HYDRA SIEGE Project

Shop deals on ebay
Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
xelexo
Gold Refining Forum

Help Support Gold Refining Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
What you did on your IC thread is something not many people here would do and in my opinion you could just carry on and make more tests, compile them to some pdf or program as I see you like to create them and then offer this for sale. There are so many of different IC around you could be working years to update it as time go by. That way it could be nice bonus or reward for your effort and I myself would happily buy one and I am sure many of members here would do the same.
 
Selling information is always very very difficult.

In the context of this forum, it simply cannot work.

People here put in their time, effort and expense, then share their knowledge so that other refiners can use that information.

If we all had to pay for every question, we would all want to be paid for every answer.

That goes against the Spirit of this forum - "Gold Refiners Helping One Another".
 
You are correct. However some things require quite a lot of time and resources so some remuneration is to be expected. Nothing in life comes free.
 
Alexander, it seems the direction of this project has changed since you started it. In your opening post you said "First i would make online database with which application Hydra Siege will communicate, and where all yield data would be saved. All regular "unregistered" users could use the application and see that yield data". Now, it seems that to see that data, a user must either upload data of their own or pay for the data?

I admit that I have not downloaded your application, but since you say it's not populated with any data yet, I don't know that it would answer any questions for me.

So if a user registers, can they see any yield data? Or are they just able to search a list of materials (as data is uploaded) and they have to use one of their downloads to see any data?

I want to understand how your application works. Are you sharing the yield data for "free", but "charging" something (whether it be in the form of an upload or a PayPal payment) for much more detailed information in the form of a three page pdf? Perhaps if you populated it with the data you already posted in your other thread, we could take a look at how it actually works.

Dave
 
patnor1011 said:
To summarize my thinking I applaud effort you put into this but current structure is favorable only to you and Ken and there is pretty much nothing to be gained to potential contributors. On the contrary they will be losing on this deal. As for the users they may benefit from using it (mainly new inexperienced or lazy ones) but lack of contributors will restrict any revenue possibility for you and Ken.
Click to expand...

Pat, thank you for sharing your experience and opinion. You are basically saying that contributors should have something more in return besides 1:1 free download per post. And you are saying that without contributors application will not work, and you have right.

We are inviting experienced members to contribute and i believe that there are people who will except it and be satisfied to allow this project works, who will be glad to be part of this project which is designed to give users real data yield from their tests, and who will not look at this like way to earn something but to contribute. And we will see will it be like that, i don't know, time will tell.

And one more thing about paying. All new users using application will have 2 free downloads. If you or anyone else try application and download any desired PDF document you will see what you would get if you paid for it, and then you can decide will you buy next one or not. And then compare this way of getting information with any other and you will understand me much better.

If you think a problem is because people will be paying for PDF documents, but you think this project is basically a good idea and should be free or something like that, no one is preventing anyone to make such application. For example Göran has "been there, done that" (programming) so i guess it will not be problem for him to "keep track of a few numbers" and make free version of similar application. But i am sure you and other contributors would be well rewarded in that case.

It is not easy at it looks, to build this kind of application, to make everything works and to take care of it.
 
FrugalRefiner said:
Alexander, it seems the direction of this project has changed since you started it. In your opening post you said "First i would make online database with which application Hydra Siege will communicate, and where all yield data would be saved. All regular "unregistered" users could use the application and see that yield data". Now, it seems that to see that data, a user must either upload data of their own or pay for the data?

I admit that I have not downloaded your application, but since you say it's not populated with any data yet, I don't know that it would answer any questions for me.

So if a user registers, can they see any yield data? Or are they just able to search a list of materials (as data is uploaded) and they have to use one of their downloads to see any data?

I want to understand how your application works. Are you sharing the yield data for "free", but "charging" something (whether it be in the form of an upload or a PayPal payment) for much more detailed information in the form of a three page pdf? Perhaps if you populated it with the data you already posted in your other thread, we could take a look at how it actually works.

Dave
Click to expand...


Dave, i will make Youtube video how application works in details and i will post a link here. I will make few "test" data yields for that. i think that is the best way to anyone see how it works.

