Because I don't know which ones they are.


No, it's not common sense. If you re-invest, the payout should be greater (unless mining circumstances change drastically) because you've increased your hash rate. If you get paid 1 BTC one week and reinvest that 1 BTC to double your hashing power, if mining circumstances stay the same you'd get 2 BTC back the next week. The next week you would get another 2 BTC and have 4 BTC. If you didn't reinvest you'd still have 1 BTC, get 1 BTC the next week and have a total of 2 BTC. The next week you would have a total of 3 BTC.


How many of those refused to provide any evidence of legitimacy just like you? How many of them did provide evidence of legitimacy?

Cloud mining allows manufacturers to sell hashing power without having to deal with shipping to places all around the world and various customer issues. All they have to do is set up farms for self-mining and sell hashing power, selling miners as requested during the process. Once all ASIC had been used, they could just used miners while waiting for more chips as long as they had enough unsold hashing power. If they were just selling miners, that hashing power is basically just sitting on the shelf doing nothing until it gets sold.

From the customer's point of view, the shipping costs involved with buying a miner can be pretty expensive and you often need to supply your own PSU which can cost up to $300. The extra initial expenses cost as much as the miners on some occasions. Then there's the cost of electricity to factor in. Most people don't have cheap electricity and the cloud mining services have maintenance fees which are cheaper.

The following manufacturers all provide cloud mining now, either directly or in partnership:

ASICMiner - AMHash
BitFury - Bit-x
Bitmain - Hashnest
KnC Miner - KNC Cloud
Spondoolies - Genesis Mining

The next gen ASICs should be out in a couple of months from ASICMiner, BitFury and Spondoolies all promising 0.2 J/GH and AM actually showing a 0.1961 J/Gh ASIC. That should allow those manufacturers to offer more profitable services.

Cloud mining is simply more profitable for both customer and manufacturer so it's inevitable really and ideally, you should be able to buy and sell your hashing power on the market, so people can get in and out whenever they want without any hassle.

The AMHash quote is from a later date than FriedCat's so it could be based on more recent information. Like I said, there's no reason to assume that the schedule has changed from a chip-out date of Feb-March. They got the chips on Dec 10 and testing was supposed to take 3-10 days.

Like I said, full production was scheduled for Feb-March and samples were early. There's been no indications of any delays so why would you assume that the schedule has changed?

Do you have any evidence to show that BitFury has a better chip that will be out in the same time frame? BitFury (and others) said that they'd have 0.2 J/Gh ASICs (based on simulations) in a similar time frame. Have you seen any evidence of that? We know that AM have had 0.2 J/Gh chips since Dec 10.

If you can get legitimate cloud mining contracts for cheaper than the cost of a physical miner, then you'd also make a profit from cloud mining too.

You could currently buy 1700 Gh/s of AMHash off Havelock for less than 0.00097499 BTC/Gh, so less than 1.657483 BTC for 1700 Gh.
AMHash charges 0.001551 USD/Gh/day for maintenance. For 1700 Gh, that's 2.6367 USD.

An SP20 is currently selling for 479 USD. At 235 USD/BTC, that's 2.03829787 BTC. You also need to pay for shipping and a PSU.
The SP20 does 1700 Gh/s (customers say about 1500-1600) and consumes 1200 W.
That gives 0.00119900 BTC/Gh and 28.8 kWh used daily.
With an electricity cost of 0.1 USD/kWh, that gives a daily running cost of 2.88 USD.

The SP20 can also be underclocked to 1176 Gh/s using 639W.
That gives 0.00173325 BTC/Gh and 1.54 USD daily running cost or 0.001310 USD/Gh/day.

You are more likely to profit from legitimate cloud mining than you are from mining bitcoins at home or even if you get you miner hosted.

They got those chips about a week early it seems so they seem to be on track and we've heard nothing that would suggest any delays.

How about commenting on why so many of your pay-in addresses are involved in transactions that fund Eobot.

