If you haven't got a smart phone, you can use a program for your PC. A list of programs can be found here. I used MOS Authenticator on Windows 7 and had no problems. If anyone has an investment worth more than $1000 I urge them to purchase a cheap used smartphone (costs like $50 on ebay) and wipe it before installing authenticator. Using a PC-based program is barely better than going without 2FA because if your password is stolen using a keylogger or trojan then your 2FA is also at risk. The whole point of 2FA is to have another device because then if your computer is compromised it's highly unlikely they also got your phone. doesn't the code refresh every 60 seconds? Yea it does. It shocks me someone can be interested in BTC and have BTC denominated assets and not own a smartphone. I have no need for a smart phone. I don't even really have a need for a mobile phone as I'm never mobile. I've also been programming, building, troubleshooting and using computers for at least 2 decades now and I'm not worried that my computer or accounts may be compromised. I'm confident that my ability and experience will ensure my safety. I've only ever had my PC infected once and that was in the Windows 95 days when I'd first got online. You are making the #1 mistake right now -- you're talking about it. You just told the world that, and now somebody could theoretically target you.. Like I said I'm not worried. I'm confident in my abilities and experience to protect myself. Someone would most certainly need physical access and my lifestyle pretty much rules that out. |
|
|
|
If you haven't got a smart phone, you can use a program for your PC. A list of programs can be found here. I used MOS Authenticator on Windows 7 and had no problems. If anyone has an investment worth more than $1000 I urge them to purchase a cheap used smartphone (costs like $50 on ebay) and wipe it before installing authenticator. Using a PC-based program is barely better than going without 2FA because if your password is stolen using a keylogger or trojan then your 2FA is also at risk. The whole point of 2FA is to have another device because then if your computer is compromised it's highly unlikely they also got your phone. doesn't the code refresh every 60 seconds? Yea it does. It shocks me someone can be interested in BTC and have BTC denominated assets and not own a smartphone. I have no need for a smart phone. I don't even really have a need for a mobile phone as I'm never mobile. I've also been programming, building, troubleshooting and using computers for at least 2 decades now and I'm not worried that my computer or accounts may be compromised. I'm confident that my ability and experience will ensure my safety. I've only ever had my PC infected once and that was in the Windows 95 days when I'd first got online. |
|
|
|
What takes WeExchange so freaking long to process? Ridiculous, its been almost two hours.
Get the six confirmations yet? Wish they'd scale that back to around three like btct, seems a bit like overkill. Finally. Now I have no idea how to activate 2-factor security. It wants a code but I have no code. Download the google authenticator app on your phone, add a new profile, type in the provided code reference number or scan the GR code. If you haven't got a smart phone, you can use a program for your PC. A list of programs can be found here. I used MOS Authenticator on Windows 7 and had no problems. |
|
|
|
Keep waiting for a pullback to buy...
Lol, good luck  seriously arb btct to bitfunder freemoneys. Once on BitFunder, there's also the opportunity to sell ActM and buy AMC if the prices start to drift apart. So, double freemonies for the next day or two.  |
|
|
|
What's up with the selling on bitfunder? Is it mostly attributable to people shifting from AM to ACTM? I don't see any of the fundamentals being different in AM unless this showing the dividend will be 0.014 next: http://www.asicminercharts.com/live/edit: someone else asked the same a few days ago, sorry. Cashing out of AM and buying in to ActM is just the logical thing to do. Look at this way. AM's price is unlikely to go above 5 BTC, whereas ActM has major potential for price increase. If we assume ActM is equally as successful as AM and provides equal income, then you could expect about a 10x increase in ActM's share price. So, by selling AM now and buying ActM, you will see your bitcoin increase by a few hundred percent in a few months. You could then sell your shares in ActM, and rebuy shares in AM without them having changed much in price, with any change more likely to make them cheaper than their current price due to competition. |
|
|
|
|
AM prices are plummeting and ActM prices are going through the roof. There must be some major migrations going on there.
|
|
|
|
Both Avalon and BFL have shipped or brought online more hashing power and every ASIC developer apart from Avalon are using more efficient ASICs than AM.