Alexander
 
I've always considered these lists of component values as being next to worthless, especially when plating was involved. These lists assume that the parts are consistent in their values and that's not true at all. There are variations due to different manufacturers and different customers. Plating thicknesses can vary from day to day and even hour to hour due to chemical changes in the plating bath. They can also vary from part to part even though they were plated at the same time on the same plating rack. If you separately analyzed 2 parts that were plated together, I guarantee that you would get different numbers.

Personally, if I were spending good money to buy a lot of PM bearing electronic scrap, I would never, ever trust anyone else's numbers. That's a good way to go broke. To me, a basic part of being a refiner is to be able to accurately sample and assay material on your own. If you can't do this, you are much more likely to lose money.

I don't think it's possible for Tzoax, Ken, myself, or anyone else to compose a totally reliable list of component values.
 
I think it's a good and bad idea when looked at from different perspectives. My concern first is it cost something for the consumer or student to access. I have arguments for and against that and understand the time and effort it takes to compile and distribute information. My biggest concern is that the information is gathered in one central location and controlled by a selected individual or group of individuals who at anytime can limit access, sale the database to outside sources, or just pull the plug on the whole thing. To me discussion and the FREE dissemination of information to the public is the greatest way to stir intellect and stimulate innovation for the free market and capitalism. If when that information is in the hands of a selected few or restricted by monetary access then the spirit of education and the advancement of that science suffers.
As a free market venture i understand the argument, but the fact it involves being tied to two non for profit forums geared for free educational purposes as the basis for the data and the promotion of the of the program bothers me somewhat.

So where do i sign up! :mrgreen:
 
Guy's, I have stayed out of this for the most part, but i will give my two cents now. It is common fact that throughout the world, just about any place you go, you can now find a post or video on how to refine precious metals.

This for many, many years was a kept secret in the industry from the common people who was interested in learning. With this forum and other places the secret was let out.

Now the secret has become yield data, no one wants to share real data. True yield data that can be provided in one central place has a value to it, It is true that the data will vary some, but it isn't going to vary that much. The days of buying karat scrap for nothing and making a small fortune is gone.

It has turned to E-waste and knowing what you are buying and how much it will yield is key. This is a ongoing project by Alexander, he has invested a lot of time and work into it and it is not going away anytime soon. He and I are dedicated to it's success. With the AA i just brought and a new furnace for assay work I can help Alexander where I can, at this time all I have done is provide him with a server that can handle anything he deems he needs. I am proud to be able to do this for the man and in the future maybe, I will make a little off of it. If not, that is fine too.

Personal feeling about myself or my site should not have any bearing on this project of Alexander's, at least give the man the time of day he deserves.

Ken
 
My comments were not aimed against anybody. For me it is just simple logic. If I decide to give out something for free then I am giving it in a way that whoever want it will simply have it for free.
From the looks of it if I contribute I will be giving it out for free yet whoever will want to have it will have to pay. That make no sense to me.
 
Its the digital age... Where information wants to be free.
But, there comes the problem.. Peoples time is worth money, as should be their hard earned knowledge. But, (as an example) android development.. The vast majority of apps are free... How do they get paid for their countless hours of testing and debugging? In app purchases, or a donate section in the app which links to their paypal, and the like.

I see both sides of the fence, and I know Alexander will find a resolution so everyone can benefit from it. Those putting in their hard work, and those wanting to check numbers to see how their yields compare. But, I also see the issue gsp brought up... No two processes of the "same" material have the same outcome. It will hopefully get them in the ballpark though.
 
I think part of the problem comes from the fact that no-one who will supply data for this project will have had their credentials vetted. If I get one freebee for everything I post how do you know I haven't just made it up to get a look at the data I want for free? Unfortunately the internet gives us all a degree of invisibility and you cannot believe everything you read. I have made databases in the past for clients to record assays and yields for various materials submitted by various customers. These are very valuable to the refinery because they know that they can believe the data because it was generated in house. These are closely guarded company documents and for good reason. I doubt a list of values generated by a variety of skilled and quasi skilled refiners listing value per unit of measure could ever rise to such standards as a business owner / scrap buyer would trust to the same degree as his or her hard learned personally processed lists.

By being a contributing member of this forum members begin to recognize the names of posters and they can factor into their acceptance the source. By reading posts from members you can see how they have developed and what type of answers they give to questions and from that you can infer whether or not you choose to believe what the poster says.