From what I can tell 1LfpedDQLqqEmSDZ9B7v2sPzz5NeeDhXec was your pay-in collection address which collected funds from individual customer pay-in addresses. During the transfer from the individual pay-in addresses, you were mixing coins with addresses that went on to fund Eobot. To do so, you had to be cooperating with the owners of the addresses that funded Eobot or you would have to be the owners of those addresses. All the transactions I looked at involving 1LfpedDQLqqEmSDZ9B7v2sPzz5NeeDhXec receiving bitcoins showed this pattern.

So, what exactly is your connection to the owners of those addresses and why do they always go on to fund Eobot?

That data is already public and you didn't mind sharing that data for the refunds.


That's good to know for people thinking of re-investing. Who doesn't want to make their payout smaller?  

If you prove me wrong, then I'll admit that I was wrong and apologise. There are simply too many addresses connecting Cloud Mining Website to Eobot so you'll need solid proof.

How could you possibly prove that CMW doesn't own that address though unless you were somehow involved with this operation?

No, SMS used as 2FA is unsafe.

~0.2 J/Gh with <0.1 J/Gh mid 2015.

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/interview-bitfury-ceo-valery-vavilov-new-bitcoin-asic-chips-horizon/

No it isn't. That's just you not understanding how transactions work.



1F91HzJaQZ1WGU9NG2ZhFaXctZD6vMsV3L is a CMW pay-in address. It belongs to CMW. Therefore the other input address - 159L7bbpjvYuMT5PQnFyQvJwws3f7D5BpL also belongs to CMW. That transaction sends funds to 1LfpedDQLqqEmSDZ9B7v2sPzz5NeeDhXec (which is CMW's pay-in collection address) and 1GNmnxWkComFYF7k8EBeKtgQz2sprUGYvM.

Every single one of the above transactions follows the same format which very strongly suggest that in all those transactions, the output address below 1LfpedDQLqqEmSDZ9B7v2sPzz5NeeDhXec also belongs to CMW. The evidence is far too overwhelming for any other conclusion.

I've already posting the evidence showing that Cloud Mining Website sends funds to Eobot. Here it is again since you keep asking:

Cloud Mining Website's payout address is 1LKW6fiftaQg8UPp32ptdgJW587XXCDk3p. The first payout from that address was on 2014-11-10 13:09:18 to the following addresses:

1S5jZoMaCAXU5ouCJUdqNqa91JyndhsKY - (Spent) 0.01383072 BTC
1GeMdyJAh89tYLKkMNwMq8NfSSuB8nubdq - (Spent) 0.00050792 BTC
13PqrhREgP7UtGCMfSmPFwSqonGfbwnBg4 - (Spent) 0.0005 BTC
1HVuXwqaTVbSyavVBUdERAzX23pdtJbSTz - (Spent) 0.00188095 BTC
1Gxx7hKXHHsYQqLemjrm9yxq7fyBpRmn6n - (Spent) 0.0167636 BTC
1Cuq6oPjmCAHYvf8P261X1kQtFSRYWxH4L - (Spent) 0.00050792 BTC
1AWH3FFgVmGkYqi6XXEBGWHxZh4jprimA8 - (Spent) 0.00380958 BTC
1PiVXGLoCZxkAXQoE1tgWUGcFNE4nxMMGp - (Spent) 0.01685437 BTC
1sXep2dchasM93tz5b4nVwKxyAwBC6NaL - (Spent) 0.00253972 BTC
1NUYC1Yn6D5QnbdJhrnfggrgMr9MxvZeHV - (Spent) 0.00787452 BTC
1PJsyKj7MFcDU2NhVGxzZwkACQm3kWSy4q - (Spent) 0.00380958 BTC
12VNyzMs2phSHieU8tn9tHJ12paBBYrkVs - (Spent) 0.0005 BTC
12sC4856yLHCVejxzDx9t2uFvqgSp93141 - (Spent) 0.00787452 BTC
1KtpNadiW7T9abF76auqaxiDRDXUsfS1Yy - (Unspent) 0.00078742 BTC
1GKjwnAoTNXeyGxyAuQj6RHVmdwX8PKHqy - (Spent) 0.00050794 BTC
1EyC24bBTjFQ97ro5Kbo1tZFAaxo2r2aEU - (Spent) 0.00256524 BTC
1ka4QPaJeKqpy27ta6Rich3YQhwPiUxia - (Spent) 0.00050792 BTC
1KzCLHBzih4AjDnqUXLoVmS8pVeCfrnGek - (Spent) 0.00393726 BTC
1MqXA26UJrMPHr8YqyQCa2wnpn3nJSyw5b - (Spent) 0.00064766 BTC
134RkePAuZzYqPBMhcbjyUgmQPnfjn11zn - (Spent) 0.00507944 BTC
1LKW6fiftaQg8UPp32ptdgJW587XXCDk3p - (Spent) 0.00861372 BTC

