Bitcoin Forum
June 17, 2024, 09:04:39 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 [112] 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 ... 170 »
2221  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [VMC] Official Virtual Mining Corporation Discussion on: March 31, 2014, 05:00:59 AM
Does that mean that all the boards you currently have/are selling were made by hashfast?
2222  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [VMC] Official Virtual Mining Corporation Discussion on: March 31, 2014, 04:53:43 AM
Ken already confirmed they are hashfast chips and boards.
2223  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [Guide] Dogie's Comprehensive Manufacturer Trustworthiness Guide on: March 31, 2014, 04:40:46 AM
Alright ill accept your judgement even though I have no faith that vmc will deliver without bullshit along the way as has been seen in the past with this company.

But shouldn't they be considered a chip integrator as of  now? Not even designing their own boards to go with their hashfast chips.
2224  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [Guide] Dogie's Comprehensive Manufacturer Trustworthiness Guide on: March 31, 2014, 04:27:18 AM
I would actually demote them to an F if anything.

First they tried passing off the hardware they are selling as their own. Now confirmed to be hashfast chips on hashfast boards.

And I wouldn't even be so sure they are shipping anything until their hashfast boards appear in the wild which could be a while since they are charging $6/gh

This is in addition to claims that they are not actually giving out refunds and a plethora of other issues in the past few months.

My interpretation was the farm is there to provide cloud hashing for customers until the actual chips are ready. They were already quite harshly punished in rating, so C+ is still near the bottom.

Do you really feel confident giving them such a high rating with so little hardware shipped (if any)?

C+ gives the impression they are semi-competent and are delivering hardware but we have no idea if this is the case at this point.
2225  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [VMC] Official Virtual Mining Corporation Discussion on: March 31, 2014, 04:22:27 AM
He is right that these will never be profitable.

$6/gh for an incomplete miner is pretty expensive compared to bitmain $2.5/gh
2226  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [Guide] Dogie's Comprehensive Manufacturer Trustworthiness Guide on: March 31, 2014, 04:17:28 AM
Sorry for the delay guys, starting a cycle now. This will keep getting edited over the next few days.

Changelog 03/31/2014
Company changes:
  • VMC promoted to C due to products being released. Promotion to C+ on independent verification of hardware.

I would actually demote them to an F if anything.

First they tried passing off the hardware they are selling as their own. Now confirmed to be hashfast chips on hashfast boards.

And I wouldn't even be so sure they are shipping anything until their hashfast boards appear in the wild which could be a while since they are charging $6/gh

This is in addition to claims that they are not actually giving out refunds and a plethora of other issues in the past few months.

2227  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s on: March 31, 2014, 12:55:59 AM
Now hashfast is selling boards and chips to VMC instead of shipping their own customers hardware.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=462370.1380

2228  Economy / Securities / Re: [ActiveMining] Official Shareholder Discussion Thread [Moderated] on: March 31, 2014, 12:42:36 AM
Did you design the boards or are you simply producing them?

And why does your website claim the boards are using your own fasthash one asic chips?

It is a chip that we purchased in bulk and we are reselling in on our manufactured boards as our Fast-Hash One chip.

Just to clarify

Did you design the boards you are manufacturing?
2229  Economy / Securities / Re: [ActiveMining] Official Shareholder Discussion Thread [Moderated] on: March 31, 2014, 12:36:30 AM
Did you design the boards or are you simply producing them?

And why does your website claim the boards are using your own fasthash one asic chips?
2230  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [VMC] Official Virtual Mining Corporation Discussion on: March 31, 2014, 12:33:15 AM
Are these hashfast chips/boards?
2231  Economy / Securities / Re: [ActiveMining] Official Shareholder Discussion Thread [Moderated] on: March 31, 2014, 12:30:58 AM
Images of products and of our Datacenter being build


So if we're using the Hashfast Yoli Evo board, why are the specs on VMC lower (500GH/s) than the ones Hashfast claims (675GH/s)?

http://hashfast.com/shop/yolievo/


Looks like a perfect match.

Does this mean that hashfast sold boards to ken skipping all their preorder customers?
2232  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Black Arrow 28nm 100Ghash Bitcoin ASIC from $1.99/GH/s, miners from $2.97/GH/s on: March 30, 2014, 11:01:32 PM
Yea, really it's just Bitmain, the trillion Coincraft clones,  and Spondoolies Tech at the moment.

Are Spondoolies really shipping product?  I just looked at their site and I don't see anything available until May 1 at the earliest.