So AM, have likely sold no more than 20 Th/s worth of hashing power to date. Asicminercharts points to AM's hashrate averaging about that 40 Th/s, giving AM a total of about 60 Th/s brought online.
Avalon batch 1 was 300 units, batch 2 and 3 were 600 units. They're currently shipping batch 3, which means they've shipped about 900 units. At 63 Gh/s per unit, that's 56.7 Th/s.
If AM and Avalon have brought online about 60 Th/s each, then where is the other 195 Th/s coming from? BFL is the only other company shipping units. 100TH is bringing units online but it's only at a few Gh/s at the moment.
In other words, even if we stipulate that all of your assumptions are correct, Avalon has not brought online more hashing power than AM as you initially said (56.7 vs. 60). Not to mention that you counted all Avalon batch 3's, which is generous, considering a great many units have not shipped at all. Then, after that little tap dance, you are seriously, with a straight face and no fingers crossed, insisting that the rest of the entire network hash rate must be coming from BFL machines. It just must be! Who else is there? It would be funny if there weren't so many actual human beings damaged by BFL's incompetence. You certainly are a rising star in market analysis. Actually, the Avalon numbers don't include any 3rd batch shipments at all. By assuming 3rd batch shipments had all been delivered, Avalon will have shipped at least 100 Th/s. BFL might be extremely late in shipping and have lots of back orders, but they are capable of shipping huge amounts of hashing power in the form of Mini Rigs. 1 Mini Rig is equivalent to about 1500 USB BEs or 50 Blades. The extra hashing power has to be accounted for. If Avalon batch 3 had all shipped, that would account for 30-40 Th/s. We could say AM is responsible for another 10-20 Th/s due to the data being a few days old and maybe attribute 30 Th/s to variance. That would still leave about 100 Th/s unaccounted for and the obvious and logical conclusion is that the majority of that hashing power must be down to BFL or there are players in the game we know nothing about. |
|
|
|
What are the conditions for a buyback of ASICminer
Here are the only conditions: If we haven't raised enough money to tape out before August. 28, 2012, we will return 100.5% of the total raised funds to investors of ASICMINER. The 0.5% is for compensating the GLBSE fee. That's it. Question answered!  So now 2012 has passed... each ASICMINER share always owns 1/400000 of the company.
...Friedcat's contract with us isn't for life, it's for eternity. I'm ok with that! No issues here ^_^ We will grow old together haha I'm curious about this no buyback clause situation. Does that mean that even if say, a huge company is interested in buying the entirety of ASICMINER's operations that the company controlling ASICMINER, Bitfountain, will not be able to sell, even if the offer were incredibly high for each share? Would this mean the company offering to buy back the shares would need to consult and negotiate with every single holder to buy out all the shares? Or would it simply mean that the majority holding of Bitfountain's shares would shift owners and the new owners would be obligated to continue serving the rest of the shareholders according to the initial IPO conditions? Pardon me if I sound a little naive, but is this a good or a bad thing? I think the whole "can ASICMINER ever be sold and under what conditions" is an incredibly high-priority question to ask friedcat. We all need clarification on this from the cat's mouth I think that question is pretty self explanatory. Who do you think would buy asicminer as a whole ? If you think about what AM is, it only has good value for some lets say 1-2 years (and that is pretty optimistic), after that there will be competitors with better and more efficient ASICs presumably. For what asicminer would be worth in BTCs that would be a huge gamble or even reckless