The following addresses go on to send funds to Eobot and include 1LfpedDQLqqEmSDZ9B7v2sPzz5NeeDhXec in a transaction:

134RkePAuZzYqPBMhcbjyUgmQPnfjn11zn > 18Xb24a6uxjQoFU4UM7Sf4qnBLGihshYMA > 1EDQxwFYbwkk7Q64PatJaGbmrLGTV8hFg7 > 12gE6HhtuT2HQyWUn7uRUCjCLFWM1zbUg9 > 1MPxhNkSzeTNTHSZAibMaS8HS1esmUL1ne (Eobot)

1EyC24bBTjFQ97ro5Kbo1tZFAaxo2r2aEU > 1trK54PHRtDkgyM8KfNHkvd8vCFfC8Xp9 > 1CDqWP7q6qVJnqUQUPPE1CegA2KJfY5Fn > 19SAkgM7vtkDn3jK3v8uJCFLethkp3hRpw > 1Bd6HCqnep7R1LjKQdkkGx5dEKBsk49xrJ > 1MPxhNkSzeTNTHSZAibMaS8HS1esmUL1ne (Eobot)

1KtpNadiW7T9abF76auqaxiDRDXUsfS1Yy > 1PYb6PX2R7wzKos2MGAVs2kYwaZbHF3VUk > 1MjC3Pmj2UjZWwNx4wML87ksPswQYDznDD > 15R9sp6pZf3m8tJutpwZHSSyBPuzuBZr1s > 1MPxhNkSzeTNTHSZAibMaS8HS1esmUL1ne (Eobot)

1NUYC1Yn6D5QnbdJhrnfggrgMr9MxvZeHV > 1CrGgHK1SuG6F5XE7DkeeVR3mS8EojzivM > 1CC4shQ5AKrLZdY4yZsje9soXNVS1xMYb5 > 1KDdqF1uUW9G3XDKQDSPjPLPMPg4tXzD7G > 1GC9SfN7dYonyuGSHrhVxtMbYcuXFR9Koj > 1MPxhNkSzeTNTHSZAibMaS8HS1esmUL1ne (Eobot)

1PiVXGLoCZxkAXQoE1tgWUGcFNE4nxMMGp > 1JPG7aob1p7HstxgfExbyittzeUcNXpQjC > 1HbPVgQLxqgWDk3DLi9rngNBNX8wVbhnqG > 1GTFsNgN2HVgY55xKEonbYcQWyJViRA2vG > 1MPxhNkSzeTNTHSZAibMaS8HS1esmUL1ne (Eobot)

1HVuXwqaTVbSyavVBUdERAzX23pdtJbSTz > 1E5Ru8dkRsUzJtdHugTDo1yL9s47S2dsyG > 1NszG3hZFKPXEsCUnUTCZnhGu2fUZQLUHg > 1MPxhNkSzeTNTHSZAibMaS8HS1esmUL1ne (Eobot)

1GeMdyJAh89tYLKkMNwMq8NfSSuB8nubdq > 19Z8GBHzC2adEHfgDkfvqCBwTrNPmijPJt > 1Mvie3e49r5LsbittvaLPodYz4mR1ZZUgx > 19NojCdwPMksCN4SWYtGCdM7RHGrPaf1Ka > 1Pz4zyH9aJJy2XeyTbQMGbroyn8eryvsHB > 1MPxhNkSzeTNTHSZAibMaS8HS1esmUL1ne (Eobot)

And that's just from the first payment! Add in the other two I found as well:

1NkVkNiNdn4bXJ34U7BZo8aK1qPLiQnnvM (krunox123) > 1EtatR2NRht9JFjmF9x99i6oztFHfM839V > 1LFHUrUwjUydvPx9uCVjq4m6uQ7gaHALh3 > 1MPxhNkSzeTNTHSZAibMaS8HS1esmUL1ne (Eobot)