Chris is absolutely correct that the variation amongst components is quite large and even ballpark numbers can differ considerably. Will information be given about sample sizes and analytical methodology or refining techniques used. All these things matter. The real skill is to learn how to figure it out for yourself and buying accordingly. That's a hands on skill, not a read it off a list made from data from unvetted sources.
 
It's a good thing to keep in mind that yield data is subjective. Even if you had build specs on a particular item, four different refiners will achieve four different yields on the same item. You can have an original manufacturers assay of a particular part and still have any number of random refiners come up with different yields.
With that being said, I feel you can have a "reasonable expectation" of the yield of any particular item within a certain range. There should never be an "absolute expectation" where it is assumed that each item will yield exactly a certain amount of metal. This will only cause a dispute and distrust among people. Yield "expectations" can vary widely from one refiner to another. No two uses the exact same process with the exact same equipment.
A tool such as this is good for the beginner when calculating expected yields when making purchases but for the experienced, not so much.
 
I disagree with Geo. I feel that, since the newbie is more apt to take these inherently inaccurate value lists as gospel, they can be quite dangerous to the newbie's bottom line. This is not the 1st time value lists have been made. There have been maybe half a dozen on the forum over the years. The only one that I ever halfway acknowledged was the one that Samuel_a made up and the only reason I did was because I knew that Sam was a better refiner than any of the other people that made these lists.

If one wants to know the value of various parts, the last thing they should do is buy one of these lists. If they want REAL numbers, they should get a fire assay setup and learn how to sample and assay.
 
I probably should keep quiet, but here goes ...

PM (especially Gold) recovery/refining is a particular animal - it attracts All, yet only a few ever actually do it.

Some of those who actually Do refining kindly help out noobs like me on this forum, for free.

The main problem with this idea is that the information is taken for free and then sold without the originator getting any $.

If the contributors of the information were also rewarded, on a per-download/per-licence basis, same as the software author, chances are that there would be more contributions, and more valuable data to be sold.

I'm also a programmer. This software isn't new or hard to do - it just needs the data.

In essence, the idea is good, but the approach is wrong .

Just share the money fairly and you'll end up with more money than 0 from this idea.
 
goldsilverpro said:
I've always considered these lists of component values as being next to worthless, especially when plating was involved. These lists assume that the parts are consistent in their values and that's not true at all. There are variations due to different manufacturers and different customers. Plating thicknesses can vary from day to day and even hour to hour due to chemical changes in the plating bath. They can also vary from part to part even though they were plated at the same time on the same plating rack. If you separately analyzed 2 parts that were plated together, I guarantee that you would get different numbers.

From experience I can say that Chris is completely correct in this statement. In fact there's a pile of wrong information even on here about plating thicknesses especially when it comes to things like pins. Statements on the lines of "pin yields are never above xxx or 100g of pins = 0.1g of gold" cannot be held as accurate because put simply every batch of pins is different by application. The same applies to plating. When you've seen enough of it you know that you may be able to say something like "the flash plating on an HP xxx revision 1 motherboard is yyy microns thick" but you cannot realistically go any further without that level of specification. As such you're going to have to introduce more fields on your information to qualify the raw material if you want to make this useable.

Personally, if I were spending good money to buy a lot of PM bearing electronic scrap, I would never, ever trust anyone else's numbers. That's a good way to go broke. To me, a basic part of being a refiner is to be able to accurately sample and assay material on your own. If you can't do this, you are much more likely to lose money.

Too right. Do your own figures, and those figures are going to cost you money to obtain. Consider it the cost of doing business because if you listen to half the twoddle printed about yield data you'll spend most of your time losing money.

I don't think it's possible for Tzoax, Ken, myself, or anyone else to compose a totally reliable list of component values.

Again I agree. I also think that the database will probably end up being populated by "old school" information from other threads and "fact sheets" to fill it out, thereby perpetuating a lot of the inaccurate information out there.

I do wish you all the best with it though regardless of my personal feelings and i hope it becomes a great tool. I just see it at the moment as something that's a great idea but flawed in practise for the reasons stated above.
Click to expand...
 
Tzoax said:
You guys are probably right, sorry to have brother all of you about this. Thank you.

Alexander
Click to expand...

