You can't ToS away core responsibilities. Especially if you register as a financial service provider. http://www.business.govt.nz/fsp/app/ui/fsp/record/liveSearchFsp.do?q=bitcoinicaOnce the people who had big money and bitcoins lose hope of receiving any substantial payouts, like after another 'hack' loss as in this OP, then the lashing out begins. Seems like lawyers and LEO are starting to be engaged, so just a matter of time before the NZ regulators have to start trying to make sense of this mess. No, this is not the users' fault. Why should the bitcoinica users eat all the loss?
+1 It makes no sense to make us eat the loss. That is their own fault. They need to all stop taking a paycheck like Zhou did and/or start eating muesli with even cheaper milk and cough up the money out of pocket. Some of us have undeniable proof and we want our money back. Actually they need to honor their terms of use their clients agreed to and if they didn't make any guarantees about security they're off the hook and it's the client's fault for putting money someplace where such guarantees weren't made. From the Bitcoinica ToS: [12] Limitation of Liability
IN NO EVENT SHALL BITCOINICA, ITS OFFICERS, DIRECTORS OR EMPLOYEES BE LIABLE FOR LOST PROFITS OR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH OUR WEB SITE, OUR SERVICES OR THIS AGREEMENT (HOWEVER ARISING, INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE) EXCEPT AS STATED IN THIS AGREEMENT. THE LIABILITY OF BITCOINICA, ITS OFFICERS, DIRECTORS OR EMPLOYEES, TO YOU OR ANY THIRD PARTIES IN ANY PROVEN CIRCUMSTANCE IS LIMITED TO THE AMOUNT OF MONEY YOU TRANSFERRED OR DEPOSITED IN YOUR ACCOUNT AT BITCOINICA IN RELATION TO THE TRANSACTION GIVING RISE TO SUCH LIABILITY. In the case where you make funds available for trading via a voucher, "coupon code", or similar from another financial service, banking institution or exchange, you acknolwedge that you are providing Bitcoinica access to those funds for trading purposes only and that the originating financial institution is the holder of such deposits. Bitcoinica is not liable for any loss if such institutions fail in honoring withdrawal of customer funds. Shouldn't you have put this part in bold: IN NO EVENT SHALL BITCOINICA, ITS OFFICERS, DIRECTORS OR EMPLOYEES BE LIABLE FOR LOST PROFITS OR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH OUR WEB SITE, OUR SERVICES OR THIS AGREEMENT (HOWEVER ARISING, INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE) Face it people. You agreed to use a service without even a promise that they'll be liable to you if they are negligent. So if you're looking for the guilty you need only look in the mirror. This. Can we just move on from this, please? But this whole thing has been an absolute blight on this project for most of this year. Let's move on, accept our losses, and agree not to use flashy looking bitcoin websites designed by 17 years olds. The silver lining out of this is that a bunch of people, myself included, have been reminded of one of the most valuable things about bitcoin - that you can secure it yourself and make stealing it over the internet practically impossible. Of course, that that can be done fairly simply highlights those working at bitcoinica's negligence. |
|
|
|
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=57255Was on a BTC borrowing streak and then went ape in a silly post he started https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=89509.0 . Claimed he was the bitcoin hacker, linked to his first few posts on the forum. TBH, didn't seem "hacked" to me at all either. Add to that, if it was a hack why wouldn't he reclaim his account after several weeks have gone by. Was expecting to see at least one post about it when I did a forum search, yet there is nada. Just plain strange.
|
|
|
|
Your best bet is to sell the cpu, ram, and 4850 then get http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813138355 and whatever Intel S1155 cpu you care for. The Celeron G5xx series is great for bitcoin but with that motherboard you could get a faster CPU in case you plan on using the machine for other pet projects. I picked that motherboard because you can fit 3 cards in it without extenders and actually have some airflow, and 4-5 cards with extenders. Not sure if both x1 slots will work with fully populated PCI-E, own the board but haven't tried 5 GPUs, the manual doesn't mention anything about either x1 slot becoming disabled. Oh, forgot DDR3 RAM but you can get by on a single stick if you want to hit your $600 budget exactly. $130 Motherboard + $50 CPU + $20 RAM = $200 (possible $15 rebate) You should be able to get around $80 selling your old but still functional parts. Heck, the motherboard works as long as you just use the 4850 right? So potentially ~$100. |
|
|
|
|
*Removed due to GLBSE Closure*
|
|
|
|
|
Given BFL's penchant for big promises, who's to say they haven't committed to a decent sized wafer buy to get a decent deal on the up front costs? Pre-order money + possible mysterious investor money could fund development and a deposit on the wafer order.
I agree though, best odds are a FPGA conversion funded by hype.
|
|
|
|
|
Older process ASIC wouldn't be $10 million, seems $500000 to $1 million would be enough to produce a 130nm - 65nm ASIC. It's a risky endeavor though because the costs can really add up if there are a lot of design revisions. Wondering now if we will see the first custom SHA256 chips as translations of FPGA designs, cost and performance would still be a head above straight FPGA.
|
|
|
|
Wafers? Their FPGAs they didn't specially manufacturer them. They just have/had a cheap source and it wasn't just MH/s but the total wattage power requirement was off by x4. Pretty obvious they did a napkin calculation and then went looking for pre-orders. Credit to them for actually delivering SOMETHING, eventually, but ignoring their past behavior skews the market. I'm impressed that so far other custom mining hardware people haven't given in to the BS and released over-hyped future product roadmaps. I won't try to tell you what you spend your money on, but I wouldn't buy anything from BFL, for many a reasons.