13RJvPMzxdAyzXQNnLAAimrMQBGseRJRmC > 1F91HzJaQZ1WGU9NG2ZhFaXctZD6vMsV3L > 1GNmnxWkComFYF7k8EBeKtgQz2sprUGYvM > 1MPxhNkSzeTNTHSZAibMaS8HS1esmUL1ne (Eobot)

I got the "Eobot" tag from blockchain.info. It comes directly from their website under "Block Explorer Link".


I don't give a shit either way. You're a proven liar (until you provide proof of me getting kicked off Default trust for lying) defending a blatant scam despite all the evidence showing it to be a blatant scam.

Go and ask them then. No, I won't ask them to leave me negative feedback if I'm wrong. You can though. And no, I won't wear that sig either. I would change my sig to admit I made a mistake though.

1. I have already provided lots of evidence which shows conclusively that Cloud Mining Website is sending funds to Eobot. Taken altogether, I'd say that's proof.

2. Because I don't want to and whether I accept your bet or not has no bearing on any of the evidence I've provided. Your bet is nothing but an attempt to divert peoples attention away from the evidence of Cloud Mining website sending funds to Eobot.

I've already listed 9 chains that show that Cloud Mining Website is sending funds to Eobot and that was just from addresses listed in the first payout. I can guarantee you I could find a lot more with the exact same pattern.

Stop talking shite. Anyone here is free to get my observations confirmed by bitcoin experts of their own choosing. They will confirm that CMW is obviously sending money to Eobot. The evidence is pretty damn conclusive.

Like I said, if it was a one off, that could be explained away as an accident, coincidence or whatever, but not when it's a third of the transactions from the first payout though.

I'm not appointed by FriedCat at all and I was never kicked off DefaultTrust for lying. Provide the proof of that or let everyone know that you are a lying sack of shit defending a blatant scam. All that link you provided shows is that I was removed from the DefaultTrust list, not because I was lying. I never should have been on it in the first place as I have no transaction history.

Fist of all, I've told you repeatedly to shove your unwinnable bet up your arse.

Second, I never said that 1KufA3z7mLntENepGKo9Ktu9S7qAL2oLF3 could be proven to be the owner of 1LfpedDQLqqEmSDZ9B7v2sPzz5NeeDhXec by blockchain analysis. I simply claimed it was the owner because that's what the evidence strongly suggests. With 1LfpedDQLqqEmSDZ9B7v2sPzz5NeeDhXec being CMW's incoming payment collection address, it stands to reason that payments to it will be from CMW owned addresses which I've shown to be true for numerous other addresses. If the input addresses belong to CMW and one of the two output addresses belongs to CMW, given all the other evidence provided and the very distinct repeating pattern of the transactions, it's bloody obvious that 1KufA3z7mLntENepGKo9Ktu9S7qAL2oLF3 is also owned by CMW.

Thirdly, I've already shown that 1LfpedDQLqqEmSDZ9B7v2sPzz5NeeDhXec was involved in the transaction between 1F91HzJaQZ1WGU9NG2ZhFaXctZD6vMsV3L and 1GNmnxWkComFYF7k8EBeKtgQz2sprUGYvM, as well as a shit load of other transactions involving CMW addresses and that Eobot address.

Fourthly, what lies have I told? Point to a specific one.

Lastly, who gives a shit about those 2 chains though when I just provided 9 chains with that very same distinct flow of funds. Basically, you'd have to be a SimplemindedSpanishSoldier, a RetardedRussianRainbow or a GullibleGermanGiant to ignore such evidence.

Does it really surprise you that a "company" that refused to provide any evidence of legitimacy has buggered off with your money? Would you hand over money to some proper shady guy in a dark alley telling you to wait there and he'll be back soon with some goodies for you?

Just remember this from now on: No evidence of legitimacy for me, no fucking money for you.

To answer your question though, the thread is locked and buried a few pages in.

Actually, you made no mention of Genesis Mining. You said:


I'm not saying you're lying or anything, I just think it's interesting.