investment to make. The only real possibility in my eyes is that BTC would explode to 1k+/BTC, some big mainstream company would take interest but even after that would such a company need anything from "underground Chinese" operation ? That is one hell of a presumption. ASICMINER is light-years beyond any of the competition, and they are an extremely forward looking company... their next-generation of ASIC chips will likely be coming online before BFL ships half of thier pre-orders from last september. The likelihood of any of the so-called competitors with their "pre-orders" actually producing real-world hardware that is more efficient than what ASICMINER is able to produce is extremely unlikely, in my humble opinion. Also, they are not an "underground Chinese operation"... Bitfountain is a legally registered corporation operating legally in the PRC. AM are only ahead of the competition in delivery time frames. Both Avalon and BFL have shipped or brought online more hashing power and every ASIC developer apart from Avalon are using more efficient ASICs than AM. Also, AM's next gen chips won't be coming online until November. There's no need to spread such misinformation and it just reflects poorly on AM. What misinformation are you talking about? Other companies have brought more hash power online than ASICMINER... are you high? That is simply false. My opinion is just that... my opinion. Personally I can't imagine that any other company will be able to compete with ASICMINER over the next few months (who else is shipping ASICs??), or in November when their next generation of chips are ready. They have proven that they have the ability to manufacture chips on a large scale, and there is no reason to believe that some other company will gain and advantage on them in that respect. The misinformation is you claiming that ASICMiner are light years ahead which is demonstrably false. When it comes to ASIC efficiency, AM is second to bottom, with Avalon at the bottom. That is an indisputable fact based on hash rate and and power consumption. When it come hashing power shipped or brought online, we have the following number for AM: Mining Income: 102,041.82 BTCBlade Sales Income: 29,594.75 BTCUSB Sales Income: 37,524.00 BTCAccording to Friedcat, at least 5,000 USB devices were sold at 2 BTC and some the number was closer to 10,000. If we take 5,000 as the number, then that's 10,000 BTC, and the remainder would be from 27,600 USB sales at 1 BTC. If we take 10,000 as the number, then that's 20,000 BTC and the remainder would come from 17,600 USB sales at 1 BTC. So the number of USB sales at that point was between 27,600 and 32,600. At 336 Mh/s, that works out to a hashing power of between 9.2736 Th/s and 10.9536 Th/s. Blades cost 50 BTC each for 10GH/s. 29,600 / 50 = 592. At 10 Gh/s, that's a hashing power of 5.920 Th/s. So AM, have likely sold no more than 20 Th/s worth of hashing power to date. Asicminercharts points to AM's hashrate averaging about that 40 Th/s, giving AM a total of about 60 Th/s brought online. Avalon batch 1 was 300 units, batch 2 and 3 were 600 units. They're currently shipping batch 3, which means they've shipped about 900 units. At 63 Gh/s per unit, that's 56.7 Th/s. At the beginning of the year, the network hash rate was at about 20 Th/s. It's currently at about 315 Th/s. If AM and Avalon have brought online about 60 Th/s each, then where is the other 195 Th/s coming from? BFL is the only other company shipping units. 100TH is bringing units online but it's only at a few Gh/s at the moment. |
|
|
|
What are the conditions for a buyback of ASICminer
Here are the only conditions: If we haven't raised enough money to tape out before August. 28, 2012, we will return 100.5% of the total raised funds to investors of ASICMINER. The 0.5% is for compensating the GLBSE fee. That's it. Question answered! So now 2012 has passed... each ASICMINER share always owns 1/400000 of the company.
