Bitcoin Forum
May 26, 2024, 06:00:19 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 »
21  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: What's the point of reducing block rewards over time? on: January 17, 2014, 09:03:54 PM
The actual reason is to make money of course, everything anyone else says is lies, FUD and disinfo

quark took this to the extreme and it made them millions in less than half a year.

doge went for this + meme but they made the block halving longer but still short.  because it takes ~2.5 minutes they keep getting hit by multipools

reward halving guarantees you can mine early and have something vastly more scarce to mine later, meaning if people want it, they have to buy it (from you)
22  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Ethereum: 2nd gen cryptocurrency with contract programming, "dagger" hashing on: January 17, 2014, 08:56:40 PM
Of course everyone is being vague in this thread, that's to be expected with these things.  But i've gathered that the algo is going to be a """CPU"" only one, and it's going to be heavily premined / IPO'd aka buy in now or never make anything style

Why always botnet (""CPU"" aka cloud services) mining?

Why always Premining and Proof of Stake?


Bitcoin started out very decentralized and then because of SHA256 became extremely centralized

Scrypt GPU era started out very decentralized and stayed like that, but now with ASICs on the horizon is about to go the way of bitcoin (albeit not as dramatic) if they stay on the same algo

CPU coins are never actually decentralized, they're always taken over by botnets and cloud mining.  CPU mining with computers is almost never ever reasonable

Proof of stake, just results in a tiny group at the start having everything.

All you need is a mining algorithm that changes slightly either automatically or by some other method -- no problem for GPU/CPU miners, but makes ASIC'ing impossible
23  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][VTC] Vertcoin - Adaptive N-factor in Scrypt - No more ASICs on: January 17, 2014, 07:35:04 PM
I can't belive this network is only 40Mh/sec (aka 80 Mh/sec normal scrypt)

since ASICs are here and scrypt is officially dead and has FAILED in its explicit purpose, it seems pretty damn obvious to move over to the new gpu-only algo.

edit : ok more like 35%-40% aka ~110Mh/sec normal scrypt.  still pretty low for the ONLY gpu-only coin/algo in existence
24  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][VTC] Vertcoin - Adaptive N-factor in Scrypt - No more ASICs on: January 17, 2014, 07:25:39 PM
Does this work with BAMT?
25  Bitcoin / Mining speculation / Re: Total Hashrate Forecast Q1, Q2 2014 (Community work) on: January 15, 2014, 01:57:07 AM
Any clue where this 5PH in ~10 days is from?
26  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s on: January 14, 2014, 04:58:05 AM
At some point when you see "hey, if they actually stick to everything they promise, i literally cannot lose money in 99.99% of situations and will make massive profit" you are supposed to realize you are being scammed and dealing with liars who will fuck you over

To be fair, a lot of people have been burned on this and it's been going on for over a year now

* BFL
* Avalon Chips
* Hashfast
* Other's i'm probably overlooking

Satoshi's oversight was chosing a PoW algorithm that could be effectively ASIC'd for several orders of magnitude increase in hash rate and power efficency which nessiciarily centralizes all power, profit and leverage into the hands of less than a few dozen human beings on the planet.  If everything were to start from nothing the objectively far superior solution would be a GPU-targeted algo like scrypt which decouples the hardware manufacturer.

One man, one fucking person, one russian, now controls like 30%+ of the network (GHash.io/Cex.io) because he alone had an effective 65nm ASIC and HE ALONE had an essentially unlimited ability to make more money printing machines that only him and a dozen other people on the planet could compete with on terms of marginal cost/hash rate.
27  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: Swedish ASIC miner company kncminer.com on: January 13, 2014, 03:22:03 AM
Hm, what's up with the massive jump in diff, is Cointerra and/or Hashfast shipping in large quantity?  Does this qualify for releasing more jupiters/etc?

Might not be a bad idea for the network since the whole GHash.io drama went down
28  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s on: January 03, 2014, 08:55:39 AM
Just to check, you guys don't actually have any delusional pipedream about getting your "same number of BTC paid months and months ago" back, do you?

Firstly because they're just going to say that "in bitcoin" means bitcoin as the payment vehicle.  Everything will be valued in USD, which is what they have to pay all 100% of their costs in.

Secondly, because good luck getting bitcoin from them.  Even a child could make it impossible to get and they will be able to recover/launder it back easily.

