLISTA

 

[Salad1]

So accepting it is a genuine question I will give you the obvious answer which is so obvious that many might think the question it is answering is not genuine.

Unless you are a member of the ruling class and have never worked in your life you will have been an employee.

As an employee you had a contract of employment. A contract can be written or oral or a combination of both.

Under the contract of employment you agreed to do certain work and the employer agreed if you did this work to pay you on the agreed terms.

Those terms would include an hourly rate, overtime rates, shift penalties, leave loadings and bonus payments.

As a result you expected if you did what you were required to do to a reasonable standard you would be paid in accordance with your contract of employment.

When my mother died at the Funeral Directors a small family business I got on quite well with the sales person and she confided in me that as part of her employment package she received longevity bonuses in the form of shares in the business.

She loved getting the shares because she could only redeem them by selling them back to her employers on leaving the company after a certain number of years and it was a form of compulsory saving.

Share based payments as part of employment contracts are common even in small businesses.

Now coming back to you and your employment would you be happy if one day your employer said to you look even though you have done everything you were contracted to do shareholders are unhappy so we are not going to pay you until they are happy again.

Given how unhappy you are about a 4C I can imagine your reaction to this suggestion from your employer.

So as every single person you object to receiving their bonuses are employees of the company and who will only be paid their bonuses if they have fulfilled their side of their employment contract I think the answer as I said before to your question is blindingly obvious.

They are employees and deserved to be paid in accordance with their contracts of employment.

Not just my opinion but the law no research required.
FF

AKIDA BALLISTA

Thanks for your explanation which I understand but from my experience performance/ bonuses are usually related to contracts/profits hence my question in the first place

 

[buena suerte :-)]

VERY interesting to see that we have gained so many 'new members' since the 4C was announced with an array of negative comments on where they think the direction BRN is heading!!?? (security please @Rocket577)

A few of our 'new members' have obviously 'sifted' out comments that were used by some of us to vent a bit of frustration with the Quarterly cashflow report and reconstructed them to suit their own agenda!!!!! ........ I also note that we have had many constructive debates here @tse regarding ..sales/partnerships/production/revenue/ etc etc ... but my observations are that it is starting to get a bit TOXIC at the moment!?

Keep the 1 peeled!

 

[Deadpool]

You are right about one thing I definitely insulted an asshole.......... didn't I

and piss off back to hot crapper.

 

[Fact Finder]

Thanks for your explanation which I understand but from my experience performance/ bonuses are usually related to contracts/profits hence my question in the first place

The vast majority of Brainchip employees are engineers who are designing, inventing and adapting and servicing customer application needs. Profit does not enter into their equation.

Rob Telson is in charge of Ecosystem partnerships signing up ARM is a huge achievement but does not generate immediate profit or sales.

Rob Telson as VP of Sales delivering Mercedes Benz with a lead time of four years to revenue because of design cycles does not generate immediate profit.

Jerome Nadel designing and delivering a new sales and marketing image and successfully implementing it does not deliver immediate profit.

Your view is an unrealistic simplistic analysis of a research company at the beginning of the commercialisation cycle competing with global established players with established cash flow and sales cycles needing to attract and keep the best people to drive this process.

If you accept the opinions of many who have posted since Thursday Brainchip is a huge risk for investors and if this is true taking a job with Brainchip is also a huge risk for those who accept employment with them because they could suddenly find themselves part of a failed enterprise, unemployed and unable to recover unpaid entitlements.

There are two sides of every coin and you are clearly in possession of a double headed coin where only shareholder rights count.

Like it or not as a shareholder you stand on the employer side and are obliged to honour agreements made with employees who have carried out their employment contract as required.

My opinion only DYOR
FF

AKIDA BALLISTA

 

[Salad1]

The vast majority of Brainchip employees are engineers who are designing, inventing and adapting and servicing customer application needs. Profit does not enter into their equation.

Rob Telson is in charge of Ecosystem partnerships signing up ARM is a huge achievement but does not generate immediate profit or sales.

Rob Telson as VP of Sales delivering Mercedes Benz with a lead time of four years to revenue because of design cycles does not generate immediate profit.

Jerome Nadel designing and delivering a new sales and marketing image and successfully implementing it does not deliver immediate profit.