...Friedcat's contract with us isn't for life, it's for eternity. I'm ok with that! No issues here ^_^ We will grow old together haha I'm curious about this no buyback clause situation. Does that mean that even if say, a huge company is interested in buying the entirety of ASICMINER's operations that the company controlling ASICMINER, Bitfountain, will not be able to sell, even if the offer were incredibly high for each share? Would this mean the company offering to buy back the shares would need to consult and negotiate with every single holder to buy out all the shares? Or would it simply mean that the majority holding of Bitfountain's shares would shift owners and the new owners would be obligated to continue serving the rest of the shareholders according to the initial IPO conditions? Pardon me if I sound a little naive, but is this a good or a bad thing? I think the whole "can ASICMINER ever be sold and under what conditions" is an incredibly high-priority question to ask friedcat. We all need clarification on this from the cat's mouth I think that question is pretty self explanatory. Who do you think would buy asicminer as a whole ? If you think about what AM is, it only has good value for some lets say 1-2 years (and that is pretty optimistic), after that there will be competitors with better and more efficient ASICs presumably. For what asicminer would be worth in BTCs that would be a huge gamble or even reckless investment to make. The only real possibility in my eyes is that BTC would explode to 1k+/BTC, some big mainstream company would take interest but even after that would such a company need anything from "underground Chinese" operation ? That is one hell of a presumption. ASICMINER is light-years beyond any of the competition, and they are an extremely forward looking company... their next-generation of ASIC chips will likely be coming online before BFL ships half of thier pre-orders from last september. The likelihood of any of the so-called competitors with their "pre-orders" actually producing real-world hardware that is more efficient than what ASICMINER is able to produce is extremely unlikely, in my humble opinion. Also, they are not an "underground Chinese operation"... Bitfountain is a legally registered corporation operating legally in the PRC. AM are only ahead of the competition in delivery time frames. Both Avalon and BFL have shipped or brought online more hashing power and every ASIC developer apart from Avalon are using more efficient ASICs than AM. Also, AM's next gen chips won't be coming online until November. There's no need to spread such misinformation and it just reflects poorly on AM. |
|
|
|
Such low volumes on bitfunder.. actually thinking of selling all and migrating to btct for volume.. is everybody taking a day off from trading this Sunday??  I don't know why some people here are claiming that BitFunder has such low volume compared to BTC-TC. We can clearly see that the 24 hour volume for Active Mining on BTC-TC is 790.3 BTC while on BitFunder it is 735.24 BTC. That's not the end of the story though. AMC is still alive on BitFunder and people are still buying it. The 24 hour volume for AMC is 249.038 BTC. If you add the volume for Active Mining and AMC together, then you get 984.278 BTC, which is a fair bit higher than that on BTC-TC. |
|
|
|
It's a simple and obvious fact that fixed hash rate mining assets will lose value over time because with all the hashing power set to come online, difficulty is only going to increase. If the share price does not drop accordingly, then people are just being stupid and paying too much.
You... didn't really understand anything of what I just said, did you? That's fine, I'm sure you're good at painting or herding cows or something else. .b I understood what you said perfectly fine. It is you that does not understand (or perhaps you do but have ulterior motives) which is evident from the completely unrealistic scenarios you keep painting in order to lend credence to your argument and your asset. You've been told this dozens of times now by numerous people. |
|
|
|
|
For those who want to make some extra shares on BitFunder, sell ActM and buy AMC then tender them for ActM.
|
|
|
|
Why do you think a mining asset which provides a fixed hash rate would "skyrocket" with a small difficulty increase? Any difficulty increase at all means less income from the asset, therefore it's value decreases. That's just simple logic. If the share price increased due to a decrease in value, then that just proves my point that there are a lot of stupid people throwing money at stuff without doing the maths or any research. Logically, a decrease in value should result in a corresponding decrease in share price.
