Since when are estimations facts? Especially when those estimations are clearly wrong.
Care to mention anything specific? You claimed to be posting facts. I pointed out your so called facts were nothing but wild speculation designed to make ActM look better than it actually is. You responded by saying I was wrong because you've did the estimations. |
|
|
|
Please explain how not getting 10% of the network by the end of January means that they're on track to get 10% by the end of 2014?
The funds raised from 40 machines in month 1 is enough to expand the mining farm above the increase in difficulty rate, so the farm growth will outstrip network difficulty increase month on month. See my post, I have calculated the divs month on month till December 2014. Since when are estimations facts? Especially when those estimations are clearly wrong. Labcoin didn't go well for me, obviously, but it didn't go bad for me either.
Underestimate of the century. You lost a majority percentage of your money in LabCoin. I warned you about it endlessly, but you chose to believe the unbelievable - that you would make 1000BTC in LabCon. You were on here everyday trying to keep ACtM prices low by spreading FUD so that you had the option to buy back in on a low share price. That was very damaging to ACtM shareholders but here you are back again trying to pretend you did nothing wrong. Mabsark - I am very very happy that you lost 75+% of your money in Labcoin, lessons like that are invaluable in life. So how many ACtM shares do you have now? That was not the understatement of the century at all. I didn't lose about 75% of my money. When I sold my ActM shares, I could have bought about 3 AM shares. When I sold my LC shares, I bought 5.89 AM shares. I wasn't spreading FUD at all about ActM. What I said would happen, did happen. It was obvious it would happen. You just buried your head in the sand though and ignored the maths. You continue to ignore reality and keep pushing your obvious hype as fact. But no, it's not you that's mad, it's everyone else. |
|
|
|
You said: 3600BTC are generated every day, there is no speculation in that.
That's not a fact. The fact is, that 50,400 BTC are generated every round, whereas the amount generated daily is variable. Averaged out yes it's a fact. Sorry if the finer detail was not explained - it is not atall relevant to the estimates being put forward. If you think it is relevant let us know why. Also, this: We only need 40 of our 24.5TH/s miners to be deployed by the end of January to be on target for taking over 10% of network by end of 2014.
What makes you so certain that the network hash rate will only be 10 Ph/s by the end of January? I didn't say it would be - not atall. I said quite clearly (you quoted it) that 40 miners would put us on target for 10%+ by end of 2014. You should read my post from the other day for more detail. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=297503.msg3906211#msg3906211So in summary you are wrong on both counts. Please explain how not getting 10% of the network by the end of January means that they're on track to get 10% by the end of 2014? BTW Mabsark - where have you been? How did Labcoin go for you? Have you made your 1000BTC yet? Did the LC experience humble you or have you turned up here to cause trouble again and tell everyone how much you are going to make from trading BTC securities?
Labcoin didn't go well for me, obviously, but it didn't go bad for me either. I'm better off than I would have been if I just kept my ActM shares. What I said about ActM at the time was true, there would be no miners till December at the earliest and the price would plummet. The price dropped but there's still no miners. |
|
|
|
...
There has been no attempt to misrepresent shipping dates to customers. Shipping dates are explained in full when customers place orders. Not a single customer has complained about missed shipping dates for any specific order - because no shipping dates have been missed. So that is lie number 2.
...
That's because there are no verifiable customers. For all you know, Ken's Active Mining is buying gear from Ken's Virtual Mining. Oh, wait... You don't even know that, do you? You just took Ken's word for it  Come back and tell us all about verifiable customers when we are shipping products using Intellihash. It will be a cold day in hell when you show your face in this thread. IntelliHash - the DowloadMoreRAM of bitcoin ASICs. |
|
|
|
Edit - telling the truth isn't cheerleading. Misrepresenting the facts is cheerleading. Tell me one single fact that I have misrepresented. If there are none then I am just putting forth the facts - do you have a problem with someone putting forward the facts on the Official Thread?
You said: 3600BTC are generated every day, there is no speculation in that.
That's not a fact. The fact is, that 50,400 BTC are generated every round, whereas the amount generated daily is variable. Also, this: We only need 40 of our 24.5TH/s miners to be deployed by the end of January to be on target for taking over 10% of network by end of 2014.
which is quite clearly speculation and not fact. Speculation designed to lead people to think that ActM will perform better than it will. Do you know how many chips that would take? Around 60,000. How many chips and miners have been sold? How many chips will be produced in the first batch? 40 x 24.5 Th/s miners is about 1 Ph/s. What makes you so certain that the network hash rate will only be 10 Ph/s by the end of January? That's only a 33% increase, whereas the network has increased by 78% in the past 30 days alone. |
|
|
|
Why won't smaller, more efficient chips be usable as miners? I just told you twice. They do not remotely compare to Bitcoin ASICs, and you only want see the magic "SHA-256" word. We have a professor of Comp Sci who says they will be.