Your view is an unrealistic simplistic analysis of a research company at the beginning of the commercialisation cycle competing with global established players with established cash flow and sales cycles needing to attract and keep the best people to drive this process.

If you accept the opinions of many who have posted since Thursday Brainchip is a huge risk for investors and if this is true taking a job with Brainchip is also a huge risk for those who accept employment with them because they could suddenly find themselves part of a failed enterprise, unemployed and unable to recover unpaid entitlements.

There are two sides of every coin and you are clearly in possession of a double headed coin where only shareholder rights count.

Like it or not as a shareholder you stand on the employer side and are obliged to honour agreements made with employees who have carried out their employment contract as required.

My opinion only DYOR
FF

AKIDA BALLISTA

Ok now the penny has dropped thanks FF for your explanation unlike a couple on here who are key board warriors looking for any opportunity to attack people and get off on it.

 

[Fact Finder]

VERY interesting to see that we have gained so many 'new members' since the 4C was announced with an array of negative comments on where they think the direction BRN is heading!!?? (security please @Rocket577)

A few of our 'new members' have obviously 'sifted' out comments that were used by some of us to vent a bit of frustration with the Quarterly cashflow report and reconstructed them to suit their own agenda!!!!! ........ I also note that we have had many constructive debates here @tse regarding ..sales/partnerships/production/products/revenue/ etc etc ... but my observations are that it is starting to get a bit TOXIC at the moment!?

Keep the 1 peeled!

And this is what I have said happens when genuine shareholders vent here rather than communicating their considered critical arguments direct to the company.

The parasites smell dead flesh on the ground and crawl out of their holes to feast on the fears and insecurities openly on display.

I am sure every regular or irregular poster here knew that the 4C had less income than most would have liked.

Yet we had continuous rants and empty threats for what purpose on the subject for the best part of 48 hours.

It reminds me every time it happens of the type of commentary I heard from the incarcerated dregs at Long Bay during legal visits.

Who cares about their empty threats and rants certainly not their lawyers. There lawyers are only interested in the facts, defences and solutions.

Some are so stupid that they have no idea that their continuing empty threats and their carry on leads lawyers who they need to walk away and their behaviour digs their hole even deeper.

Anyway hopefully the parasites will have had their fill and crawl back into their holes sooner than later.

My opinion only DYOR
FF

AKIDA BALLISTA

 

[Salad1]

View attachment 20651 and piss off back to hot crapper.

Maybe you should you got as much class as shareman and the Dean...........

 

[TECH]

I wonder what % of shareholders on this forum are actually still sitting on a profit, whether that be small, medium or maybe bigger, depending on your early holding.

I wonder what % of shareholders on this forum are actually trading, I have done a few, and not always have they gone to plan, but I'm still ahead like many I suspect.

I wonder what % of shareholders on this forum are long term holders or just straight-out punters, in it for the quick buck, I suspect that there are quite a number of you, not that I'm judging.

Right now, is such a great opportunity to really load up, you aren't investing in a "falling knife" scenario, far from it.

Has Brainchip got cash in hand?

Is Brainchip laden down with large debt?

Is Brainchip under pressure to conduct a Capital Raise?

Does Brainchip have cash in hand to carry on as a going concern for 12/18 months at present?

Does Brainchip have a stable staff at present?

Does Brainchip have world leading technology?

Does Brainchip continue to win Patents worldwide, brushing aside companies like Intel and IBM?

I could go on and on, we all know the problem.

We changed course from a chip company to an IP company, yes?

We need to sign IP Licenses.

We need to see those License Fees in our quarterly 4C documents.

It's not rocket science, it's a time thing....as frustrating as it currently is, we will succeed.

Just imagine what Peter was thinking back in 2004, now that wasn't just patience or determination, but it was the work of a genius.

Just be grateful for what you have at present, without all the whining.

Brainchip as a company will deliver.

Purely my own selfish opinion

 

[MDhere]

Thanks for your explanation which I understand but from my experience performance/ bonuses are usually related to contracts/profits hence my question in the first place

Sorry my turn. I disagree, the word usually is a tricky word used in yr argument unless its backed up. I from personal experience was paid bonuses in form of shares for projected future view of the company as an incentice to performance at the time to deliver, a sweetmer or a carrot as one may say, unable to sell the shares for a number of years. To me it was a fantastic incentive to loyalty and the thrill of the virtual bonus at the time. very clever move for a growing company. hope that make sense.