Right now, 200mhs at 0.4 gets you 200+% interest per year. If difficulty increased only by 5-10% per month, that would mean that in a year, the profit would still be in the 100-150% per year range. Microsoft currently stands at around 3% per year. NASDAQ composite stands at somewhere between 4-7% per year. Something paying 25 times that would skyrocket over night. You're forgetting that the market has already priced in the upcoming difficulty changes. Because of the fear that this will go on perpetually, the prices drop like rocks. However, if that doesn't happen (and there are already signs it may slow down when you see the skepticism about any mining investments these days) then profitability for these assets will be so high that they comparable prices would go through the roof. Megabigpower is struggling to sell out their 400 available October 400gh/s miners, and even if they sold all those today and had them in operation tomorrow, accounting for 100th, that would only keep the momentum of the current growth up for another month. If difficulty completely stoppped today, any currently available mining asset that would survive more than 3 years would probably rise to 10-15 times its current price overnight. You'd still get your money back and beat most Wall Street investment funds by 200%. If you need evidence of this, look at ASICMiner, where the market expects them to maintain their relative hash power for a long time. Right now, the market is paying 10x per hash of what they are paying for fixed-rate assets like 100TH, TAT.VM, and BFMines (ASICMiner now costs just over 10BTC for 200mhs). The market has no fear of difficulty increases becaus ASICMiner can grow. However, if difficulty stopped rising, the effect would be the same as if they rose perpetually because they would maintain, like ASICMiner is expected, their relative hash rate. .b Difficulty increases of 5-10% per month are completely unrealistic for at least the next few months. It's increasing by around 10-20% each round. In the coming months, we'll see BitFury, KnC, Active Mining, HashFast and BTCMAN all entering the market. We're not going to be seeing 5% increases per round any time soon, never mind per month. Just look at your asset, BFMines. The bids are at 3/4 of your IPO price and you haven't even sold 2/5 of your shares yet. By the time you get your miner, you won't have sold any more shares and the bids will be less than half the IPO price. Your investors are already losing 25% and they haven't even seen 1 Satoshi yet. Look at TAT.VM, currently trading at less than half the price of it's IPO. To claim that share prices for such assets will "skyrocket" with small percentage difficulty increase just proves you don't know what you are talking about or are just blatantly telling lies. Difficulty will have to "skyrocket" in order to see such small percentage increases and in that case, all these fixed hash rate assets will become basically worthless. It's a simple and obvious fact that fixed hash rate mining assets will lose value over time because with all the hashing power set to come online, difficulty is only going to increase. If the share price does not drop accordingly, then people are just being stupid and paying too much. |
|
|
|
It doesn't, like I said. It pays only like one as long as difficulty skyrockets. If the rise goes down or even falls, DMS.Mining won't behave like anything mining related and will be a guaranteed loss, unlike a mining asset. I've written more about it here: http://coin.furuknap.net/understanding-dms/.b Difficulty doesn't need to "skyrocket", it needs to increase by a couple of percent, which it will continue to do so for quite a while. By the time DMS closes, 200 Mh/s will be like mining with a CPU today - completely pointless. You keep saying that and keep getting slapped down by Deprived. Difficulty increase slowed from about 28% to about 10% a month ago then went up to 23%. DMS.MINING behaved exactly the same, proving that what you are saying is simply wrong. If difficulty slowed down to increasing just a couple of percent, prices on mining assets would skyrocket instead, but DMS.Mining would stop quickly and not rise in price. If you believe I'm wrong, put your money where your mouth is. Buying DMS.Mining now would be a steal when you see that comparable outputs go for two and three times as much. You'll make a killing if you're right in that they will work the same. There's easy money there, no need to give it away by spilling your knowledge. .b Why do you think a mining asset which provides a fixed hash rate would "skyrocket" with a small difficulty increase? Any difficulty increase at all means less income from the asset, therefore it's value decreases. That's just simple logic. If the share price increased due to a decrease in value, then that just proves my point that there are a lot of stupid people throwing money at stuff without doing the maths or any research. Logically, a decrease in value should result in a corresponding decrease in share price. |
|
|
|
Hardware shipping isn't until November, and these things often get delayed.
The dividends are better at asicminer and will be for months due to their own sales. Let's not pretend otherwise.
This stock is a long term hold with an awful lot of potential. It's all about eASIC - look them up.