They are shipping early orders.

Many already have their miners in hand.
2233  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: BFL Announces 600GH/s 28nm PCIe Mining Card on: March 30, 2014, 10:56:44 PM
Just when you thought bfl couldn't get any scummier they decide it would be a good idea to pay shills to boost their trust and give critics negative trust.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=525840.0

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=549403.msg5979745#msg5979745



2234  Economy / Securities / Re: [ActiveMining] Official Shareholder Discussion Thread [Moderated] on: March 30, 2014, 09:15:16 PM
Well, what about these chips/boards are HASH-FAST and we know they are having all sorts of issues.

Could it be that they are trying to secretively increase their revenue to keep afloat and striking deals with whoever they can in order to do so?

Ken would be a perfect customer for them, right?   And would be bound by, dare I say it an NDA.


So out of the 4 seperate companies trying to sell hashfast chips ken is the only one with an NDA?

Honestly there needs to be a time when you stop accepting the bullshit and demand answers.
2235  Economy / Securities / Re: [ActiveMining] Official Shareholder Discussion Thread [Moderated] on: March 30, 2014, 08:58:12 PM
Day 3 without pictures of supposedly in stock and hashing hardware.

I see 4 possible explanations:

-Hardware doesn't exist
-Hardware is not using own chip/board
-Ken is incredibly incompetent
-Ken is trying to make his stock plummet

Based on history I would guess it is a combination of using hashfast hardware and incredible incompetence.
2236  Economy / Securities / Re: [IPVO] [Multiple Exchanges] Neo & Bee - LMB Holdings on: March 30, 2014, 11:23:00 AM
Boy, this is looking bad. It's too early to be certain Neo & Bee is doomed, but something very bad is going on. The radio silence is the most worrying of all. If you're not even a little worried, you need to snap out of it right now. I see lots of denial, rationalisation and magical thinking here.

Even if its not a scam the complete lack of communication is unacceptable.
2237  Economy / Securities / Re: [ActiveMining] Official Shareholder Discussion Thread [Moderated] on: March 30, 2014, 10:42:36 AM
once pics are provided the bashing will continue regardless

The thing is you dont sell an in stock item without providing pics. Especially when your company has yet to ship a single product.

Quote
It's ridiculous and naive to think that the business can't be negatively impacted by trolls and fudsters on an Official Forum.

Fudsters have nothing to do with the failure after failure caused by Kens actions and inability to actually deliver.
2238  Economy / Securities / Re: [ActiveMining] Official Shareholder Discussion Thread [Moderated] on: March 30, 2014, 09:44:09 AM
No, I'm talking about how if left to your own devices you lot could convince yourselves that Man hadn't stepped foot on the Moon.  Anyway, we could go round in circles on that one.  I try as much as possible to always add something, even just a little thing to my posts, which may help improve things for the better.  If all of you did the same thing, rather than merely posting negative comments and leaving them to fester (yes I'm looking at you DTS, among others) then we might even make progress.  But maybe that's beyond some people's grasp.  Hey-ho.

Ken, this thing about photos as evidence;  publishing photos, as I believe you have said you now will, could certainly improve our sales.  It won't stop the cynics and fudsters as they'll just move onto another aspect of the business and continue bashing because that is what they do.

You see the difference is we have pictures of people on the moon. They even brought rocks back that people can examine.

There is not a single shred of evidence that these miners exist other than kens word.

In case you don't already know this, trolls and fudsters have absolutely no affect on the success of a company. The only thing that matters is activeminings ability to deliver (and at a competitive price but ill ignore that for now)

If active mining did magically go from development to selling bulk batches daily in a mere 4 days then he should provide some evidence.

As the saying goes, PICS OR BS.
2239  Economy / Securities / Re: [ActiveMining] Official Shareholder Discussion Thread [Moderated] on: March 30, 2014, 09:22:36 AM
The level of absurdity this thread reaches sometimes is beyond me.   Sad

You are talking of course about the fact that there still exist not a single picture of this long awaited hardware which is flying off the shelves right?
2240  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [Guide] Dogie's Comprehensive Manufacturer Trustworthiness Guide on: March 30, 2014, 09:20:22 AM
And now BFL is buying positive and negative trust ratings in the bitcointalk. Ethically challenged? That should be added to the list of crimes / lies / deceptive practices they employ. Z- is too good for them.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=549403.msg5979745#msg5979745

This reminded me that I completely forgot to ever give BFL a negative trust rating.
Pages: « 1 ... 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 [112] 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 ... 170 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!