You should be happy for a USD refund

How do you explain them saying "if you pay 51 btc then you will receive 51 btc as a refund"? They advertised full bitcoin refunds, that's the only reason I (and many others) ordered, it was zero risk. Until they started lying and changing things they said after the fact.

I seriously hope for your sake you're not quoting some nameless tech support person probably outsourced if not minimum wage employee, because that was the *ONLY* time it was ever mentioned or even implied that it would be in the # of BTC's, and that's pretty much as far from binding as you can get.

the ToS wording is explicitly crafted to avoid this situation.  You're not getting your BTC back.  You'll get your USD back.  They're not going to eat a massive loss, or rather, a massive loss of profits.  

The ToS wording NOW is explicitly crafted to avoid this situation.

Nameless techs, COO, CEO, of the company, how many people need to say btc refunds to make it true?

The ToS I signed said that refunds would be issued according the exchange rate on the DAY ORDERED.

Please post it, i'd love to see objective, proven evidence of this claim.  I've been passively following this situation and while i feel bad for you, many of you look like you're trying to exploit the situation to get 5-10x gains by getting BTC back.

You'll win me over to your camp i guess if you can post this OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE OF THEIR TOS THAT **** EXPLICITALY STATES *** NUMBER OF BITCOIN

REMEMBER : when it say "paid in bitcoin"

BITCOIN IS THE ******VEHICLE******** FOR PAYMENT

it ** NEVER SAID *** that BTC was the VALUE.  they can PAY IN BITCOIN and USE USD VALUEAS THE QUANTITY

It's all posted already:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=391251.0



Yeah i saw it

Sorry to break it to you guys but

>In response to an email sent to the support on 08/16/13:

That's not the ToS.  That's not legally binding.  that's literally less than nothing.  If that is all you have to go on, you have zero fucking chance of getting your BTC # back.

Again, i hope for your sake you have something concrete.  Otherwise take your USD and suck it up.  You could have been handed a worse hand, you could have been BFL'd

Sorry, but I will not accept anything less than a full btc refund. They were asked dozens of times. They had plenty of opportunity to clarify themselves. You can't advertise one thing even if your TOS says another. That's called, false advertising. I can't say, "Buy my product it cures cancer" and then put a TOS saying "This product is not intended to cure cancer". Advertisements are indeed binding terms.

There's also this:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=270384.msg2903338#msg2903338

Then, the TOS:

http://pastebin.com/EfS9vmRf

Please show me where in the TOS it says anything about USD equiv refunds.

I guess though according to you we should just allow people to pull Tom / bAsic scams. Tom from basic took around 35,000 coins in orders, he did zero, literally no, work, at all, in the design of an asic, then refunded everyone USD value (10%) of their coins and kept the 90% for himself. The guy is now a multi-millionaire and did nothing. According to you, the best way to make money would be to start an asic company, take usd purchases for machines that will never exist, wait for bitcoin value to go up 10 or 20%, then refund everyone usd value.

Here in the realpolitik world, that's a very true, empirically tested, statement.

Although maybe BFL made more $ with their scam, dunno.  Certainly though scamsters and frauds make bank

KNC probably has made the least money of any of the  big mining companies to date

anyway I wish you luck in getting your money/vegence on them, i just don't think you have good odds.  They've been playing a long con, and they prepared for your manuevers.  Seems to me all the Legal (ToS) is worded explicitly so they profit, no matter if BTC goes up or down.
29  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s on: January 03, 2014, 08:15:58 AM
Just to check, you guys don't actually have any delusional pipedream about getting your "same number of BTC paid months and months ago" back, do you?

Firstly because they're just going to say that "in bitcoin" means bitcoin as the payment vehicle.  Everything will be valued in USD, which is what they have to pay all 100% of their costs in.

Secondly, because good luck getting bitcoin from them.  Even a child could make it impossible to get and they will be able to recover/launder it back easily.

You should be happy for a USD refund

How do you explain them saying "if you pay 51 btc then you will receive 51 btc as a refund"? They advertised full bitcoin refunds, that's the only reason I (and many others) ordered, it was zero risk. Until they started lying and changing things they said after the fact.