Let's compare them on BTC-TC based on current price and last dividend payout. ASICMiner Price: 4.643 BTC per share Divs: 0.02405901 BTC per share Active Mining Price: 0.005780 BTC per share Divs: 0.00000517 BTC per share For the cost of 1 AM share, you could buy 803 ActM shares. The ActM shares would payout 0.00415151 BTC in dividends, which is 5.8x less than what you would get from AM for the same price. |
|
|
|
Pictures + hash-rate proof when rigs go online in numbers = 1 BTC/share
If 1 share still represents 200 Mh/s then 1 BTC per share would be terrible value. You can get 200 Mh/s for 0.5379816 BTC right now from DMS.MINING and that price will get lower with every difficulty increase, just as these shares will. Why are you expecting the price to increase as value decreases? Then again, it wouldn't surprise me if it did hit 1 BTC per share because there's a lot of stupid people around who just seem to throw BTC at anything without doing any research or maths. Yeah, except DMS.Mining isn't a mining asset and won't work like one unless you're continuously losing money. A better comparison would be TAT.VM or my own BFMines. .b Who cares whether it's actually a mining asset or not, when it pays the same as one? It doesn't, like I said. It pays only like one as long as difficulty skyrockets. If the rise goes down or even falls, DMS.Mining won't behave like anything mining related and will be a guaranteed loss, unlike a mining asset. I've written more about it here: http://coin.furuknap.net/understanding-dms/.b Difficulty doesn't need to "skyrocket", it needs to increase by a couple of percent, which it will continue to do so for quite a while. By the time DMS closes, 200 Mh/s will be like mining with a CPU today - completely pointless. You keep saying that and keep getting slapped down by Deprived. Difficulty increase slowed from about 28% to about 10% a month ago then went up to 23%. DMS.MINING behaved exactly the same, proving that what you are saying is simply wrong. |
|
|
|
Pictures + hash-rate proof when rigs go online in numbers = 1 BTC/share
If 1 share still represents 200 Mh/s then 1 BTC per share would be terrible value. You can get 200 Mh/s for 0.5379816 BTC right now from DMS.MINING and that price will get lower with every difficulty increase, just as these shares will. Why are you expecting the price to increase as value decreases? Then again, it wouldn't surprise me if it did hit 1 BTC per share because there's a lot of stupid people around who just seem to throw BTC at anything without doing any research or maths. Yeah, except DMS.Mining isn't a mining asset and won't work like one unless you're continuously losing money. A better comparison would be TAT.VM or my own BFMines. .b Who cares whether it's actually a mining asset or not, when it pays the same as one? |
|
|
|
Pictures + hash-rate proof when rigs go online in numbers = 1 BTC/share
If 1 share still represents 200 Mh/s then 1 BTC per share would be terrible value. You can get 200 Mh/s for 0.5379816 BTC right now from DMS.MINING and that price will get lower with every difficulty increase, just as these shares will. Why are you expecting the price to increase as value decreases? Then again, it wouldn't surprise me if it did hit 1 BTC per share because there's a lot of stupid people around who just seem to throw BTC at anything without doing any research or maths. |
|
|
|
Thanks for your Input guys... I am hanging on and not selling now..
I only have 1500 shares but still its nice to even have that for the price I got in at.... 0.0025
And agree that you have to believe its the hardware sales that will REALLY potentially drive the Stock price and Div way up(Hopefully)
The dividends are low per share, but most of us have thousands of shares. The last div payout on BitFunder was 0.00000517 BTC. Multiply that by 1500 and you get 0.007755 BTC. If we assume dividends of 0.00001 BTC when all the Avalon based systems are online, you'd be getting 0.015 BTC from mining from those 1500 shares. 1500 * 0.0025 BTC = 3.75 BTC. That's about 1 BTC less than the cost of an AM share, with equivalent mining divs. |
|
|
|
Always do the maths: hardware sales.
I don't have any data for hardware sales so I wont do any maths for that. What I do know though is that the hardware does not exist yet and that people are pissed off with pre-orders. I don't expect hardware sales to amount to much at the moment or for the next month or two. The reason for buying shares at the moment is due to the potential, the dividends are just a little bonus while waiting. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
