No Such lAbs (S.NSA), March 2015 Statement

Saturday, 04 April, Year 7 d.Tr. | Author: Mircea Popescu
S.NSA incoming and outgoing
Incoming Outgoing
Description Value Description Value
-- 0
Total 0 Total 0
    S.NSA assets
    Account 01.03.2015 Net change 31.03.2015
    Cash 459.97832582 0 459.97832582
    Tangibles 4.46348365 0 4.46348365
    Intangibles and goodwill 8.31827553 0 8.31827553
    Total assets 472.76008500
    S.NSA liabilities
    Account 01.03.2015 Net change 31.03.2015
    Shareholder equity 472.76008500 0 472.76008500
    Total liabilities 472.76008500

      S.NSA has a total of 4`737`075 authorised shares outstanding. The total assets per share implied value is thus 0.00009980 BTC. The cash+tangible assets per share implied value is thus 0.00009804 BTC.

      S.NSA realised no operating revenue this period. The P/E implied value per share is so far 0 BTC.

      S.NSA has Special Stock Warrants outstanding issued as per the IPO agreement, as follows :

      # Fingerprint Shares BTC Par
      1 17215D118B7239507FAFED98B98228A001ABFFC7 3`315`952 331.5952 1
      2 6160E1CAC8A3C52966FD76998A736F0E2FB7B452 1`421`122 142.1122 1
      T 4`737`074 473.7074 1


        Since this month's letter is intricate and most of it not either very interesting or easy to follow, I'll proceed to a summary.

        There were two major points of activity. One, was evaluating a new provider of small run populated boards, which was broadly discussed in channel. In summary, they delivered bad parts on account of what they claim to be a caching error of the web application, replaced the parts at their own costs with apologies, the replacements seem to work. The test was on a sub board (chosen for being both easy to verify and easy to fail as it's not a very common design), the production of the whole shebang will be attempted on this platform and we'll see. In any case actual Cardano is getting a lot closer - if the run succeeds it'll be a simple matter of massaging the software, packaging and it's ready for delivery. This makes it possible if not certain that next month may see income for S.NSA and in my estimation certain that this year will.

        The other was supporting the Bitcoin node infrastructure, which wandered from subcritical to outright critical sometime early this year. So far this effort has been broadly productive, to quote :

        (B-1) I have produced a total kernel-and-userland build system and complete Linux runtime for 'PogoPlug' computer using 'buildroot', a classical mechanism for crafting minuature Linuxen for use in routers and other low-cost embedded hardware. This system, entitled 'pogotron', builds on most reasonable Unixen and produces a binary image suitable for loading on a PogoPlug using TFTP or flashing into the on-board NAND. The Linux kernel I used is based on a recent 3.18 but stripped of all - in my view - unnecessary aspects. These include devices which are not present, such as video controllers, but also devices which I consider undesirable (USB HID mice, keyboards), features such as loadable kernel modules, etc. A 'pogotron' presently weighs less than 5 MB.

        (B-2) In the course of attempting to replicate the static build '' (based on my 'portatronic') recently released by - I discovered a most peculiar bug. It is triggered exclusively (it appears) on Gentoo. At present time, I cannot rule out the possibility that I may have found a bug in GCC. Or perhaps 'bug' is not the right term - a misfeature. This particular affair is discussed at great length in #bitcoin-assets and interested readers are invited to follow the (still-ongoing) thread there.

        (B-3) At present time, I am testing an experimental non-leaking on PogoPlug. It is presently built with the pseudo-static 'portatronic' (see last month's broadcast) and is currently running on a heathen linux. At the time of this writing, it has synced 121100 blocks without OOM-crashing once.

        The work sourcing out the correct product for this task as well as a lot of other trims should also be mentioned, as should be the efforts of the many people who have graciously contributed their time and expertise in verifying builds, reproducing compiles, hunting for bugs, various logistics tasks (we, for instance, have thousands of the units in storage ready to go, as well as numerous prototype and test units running, etc etc).

        None of this incremental utility can readily be discounted nor would it be rational to attempt. The work figures in the S.NSA letter strictly because we have donated a significant amount of engineering time and expertise to this public interest - and make no mistake about it, a healthy network of Bitcoin nodes outside of the control of the various enemies of Bitcoin is the first and foremost public interest in this space. Miners are financially motivated to run their gear, nodes however are politically motivated only, and politics is a very finicky matter - one at which our adversaries excel, and the soi dissant "community" sucks, incidentally.

        We will continue to protect and defend Bitcoin, even if this effort is not necessarily productive in the most direct, shortest term perspective available. We will also continue work to bring useful products to market - geared not towards needs as the market may introspectively perceive them, but towards actual needs as deductively obtained from a mature and comprehensive consideration of the fundamentals involved. No Such lAbs' vocation is not as a producer of trinkets in a commodified, consumer-driven space, but as a thought leader and market creator. We intend to remain true to it.

        Category: S.NSA
        Comments feed : RSS 2.0. Leave your own comment below, or send a trackback.

        2 Responses

        1. Parties who wish to contribute to the vivisection of all that is unholy, so that the yet-healthy organs may be moved to a worthy host, are encouraged to get up to speed on the mailing list.

        2. Mircea Popescu`s avatar
          Mircea Popescu 
          Saturday, 4 April 2015

          Good point.

        Add your cents! »
          If this is your first comment, it will wait to be approved. This usually takes a few hours. Subsequent comments are not delayed.