 

[Perhaps]

A bunch of Brainchip related links I found lately. Just ignore if they all been posted earlier:

🔥 Edge AI & Autonomous Vehicles with Brainchip's Jerome Nadel | Catalyst #04

🔥 Alex and Amit talk with Jerome Nadel, CMO of Brainchip (BRCHF stock). We talk about edge computing, the internet of things (IoT), big data, sensors in eve...

www.youtube.com

 

[Beebo]

There is just too much good happening on the neuromorphic front for me not to pick-up an additional 54K BRCHF last Friday.

Onward!

 

[Mugen74]

Did The Simpsons get it right again?


Ps Not taking sides,I just got caught up in the rhythm

 

[SERA2g]

That was a great post @Kiwikangaroo, a very good, on balance summary of where we are.

Myself, I do not take anything as a given here, and yes we were forewarned of lumpy income, but what we just got was in fact a very deep valley. I am not an accountant, but perhaps some creative accountacy (as long as it was conducted within what might be accepted as "proper" practice) might have helped smooth this very deep fall-off in qtrly income.

Perhaps BRN might consider the notion of creative accounting or back-ending the some of the relatively small amount of income they have had so far, so that events as severe as last Friday can possibly be mitigated to some extent. BRN is in ASX200, there are a lot of eyes watching, and our company is now worth 21% less than it was Thurs closing.

So while from the point of view that nothing has changed with regard to the contracts and numerous other partnerships, NDA's, EAP's, which Rob, Sean, Jerome et al have been developing; the market on the other hand, now values BRN very differently.

The headwinds Sean spoke are not likely to diminish, we know there has been progress made, and while I am really appreciative of the excellent research which is shared here, we really don't know what is happening behind the scenes or to what extent any number of partnerships have developed. I believe BRN could be more forthcoming with information, without breaching any contractual matters.

I am not impatient, I have been holding for 7 years, I have seen timelines changed (more than once), I have not ever sold a single share, basically have accumulated what to me is a reasonable holding. This would certainly be life changing if BRN can actually land contracts or real sales with some of the companies BRN has relationships with.

However my bottom line here is that we don't have forever, the global economy is a far worse shambles than most realize, and the headwinds mentioned earlier, most certainly will NOT diminish. I am not at all comfortable with that view of things, and I am also, most certainly not a pessimist, however I do spend a lot of time researching macro economics, and the pictures that I see are un-settling and the economy as we have known it - has a looming horizon (not the end of the world - but not pretty). In my strong opinion time is very much of the essence, and of more than a little concern to me. Hence my disappointment Friday

Regardless of all the above, I have a wonderful life and spend a lot of time laughing, and will always remain grateful for that, and count myself as truly blessed, I also remain a true holder of the BRN faith, even though my view of things is at quite some variance with some of the views posted here; and one of my deep wishes, is for all of us to share a manifest outcome to our mutual investment in what I hope are the magnificent iterations of BRN's Akida.

I’m not sure if anyone has responded to this yet but thought I would given you have over 40 likes.

Im an accountant for what that’s worth before you read on.

You can’t use “creative accountancy” in a quarterly.

The quarterly report is a cash flow report. It’s cash movements only.

It does not show revenue at all.

It does, however, shows cash receipts for income that was accrued in prior and the current period, but, we don’t know how much of the cash receipted came from which periods.

We also don’t know how much revenue was accrued this quarter for which the cash was not receipted.

Excluding continuous disclosures obligations for a moment (simply because I’m not sure if this example would require an announcement), We could invoice a customer $5 million on the 30th of September and if the cash wasn’t received it would not show in the quarterly.

“Creative accountancy” isn’t easy when it comes to asx listed companies.

Their obligation from a compliance perspective is to prepare general purpose financial statements which have specific requirements from an accounting standards perspective. These standards determine how all sorts parameters within the financial statements are recognised, including but not limited to revenue, expenses, assets, liabilities and equity.

The entire purpose of having these standards is to ensure that third parties whom rely on the financial statements (banks, investors, shareholders) can in fact rely on those financial statements when making financial decisions.

I appreciate your want for improvement but suggesting the accountant move his pen in another direction is not the answer.

Cheers