Hilarious. I'm aware they won't be as powerful, per unit, as mains-powered ASICs. (Although they will be more efficient in hashing per watt.) They're mobile chips. That's not in debate. Why does that make them unusable? How on earth is a 14nm general purpose SHA-256 ASIC going to be more efficient that a 14nm ASIC designed specifically to mine bitcoins? What you are saying makes no sense. |
|
|
|
Very easy for you to say after it did happen.
I did say so back then and sold out 100% of my shares. I'm trying to find the posts, but the search function is crap and I'm not keen to manually read 750 pages to find them. This is what I said back in June: It's my opinion that a lot of investors simply don't understand how mining works. If they did, then they would understand that AM hardware and shares are vastly overpriced.
Just like a lot of people paying silly money for mining bonds have found out, AM investors will come to the same realisation that share prices are currently way overpriced.
LISTEN AND LISTEN CAREFULLY. The only reason why AM is able to charge such outrageous prices is because they've had no competition. By the end of the year, there will be plenty of competition. Here's a quick comparison:
AM Block Erupter Blade
10 Gh/s
50 BTC = 5,000 USD @ 100 USD/BTC
2 Mh/s per USD
KNC Jupiter
350 Gh/s
7,000 USD @ 100 USD/BTC
50 Mh/s per USD
It should be blatantly obvious to anyone with half a brain that there's going to be a lot less income from hardware sales due to competition. That same competition will also decrease AM's share of the network hash rate.
AM share holders are going to get hit by a good dose of reality in the coming months. Perhaps then they will stop listening to idiots trying to flog them overpriced stuff and do the maths themselves.
As you can see if you read the replies to that comment, people were warned and purposely chose to ignore those warnings. They called me a troll and stuck me on their ignore lists because they didn't like what I had to say and wanted to censor me. Things played out exactly how I said they would. So, can I see the future? Of course not. This was just blatantly obvious. In order to not understand that, you'd need to be delusional, retarded or have severely limited experience of how the real world functions. |
|
|
|
|
This is complete and utter bullshit and just paints all you mods who are trying to White Knight for Theymos as scummy sycophants. You can't ban someone for trolling and leave Crumbs to post. That proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the ban is not for trolling, which makes the ban for personal reasons.
I don't know why anyone is surprised by this though. This is just libertarians showing their true colours. What part of money = power do people not understand about that horrible philosophy?
|
|
|
|
Why should anyone listen to you? You dress up as a dog and sexually abuse cats.The evidence is blatantly clear on this. You call yourself "puppet" and the guy in the article dresses like a puppet dog. Open and shut case - you molester small children and mug old grannies.  |
|
|
|
22:09:06 fruitninja https://blockchain.info/address/1J3bLZrFdWwVE6kG9cojT5189N6Er2xHrm22:22:03 TheSeven someone should try to figure out what of that is really related and what is false positives 22:22:31 fruitninja TheSeven: I posted address here, if you post address someone can begin to analyze it and try to make some sense 22:22:51 TheSeven fruitninja: I received coins from the same address 22:23:29 fruitninja So, we should try to follow it up from the transaction chain, or check taint analysis to see referenced TX 22:23:32 fruitninja and UTXO source: http://irc.radiumsoup.com/freenode/labcoin/logs/In case anyone is wondering, the money trail starts here. |
|
|
|
Would people stop obsessing over me. Whilst this attention is quite flattering, it's also creeping me out a little.
Pretty hypocritical considering that you were one of the main cheerleaders in trying to set people on a witch hunt against me. |
|
|
|
labcoin_ is now known as mircea_popescu lol. this Q&A made my day  (i know it's troll) I got a laugh out of that one as well. |
|
|
|
Is it the corrent time to start dumping? Or we can see higher bids later?
Well, it's doubled in price in the last few minutes, if that's any help to you. |
|
|
|
Defending liars for personal profit by saying, "That is a valid possibility." LOL!  by calling everyone a liar for calling Labcon out for their bullshit. by saying there is no evidence of scam, when there is. by defending them over and over by preaching the "possibility of riches!" and finally, by pumping the share price and SELLING OUT, while still telling people to hold/buy. There isn't any evidence proving Labcoin is a scam and if I've called someone a liar then it's because they were telling lies. Also, where am I telling people to buy/hold and where am I pumping the share price? I just stated that I think the share price will drop as low as 0.00005 BTC on BTC-TC. I'm pretty sure that's lower than what it's currently at. I'm willing to take the risk that Labcoin are legit and will sort their problems out. If others aren't, then perhaps they should sell. It's their decision though, not mine. I couldn't care less what they do. Like I said, I've already made my money back and I'm willing to gamble on them. |
|
|
|
I was clearly stating facts.
Labcoin announced they planned to bring 50 TH/s online in October. They've also stated that they plan to bring 500 Th/s online this year. I also stated what the network hash rate would be if Labcoin controlled 5% of the network with 500 Th/s.
