|
More likely is that those computers had more than 1GB Ram in them, and thus windows reserves more for diskcache.
Either way, comparing with a feature incomplete version of 10 is a bit premature
|
|
|
|
So, if we were to liquidate all of the assets, we would have 862.5 btc roughly, which divided over 1,149,988 shares, would be .00075 btc per share.
Yeah why make it easy calculating with BTC/1GH since each unit represents 1GH  You make a few assumptions though; first of all, that the hardware can be sold. Since cryptx uses Bitfury hosted mining, its not clear to me who really owns the hardware at this point. EVen if cryptx owns the hardware, its very likely the contract with bitfury runs for a predetermined time, most likely 12 months if not more. Keep in mind bitftury built their datacenter to essentially serve two customers (DigitalBTC and cryptx). Who is going to pay the next 6 months (edit: or 11 months, since the datacenter apparently came online in august!) ? Lastly there is the matter of incentive. Cryptx is making as much on petamine today as it was in the beginning. Its still reaping in $0.15/GH/month. He has no incentive to sell the hardware. He may lower hosting fees if and when needed to maintain the illusion of shareholder returns, since he is hosted in Georgia with rock bottom electricity prices (*), Im sure he has enough leeway there on his $0.15. (*) http://www.georgiapower.com/pricing/files/rates-and-schedules/large-business/5.10_PLH-9.pdf |
|
|
|
Next course of action is to determine whether the units were ever purchased as claimed with investors funds or leased, amounting to intentional deception by the operators. BitFury has been issued with questions .
Whoever you may be, you do seem to have a point here. Right from Bitfury's website: CryptX and DigitalBTC are among our clients which use BitFury’s hosted mining servicesOr in Berts own words: Professional hosted mining operations are the future of this market. CryptX operates in this space and has chosen BitFury’s hosted mining services for its project, PetaMine. We have worked together with BitFury on several occasions and we are very pleased with this business relationship.
BERT VALKENBORGS
CryptX CEOhttp://www.bitfury.org/Might be a bit of a problem to sell those miners. And so much for cryptx claim of buying and running its own datacenter in Belgium. |
|
|
|
Partially correct. We represent an intermediary body that has been forwarded a number of REV requests in the past months. Filings are currently in an informal, prefatory stage pending communication by CRYPTX BVBA.
This smells like BS to me to be honest. Who would the fsma forward a file like this to ? Why wouldnt you just say who you represent? Why use FSMA in your handle if you are not working for them ? Mind you, this come from a guy (me) who predicted a long time ago cryptx would get in hot water with the FSMA. I just dont believe "intermediary bodies" would make pseudonymous threats on this forum to achieve what appears to be a desire on your part to make crypx sell their hardware. If/when the FSMA gets involved I expect them to do their own investigation and do it silently to determine whether or not any rules have been breached, and if so, make that very public. Tell me this, do you represent a belgian agency? |
|
|
|
I hired a private detective to find that out. or maybe its all on their website: http://www.cryptx.com/ CryptX bvba Witte Paterstraat 4 1040 Etterbeek, Brussels Belgium |
|
|
|
|
cryptx is a belgian company
and btw, its illegal even for a panamese company to sell securities to belgian investors (or for that matter, pretty much any investor in the industrialized world).
|
|
|
|
The two former Poker players behind this outfit will be getting investigated within a week if I see no action taken. I have their information from high profile investors who have communicated with them at conferences. Lets be clear here, are you saying you are/work for/represent the FSMA, or are you threatening cryptx to file a complaint with the FSMA ? |
|
|
|
Its a label that some scammer added to the address try to dupe you. It used to have a link with it (now fortunately removed) that would give you a false list of supposedly hacked accounts and a button to check yours. That forwarded to this site lastpassw.com (its NOT real!). Enter any blockchain ID there and it would tell you your account is compromised, while opening another blockchain phishing site to try to grab the password that goes with it. edit: seems the “Blockchain accounts hacked” label has been removed too, but Im sure they will try again with another address. |
|
|
|
You can't lose more than 100% ... Me ? No, I cant. Cryptx however, dont underestimate his ability to incur losses upon his shareholders . BTW, Last Price ฿0.00010000 ROFL |
|
|
|
|
I heard they hired a renowned specialist to audit their books. A guy called Trendon Shavers.
|
|
|
|
lol new user, IPO. I'm tired of this, really. I don't post in Securities a lot but I am seeing this daily.
We need more proof to validate why and how we can trust you with our money without you delivering anything.
Oh, common, he even disclosed his name. "Kris". Im gonna send all my BTC there, what could possibly go wrong? |
|
|
|
Dear unit holders, Difficulty has increased a little more than we originally anticipated. Our IPO prospectus foresaw a difficulty of less than 2B by this time. In reality it is a little higher, at 17 times our projection. As a result, we have fallen a bit short of our initial 1BTC per share dividend goal for October. But if bitcoin exchange rate increases by a few orders of magnitude and difficulty declines dramatically over he next decade or two, our initial goal is still within reach. To maintain the possibility of achieving this goal, PETA mine will continue running for as long as mining revenue exceeds our very low undisclosed hosting costs. But whenever the revenue falls below our publicly announced $0.15/GH/month, as happened yesterday and will happen more and more frequently in the future, PETA will generously lend unit holders the difference so that no negative dividends have to be collected. Actual dividends will only resume once this accumulated debt is repaid, which will be increasing unlikely to happen ever. Looking further ahead, once mining revenue drops below our undisclosed hosting costs, we will auction off the hardware, and will deduct this sum from the outstanding loan, thereby reducing the debt unit holders owe to Peta. PETA mine has come a long way, and together with Havelock, has been a leader in driving down prices per GH, from ~0.007 BTC per GH at IPO to 0.0003 0.00025 ฿0.00020 BTC today, an impressive 2300 2700 3000% decline in just a few months. We are proud of this achievement and look forward to continuing on this path and set new records along the way. YHBT Team CryptX |
|
|
|
Well, let's wait the review from her peers. Aww, you science types are such a buzz-kill. With you logic and double blind studies. Your ruining the magic.  ON the contrary, it fuels the real magic. For those who want a nice initiation on what the paper is really about (ie, the black hole paradoxes), this is a good lecture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8bhtEgB8Mo&list=UUYeF244yNGuFefuFKqxIAXwParticularly the second part with sean carrol. |
|
|
|
How much in divs did they pay over the span of being on havelock?
With the split, thats too much work for me calculate. So ill give you my best approximation: peanuts. |
|
|
|
the ccc theory is best one, and also it make sense
I actually agree. WHile the math is way over my head, something about it just feels right. Hope evidence for it is found. |
|
|
|
Stephen Hawkings has been doing a flip flop on this theory. At first they existed now they don't. He said the same thing about God too. Fascinating subject.
Hawkings never flip flopped on whether or not black holes exist. He made a bet back in the 70s against his own belief and his own theory, but that was in his words "an insurance policy". If it turned out black holes did indeed exist, he would pay some other scientist a yearly subscription to Penthouse magazine. And he did. If he was wrong about his theory, at least he would have received a penthouse subscription as consolation for years of wasted work. If anything, it was a joke. He never changed his mind on whether or not black holes exist, he did change his mind (and conceded another bet) about whether or not black holes destroy information. While he conceded that bet, its far from certain he was actually incorrect on that one. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