Don't take it that way. Think outside the box and make some alterations that make it better. For example what if you listed a range of yields by contributor or added the extra fields I suggested to add context to the information. If people all stopped something because others offered improvements then nothing would ever get done. :D
 
I feel the same way about those catalytic converter lists. Not reliable, even the one that sold for $10,000 (true).

About 12-15 years ago, I knew a guy that bought and refined CPUs and was good at it. He showed me a stack of photos that showed about every possible type of CPU. On the back of the photos, he had written the gold value. He had paid $100 each to have these fire assayed. He said the assays were quite close to the yields. He probably could have sold the list but he didn't want more competition. This was in a large city and he had a good lock on the CPU business there.
 
As has already been said by 4metals, GSP, Jon & Pat - all of whom I agree with - there is NO WAY you can provide "reliable" yield date on the vast majority of electronic scrap &/or its components --- "especially" considering the way in which you are planning to compile this data (from "anyone" willing to proved "their" data)

There are a FEW exceptions to the above statement (but VERY few) - such as CPUs

Examples ----------

Plating; - As mentioned by GSP - plating on fingers can very by a lot depending age of equipment, type of equipment, manufacture spec, etc. --- anyone with any "real" experience "knows" this --- Fingers can (not always - but can) very by as much as .5 gram per pound --- in other words - "may" have a smaller variance from one batch to the next (but a variance none the less) they can also have a big variance --- so its a "law of averages" based on what's "in the mix" &/or batch size

Plated pins can & most likely will very even more then fingers - a very good example of this is some pins I just recently did - they where "exactly" the same "type" of pins that I had got in about 5 years ago - the "only" difference was the pins from 5 years ago came out of equipment that was from the 1980s --- this batch came out of much more recent equipment - the pins (in both cases) were about 2" long & fully plated - the batch 5 years ago had "heavy" plating on the "whole" pin - the kind of plating that retains the shape of the pin after dissolving the base metal away & I remember these pins well because yield was like 3 grams per pound --- so I was excited when I got this recent batch in - BUT - this batch was NOT like those old pins - only about a 3/8 of an inch of the tip of the pin had the heavy plating that retained the shape of the pin - the rest of the pin was only "flash" plated that turned to ultra fine plating dust when the base metal was dissolved away - the result was less then a gram per pound - needless to say I was very disappointed

IC chips - again - yields can very a little from batch to batch - or - by a lot from batch to batch - not only because yield depends "in part" on age of equipment, type of equipment, manufacture spec, etc. --- but IC chip yield also depends "in large part" in the individuals processing ability/method/batch size etc. etc.

Just like plating - what you will find with chips - is you can take chips the look exactly the same - & what you find (concerning the bonding wires) is some of those chips will have longer & larger diameter wires - & some will have shorter smaller diameter wires - so yield depends on "what is in the mix"

Bottom line - IC chips again fall under "the law of averages" - meaning there is no way to provide "true" accurate data

Add to that - that when you ramp up from "small" test batches to processing larger batches - that "test" data can be a "far cry" from the test batch (&/or fire assay) used to come up with the data

Believe me - I have run MANY 100s of pounds of IC chips (I would say close to a actual ton) over the years - AND - I have had yields come out as much as 20 - 25 percent "under the expected yield" - AND - that is including "going back over" the ash, the magnetic legs, copper legs etc. to try to figure out where my "expected" gold went --- the gold didn't go anywhere - it just wasn't there :!: :!: :!:

MLCCs - these you will NEVER get any true data on --- the reason for that is there are two different types of MLCCs - BME (Base Metal Electrode) & NME (Noble Metal Electrode) MLCCs --- Sooo - depending on the ratio of BME to NME in the "mix" of MLCCs - the Ag/Pd recovery is going to be "all over the map"

The best you can do with MLCCs is to do a fire assay on "every batch" & then they need to be "well mixed"

Bottom line - I don't see this working - first because you intend to build your data base on "other" peoples "in put" - that's NOT a reliable source of data - secondly even if you did ALL the data yourself - it would not be reliable --- therefore (as someone with LOTS of experience) - I would nether provide data nor would I EVER pay for such data --- AND - my advice to anyone less experienced would be - "beware of snake oil salesmen"

Kurt
 

Latest posts

Back
Top