I seriously hope for your sake you're not quoting some nameless tech support person probably outsourced if not minimum wage employee, because that was the *ONLY* time it was ever mentioned or even implied that it would be in the # of BTC's, and that's pretty much as far from binding as you can get.

the ToS wording is explicitly crafted to avoid this situation.  You're not getting your BTC back.  You'll get your USD back.  They're not going to eat a massive loss, or rather, a massive loss of profits.  

The ToS wording NOW is explicitly crafted to avoid this situation.

Nameless techs, COO, CEO, of the company, how many people need to say btc refunds to make it true?

The ToS I signed said that refunds would be issued according the exchange rate on the DAY ORDERED.

Please post it, i'd love to see objective, proven evidence of this claim.  I've been passively following this situation and while i feel bad for you, many of you look like you're trying to exploit the situation to get 5-10x gains by getting BTC back.

You'll win me over to your camp i guess if you can post this OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE OF THEIR TOS THAT **** EXPLICITALY STATES *** NUMBER OF BITCOIN

REMEMBER : when it say "paid in bitcoin"

BITCOIN IS THE ******VEHICLE******** FOR PAYMENT

it ** NEVER SAID *** that BTC was the VALUE.  they can PAY IN BITCOIN and USE USD VALUEAS THE QUANTITY

It's all posted already:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=391251.0



Yeah i saw it

Sorry to break it to you guys but

>In response to an email sent to the support on 08/16/13:

That's not the ToS.  That's not legally binding.  that's literally less than nothing.  If that is all you have to go on, you have zero fucking chance of getting your BTC # back.

Again, i hope for your sake you have something concrete.  Otherwise take your USD and suck it up.  You could have been handed a worse hand, you could have been BFL'd

BTW

"

Orders are taken in BTC, in the unlikely event we get to refunds they will be given in BTC.
"


That doesn't mean # BTc.  that means you'll get BTC, if it says "full value" that implies USD, what they pay 100% of their costs in, and what you measure profit in.

Actually now i'm wondering if some of you actually tried to use this as a HEDGE, thinking you could cash out BTC back 1:1 in the most volatile exchange market in the history of fucking mankind.
30  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s on: January 03, 2014, 08:12:46 AM
Just to check, you guys don't actually have any delusional pipedream about getting your "same number of BTC paid months and months ago" back, do you?

Firstly because they're just going to say that "in bitcoin" means bitcoin as the payment vehicle.  Everything will be valued in USD, which is what they have to pay all 100% of their costs in.

Secondly, because good luck getting bitcoin from them.  Even a child could make it impossible to get and they will be able to recover/launder it back easily.

You should be happy for a USD refund

How do you explain them saying "if you pay 51 btc then you will receive 51 btc as a refund"? They advertised full bitcoin refunds, that's the only reason I (and many others) ordered, it was zero risk. Until they started lying and changing things they said after the fact.

I seriously hope for your sake you're not quoting some nameless tech support person probably outsourced if not minimum wage employee, because that was the *ONLY* time it was ever mentioned or even implied that it would be in the # of BTC's, and that's pretty much as far from binding as you can get.

the ToS wording is explicitly crafted to avoid this situation.  You're not getting your BTC back.  You'll get your USD back.  They're not going to eat a massive loss, or rather, a massive loss of profits.  

The ToS wording NOW is explicitly crafted to avoid this situation.

Nameless techs, COO, CEO, of the company, how many people need to say btc refunds to make it true?

The ToS I signed said that refunds would be issued according the exchange rate on the DAY ORDERED.

Please post it, i'd love to see objective, proven evidence of this claim.  I've been passively following this situation and while i feel bad for you, many of you look like you're trying to exploit the situation to get 5-10x gains by getting BTC back.

You'll win me over to your camp i guess if you can post this OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE OF THEIR TOS THAT **** EXPLICITALY STATES *** NUMBER OF BITCOIN

REMEMBER : when it say "paid in bitcoin"

BITCOIN IS THE ******VEHICLE******** FOR PAYMENT

it ** NEVER SAID *** that BTC was the VALUE.  they can PAY IN BITCOIN and USE USD VALUE AS THE QUANTITY

call me a shill or whatever, i never bothered with hashfast shit, i figured them too shady early on, same with BFL, although I admit i was pretty close to ordering with both

you'd do well to remember bitcoin (especially the mining community) is a community of thieves, liars, cheats, disinfo agents, charlatans, scammers, shitbags and generally detestable people.  the fact of the matter is there's only been one single fucking manfuactuer that hasn't broken this trend yet (Avalon, BFL, Hashfast, etc all have proven it true) and that's still with a sample size of n=1
31  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s on: January 03, 2014, 08:02:12 AM
Just to check, you guys don't actually have any delusional pipedream about getting your "same number of BTC paid months and months ago" back, do you?