All facts.
no, you were pushing those unlikely promises to get people to buy your shares. you were defending known liars for personal profit. Pump and Dump FACT: there is no evidence to suggest that this operation is legit. Defending liars for personal profit by saying, "That is a valid possibility." LOL! |
|
|
|
The money is most likely coming from other people doing the same thing.
or from the newbies you sucker into buying your shares... remember this: Anyone with an attention span greater than a gold fish knows what he's talking about. 50 Th/s coming online in October. Why does that worry you?
or this: They've stated that they plan on bringing 500 Th/s online by the end of the year. That is a valid possibility. If they did and they controlled 5% of the network, then the network hash rate would be 10 Ph/s. I think it's more likely that Labcoin will have 500 Th/s online than the network will be at 10 Ph/s by the end of the year. If the network was at 5 Ph/s then LC would need 250 Th/s.
those quotes were not very long ago... Err...so what?  pump, pump, pump it up I was clearly stating facts. Labcoin announced they planned to bring 50 TH/s online in October. They've also stated that they plan to bring 500 Th/s online this year. I also stated what the network hash rate would be if Labcoin controlled 5% of the network with 500 Th/s. All facts. |
|
|
|
Yeah. At the same time, though I think LC could use a board to oversee what's going on. And also offer assistance and in terms of how to manage things.
One of the reasons why the share price is in so much trouble is the rising difficulty. If this was a year ago, it wouldn't be much of a problem if they got delayed by a month or so. ASICMiner had issues as well. B1 Avalons were delayed a month or two, but their owners are still pretty happy.
The problem now is that with KnC, Cointerra, and the like there's not much room for error, before bitcoin mining becomes unprofitable.
The difficulty is not such a big problem here because this is not a normal mining security. This is a security that owns an asic design. That means they can create miner at cost. Thats fundamentally different to securities that have to buy miner for nearly enduser prices. Those last securities arent much better than when you buy hardware yourself. And you know it wont be a big success. But securities like labcoin can create the miners at cost and on top they will grow the mine. So the difficulty isnt a big problem. I admit... i invested in 2 other normal mining projects, that dont own their own design, in the hope that the previous patterns of other mining securities are repeated. They went up and then slowly dropped. But since all the panic is going on in all mining securities now this wont work anymore. My bad. But companies like labcoin, that own their own asic design, are different. Regarding the scam claims... they didnt run with the money because they wanted to earn more later? How that? I mean they still have 2million shares. Where is the sense when this would be planned as a scam? It would have been so easy to fake a miner. I could do this myself. Then when the shareprice is rising sell the 2 million shares. Easy as pie. Instead they post unfortunate news and know that it makes the price drop. So they are bagholding scammers? Really? If this is a scam then its a scam done exceptionally bad. I guess it could be a scam and they just fucked up in typical Labcoin fashion. |
|
|
|
The money is most likely coming from other people doing the same thing.
or from the newbies you sucker into buying your shares... remember this: Anyone with an attention span greater than a gold fish knows what he's talking about. 50 Th/s coming online in October. Why does that worry you?
or this: They've stated that they plan on bringing 500 Th/s online by the end of the year. That is a valid possibility. If they did and they controlled 5% of the network, then the network hash rate would be 10 Ph/s. I think it's more likely that Labcoin will have 500 Th/s online than the network will be at 10 Ph/s by the end of the year. If the network was at 5 Ph/s then LC would need 250 Th/s.
those quotes were not very long ago... Err...so what? |
|
|
|
There's no proof of it being a scam so far, no matter what you guys keep claiming. substantial evidence has been presented. You know what evidence is missing, here? Evidence to suggest they are NOT a scam. You keep saying they are legit, where's your evidence, Mabsark? I don't keep saying they are legit. I'm saying I've already made a profit from Labcoin and am willing to take the risk that they are legit and hold as many shares as I can acquire from trading. When push comes to shove, all you do is provide FUD instead of evidence to back up your claims.
that's funny, cause I was using your own math to show they were overvalued. Guess what? the share price is approaching the fair value I posted. So? |
|
|
|
I love how Mabsark is still defending them. Add that to the list of people that deserve to be bagholders:
Mabsark
dhenson
JohnyBigs
These people should be on ignore, folks. They were defending these scammers right until a few days ago. They encouraged people to invest, all the way down...
If anyone has lost money on this that's their own problem, nobody else's. We all have the same information. There's no proof of it being a scam so far, no matter what you guys keep claiming. When push comes to shove, all you do is provide FUD instead of evidence to back up your claims. That's because you don't have any actual evidence. I've already made a profit from Labcoin, reinvested it into AM on BitFunder and still have 10,000 shares to trade. Hopefully I can acquire 100,000 shares before trading ends on BTC-TC. You're just a clown playing with small numbers here. You claim in public to be smart, but you are not. Just ask yourself, where this money is comming from. Dumbass. The money is most likely coming from other people doing the same thing. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
