Vinneh is not wrong in that 4DS representatives verbally telling people confidential undisclosed information about the technology that isn't available to the market either on their website or via an ASX announcement is in direct violation of the continuous disclosure laws of the Corporations Act, as its outside of what a "reasonable person would be expected to know". Anyone that then either buys or sells with this additional information could technically be classed as insider trading.
This cannot be refuted or debated.
ASIC would have to investigate if 4DS was reported by anyone and this entire forum would be evidence.
Now whether it should be ignored? I don't think so - the more information we can get from any source is beneficial. However if that verbal information contradicts was has been officially said and presented... that is a problem. Its actually a very poor position for the company to be in to get themselves into, but also doesn't surprise me by the lack of professionalism.
Also - this paper from last year is basically why we can completely write of SCM, but we wouldn't know that SCM is not a viable option without knowing the retention so props to vinneh, jock, etc. for pushing for this information.
Now this is a paper from September 2009 - "4DS did not disclose its technological basis", took 15 years from their claim to an ASX announcement - but its still currently a "just trust us, bro". No joint statement with Imec to add credibility to the claim. No technical papers. No proof. That is the problem with the share price at the moment and it has nothing to do with "Australians don't understand tech", because if there was more than a "just trust us, bro" - industry behemoths would be hedging their bets and acquiring 4.99% of the shares. If Imec doesn't want to do a joint statement... give a chip to Stanford and get them to validate it independently.
Or this book from 2011.
So whats changed? Nothing besides a partnership with Imec. 4DS has made the exact same announcement this year, with pretty much identical specs as they did in 2009.
Also note that back then Imec, Samsung, Hynix, Micron, Qimonda, Elpida had a joint venture on RRam R&D. Since then Imec has publicly published dozens of papers on RRam. Imec tried: - TiN/Hf/HfOx/TiN - scaled down to 10nm published in Proceedings of Technical Program of 2012 VLSI Technology, System and Application DOI: 10.1109/VLSI-TSA19684.201223-25 April 2012 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/conhome/6203619/proceeding
In another paper published in 2013 Performance and reliability of Ultra-Thin HfO2-based RRAM (UTO-RRAM) "We show that cells with an oxide thickness of 3 nm have basic performance (including speed, switching voltages, and the on/off window) similar to that of the cells with reference oxide (5-10 nm thickness), while their operation requires a forming step at a voltage of only about 1.5 V for a 40 nm size. This performance can be further optimized by tuning the cap layer thickness. We also demonstrate endurance of at least 10^8 cycles and observe failure modes similar to the reference cells. Endurance optimization needs to take into account, next to the stack structure and pulse characteristics, the target on/off states. UTO-RRAM retention is strongly temperature-activated, with a median cell extrapolating at 125°C / 10 yr.
And another by Imec N. Raghavan et al., "RTN insight to filamentary instability and disturb immunity in ultra-low power switching HfOx and AlOx RRAM," 2013 Symposium on VLSI Technology, Kyoto, Japan, 2013, pp. T164-T165.
And another by Imec in 2015 Intrinsic Program Instability in HfO2 RRAM and consequences on program algorithms
Another last year "Reliability Challenges in Advanced 3D Technologies: the Case of Through Silicon Vias and SiCN–SiCN Wafer-to-Wafer Hybrid-Bonding Technologies"
Another last year by Imec for SRAM "3D SRAM Macro Design in 3D Nanofabric Process Technology" - 3nm FinFET.
Another from last year from Imec, a paper about trying to find the right material for RRam and OTS memory "In silico screening for As/Se-free ovonic threshold switching materials"
Looks like they excluded maganese as it has 7 valence electrons - otherwiwse then we may have some data on PCMO RRAM.
Why even bring that up? Because people keep making BS claims with the latest one being that "Imec doesn't want to show favouritism" - Its not about favouritism, that is not how it works, and if it did... why is Imec involved in anout 21,000 papers? They do about 1,300 a year as per their own annual reports.
The industry is not going to take 4DS seriously if they are not presenting their technology at industry standard conferences or releasing technical papers as proof of concept. If they're not releasing technical papers to open themselves up to peer scrutiny on the viability of the technology, then I don't see this IP being sold anytime soon as DM expects.
I want 4DS to prove me wrong, because when they do, the SP will go bezerk.
4DS Price at posting:
12.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)