Firstly because they're just going to say that "in bitcoin" means bitcoin as the payment vehicle.  Everything will be valued in USD, which is what they have to pay all 100% of their costs in.

Secondly, because good luck getting bitcoin from them.  Even a child could make it impossible to get and they will be able to recover/launder it back easily.

You should be happy for a USD refund

How do you explain them saying "if you pay 51 btc then you will receive 51 btc as a refund"? They advertised full bitcoin refunds, that's the only reason I (and many others) ordered, it was zero risk. Until they started lying and changing things they said after the fact.

I seriously hope for your sake you're not quoting some nameless tech support person probably outsourced if not minimum wage employee, because that was the *ONLY* time it was ever mentioned or even implied that it would be in the # of BTC's, and that's pretty much as far from binding as you can get.

the ToS wording is explicitly crafted to avoid this situation.  You're not getting your BTC back.  You'll get your USD back.  They're not going to eat a massive loss, or rather, a massive loss of profits.  
32  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s on: January 03, 2014, 07:34:27 AM
Just to check, you guys don't actually have any delusional pipedream about getting your "same number of BTC paid months and months ago" back, do you?

Firstly because they're just going to say that "in bitcoin" means bitcoin as the payment vehicle.  Everything will be valued in USD, which is what they have to pay all 100% of their costs in.

Secondly, because good luck getting bitcoin from them.  Even a child could make it impossible to get and they will be able to recover/launder it back easily.

You should be happy for a USD refund
33  Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: Hacking The KNC Firmware: Overclocking on: December 23, 2013, 10:28:14 PM
231 sounds pretty high.  That's 900MHz if I'm not mistaken.

How many amps does bertmod report each DCDC is putting out?  I hear that exceeding 50A each is pushing things beyond safe margins (in particular the PCB traces are at risk).

The feedback i saw from the KNC folks is that 60A is the upper end for the GE VRMs but of course they higher you go the more risk youtake
I'm pretty sure the datasheet lists 40A as the max.  But that is of course, as always, underspecified.
34  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] Dogecoin Pool doge.scryptpools.com - 2% fee on: December 12, 2013, 06:26:27 AM
It's not autopaying either.

just fyi
any way to get manual payouts?
35  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Pools (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][Profit-switching scrypt+ASIC Pool] multipool.us on: December 01, 2013, 06:29:53 AM
Cryptsy apparently is getting a massive amount of traffic and their servers are shitting the bed, so deposits are massively delayed.

i just mined a coin or two and sent it there and haven't even seen a pending confirmation in an hour yet

I was wondering how much TXFees the pool adds when withdrawing, or if that could be changed.. but i'm pretty sure it's on the cryptsy end
36  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: [Not] Good price at CEX.io on: December 01, 2013, 01:05:09 AM
I'm assuming it's basically never been the case that X BTC / 1 GH/sec ever mines back anywhere close to X..?

seems more akin to trading than mining

It's like 80$ per GHash - seriously?
37  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Liquid Synergy Designs Inc. -ASIC mining hardware on: December 01, 2013, 12:46:37 AM
This feels like so long ago

What do these guys need again, a bunch of 12V power splitters, USB hub/connections, and a host PC?
38  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Liquid Synergy Designs Inc. -ASIC mining hardware on: November 30, 2013, 01:14:55 AM
i emailed him too, no answer

I've also emailed him twice before and still no answer.

i just got some emails with tracking, so if you request you will get them
39  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [Work in progess] Burnins Avalon Chip to mining board service on: November 29, 2013, 05:12:41 PM
Uh what's up with the 50% refund?  I just saw that it's listed as "refunded" but i don't know how or where or why it was, did this go back through paypal or something?  I haven't followed up on this in months..

Looks like it i guess, there's a nice sum in my paypal from october
40  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Liquid Synergy Designs Inc. -ASIC mining hardware on: November 29, 2013, 05:07:26 PM
So I emailed asking for mine to be sent as the email described but haven't heard anything back.

For the people that received them, did you get any confirmation/response or did they just show up?
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!