Nope, that is not the advertised performance. Forum speculation is forum speculation, product page advertisement is what the company is standing behind and will deliver.

I'm considering suing bitbet.us over this, so if you're thinking the same please let me know.

I ordered from them twice (before the bet and after the bet) and wattage was never mentioned anywhere. And no, the page doesn't say it will run off the usb cables. This is like some of the No voters trying to say that delivering 1 USB cable instead of 2 is less than 10% of the advertised performance specs. Grow up and accept that you lost.

I don't think USB cables fall under the category of advertised performance

GH/s is the only spec that has ever been advertised on the product page. Forum posts by moderators have never counted as a real statement, you can look up similar cases with google.

http://bitbet.us/bet/337/bfl-will-deliver-asic-devices-before-may-1st/

BFL has delivered many pre-orders already and they are within the +-10% range of the advertised 5GH/s (+-10% running variance).

Don't deal with them, they don't listen to reason and just do what they please.

EDIT:



Let's break this apart a bit shall we?

• can be established to true/false
• turned out to be: true

• can be established to true/false
• no percentage or quantity defined, thus any quantity will result in true
• turned out to be: true

• can be established to true/false
• turned out to be: true

• cannot be univocally established to true/false (BadBet)
• "advertised" can be interpreted in many ways ie. what mediums are considered to be official advertisement
• Sources supporting "Yes" answer
  
  • Official BFL FAQ says that the company will not give out any info relating to power consumption
  • Official BFL product pages only advertised GH/s performance
  • BFL Forum post from 28-03-2013 by BFL_JOSH says announces that at least first products will use more power than needed, customers can opt to wait longer (first devices will still use more power) or to get a refund

• Sources supporting "No" answer
  
  • BFL Forum post from 2012-09-29 (later superceded by 28-03-2013 anncouncement)

• true is supported by more sources, referenced "No" source was negated

• cannot be univocally established to true/false (BadBet)
• "performance" can be interpreted in many ways ie. Performance per Joule (GH/J), Gigahashes per secons (GH/s)
• Sources supporting "Yes" answer
  
  • Official BFL FAQ says that the company will not give out any info relating to power consumption, thus Performance per Joule should be out of the picture
  • Official BFL product pages only advertised GH/s performance, thus Performance per Joule should be out of the picture
  • BFL Forum post from 28-03-2013 by BFL_JOSH says announces that at least first products will use more power than thought before, customers can opt to wait longer (first devices will still use more power) or to get a refund

• Sources supporting "No" answer
  
  • BFL Forum post from 2012-09-29 (later superceded by 28-03-2013 anncouncement)

• true is supported by more sources, referenced "No" source was negated

The bet should not have been allowed in the first place as per BitBets FAQ/EULA. After it was accepted, when it became clear that bettors couldn't agree what advertised performance was (see the comments about in the bet, people even here can't agree) the bet should have been cancelled.

Now if BitBet doesn't stick to their own policies and still wants to resolve the bet, "Yes" is a clear winner because it is supported by more sources and the only "No" source was negated when 28-03-2013 announcement stated that the devices will consume more power than previously advertised.

Let me know if you still think that the 28-03-2013 announcement doesn't say that the first products will perform worse in terms of GH/J and I will help you out.

r9w7ukxCvLXd3wjZ88fwvU4xret3dBPmJs

Save us from your BS stories, you cashed out and added to the panic.

Could still be the same kids trolling. Or another group trying to bring bitcoin down.

http://pastebin.com/h7iGK49T

Buy and hold, don't feed the trolls.

Thanks, too sleepy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thPpJSkNvPo

Bitcoin rally mentioned as a reaction to cyprus and the fact that people are losing trust in the banking system. Bitcoin bits around 9:55.

03:49 <@gmaxwell> I thought it would be nice to go and talk about bitcoin for once, instead of being flooded out by more north korea stuff.
03:49 <@gmaxwell> We were actually _unable_ to talk about bitcoin, to the point where d-dimer suggested we go to another channel.
03:49 <@gmaxwell> and I think thats nuts
03:49 < rikur> You probably thought wrong, unless you auto +v everyone who is authed in the channels and help new people to get started too
03:49 < rikur> gmaxwell: this is more nuts
03:50 < rikur> just because you and d-miner wanted to chat in a more peaceful environment, you blocked out 1k people
03:50 <@gmaxwell> I'll be removing the +m in probably 10 minutes or so when we complete doing this multisign tutorial.
03:50 < rikur> gmaxwell: I don't think that you should be able to just shut the channel because you're walking someone through a tutorial
03:51 < rikur> #bitcoin-tutorials?
03:52 < rikur> the very foundation of bitcoin is to counter censorhip. This is just so wrong.

Anyone else think that is is just plain stupid?

Yeah. We should start mining with a client that blocks transactions from these power grabbers. No but really, new people to bitcoin must feel really welcome when they can't even say hi on the chat channel that is most quoted in all documents / websites as the place to go to.

The channel just got silenced by the ops. Reason given: we want to talk about bitcoin.

Discuss.

Might be too late now to add:
 * Get paid in Money instead of Fiat

http://fincen.gov/statutes_regs/guidance/html/FIN-2013-G001.html

Still reading it, but they are taking notice!