Simple reasons, I don't like working with any company that happily charges you upfront, makes you wait 3-4 months before delivering you a product.
I much rather work with a company that only charges you when it's ready for delivery aka 2-3 days away.
I like Enterpoint for that reason, also their local for me (England). I put my order in 1-2 months ago I think so they got it ready quicker due to being a more mature company, since they've worked with FPGA for many many years in other industries. I've got the tracking details for my order with them, it's on route now.
BFL have already shown with their first products, that they kinda exaggerate the numbers they state they can do, performance, energy, price etc. They speculate and take guess' about what something can do, without having a prototype, so they are selling your something they don't yet have working, it's why they are always way off. So I expect with the numbers they launched the ASIC with, will be the same (exaggerated). Especially since their numbers don't really add up either.
You won't be the only one if you choose the believe them, but if something doesn't smell right, I'm not going near it. That is my opinion.
While I understand these points and personally can agree, however one strikes me as being incorrect. "without having a prototype, so they are selling you something they don't have working yet" That is not what happened with BFL's first line of FPGAs. They had a prototype, they had a product they were going to sell, but when it came time for production - there was a flaw that required them to retool the wafers. The result of this was a 200 Mh/s difference. Honestly not that much, and they did infact have reason to say they could do their original quoted hash rates. It wasn't speculation. At least, that is what I read somewhere around here in a thread where BFL had posted. I cannot say the same for ASIC, you may be right about speculation, but that's a hell of a speculation for 40 Gh/s |
|
|
|
|
I've seen talk of lawsuits and lodging complaints with various LEO, but has anyone directly affected tried going through the NZ business regulators? Just seems like the first place to start.
|
|
|
|
|
Going beyond 950ish on a 5830 is really a roll of the dice. There is variation in core chip quality and overall board quality, just as not every CPU overclocks to the same maximum.
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps some sort of exchange from separate bitcoin networks? I.E. Earthcoin - Mooncoin - Marscoin.
|
|
|
|
|
It's worth trying 1000/300, my Sapphire 5830s are rock solid with 300Mhz RAM settings. But the cores are at 950, and overclocking can have some seemingly odd quirks. Might need to drop the core clock a bit.
|
|
|
|
|
It's a smart move on their part, I almost did a bitcoin buy in even though I'm not really interested in the games at all. Almost, and since I'm a bit of a tightwad when it comes to these indy collections I bet there* were quite a few who actually bought in.
|
|
|
|
I've tried playing SWTOR on an A8-3850, which has the same 6550D as the A8-3870. It's actually not that impressive. Granted this was at 1080 with most settings on Med, but you start running into sever bandwidth issues. APUs are great, but you really need dedicated GDDR5 if you wanna play any games.
At 1080P, yes. Can't really expect to jump from 800x600 low details integrated performance to 1080P in only a couple of generations. Especially since the DDR4 needed to really increase bandwidth won't be in volume until end of 2013 or beginning of 2014. Edit: It's a good thing bitcoin hashing doesn't use much bandwidth. |
|
|
|
1) Make incredible claims about your future product promise 1 to 1 trade ins on your currently sold product 2) Point all your PR tools to talking favorably about your future product and minimizing your previous failure to meet pre-release numbers 3) Take peoples $ for future orders, this combined with money not spent due to uncertainty reduces your competitors sales and thus available funds to develop their future products 4) Some profit 5) Plow some of that money into developing something that at least might, perhaps come close to your seat of the pants PR numbers 6)  7) More profit Perhaps I should add:  Actually manage to produce great ASIC chips, make even more profit from mining during QA "testing" |
|
|
|
|
It's actually VLIW4 cores, so it may not actually be much better than the highest end Llano given it's lower core count. The next APU after Trinity, Kaveri, is supposed to be GCN based.
Anyone know if we can convert MB/s of SHA256 to MH/s?
|
|
|
|
1) Make incredible claims about your future product promise 1 to 1 trade ins on your currently sold product 2) Point all your PR tools to talking favorably about your future product and minimizing your previous failure to meet pre-release numbers 3) Take peoples $ for future orders, this combined with money not spent due to uncertainty reduces your competitors sales and thus available funds to develop their future products 4) Some profit 5) Plow some of that money into developing something that at least might, perhaps come close to your seat of the pants PR numbers 6) ?? 7) More profit |
|
|
|
Uh, or they changed their plans from using fpga sometime between announcing SC and announcing future ASIC products? If I'm remembering right the mini-rig is a bit shrunken from initial announcement specs, suggesting that trying to get more BFL fpga units into a reasonably managed single unit would be quite a difficult engineering challenge. Edit: Looks like my memory was correct, originally they announced 50GH/s at ~$25000. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=53530.msg638003#msg638003Was it really known back then that the 'super computer' product was in fact a future asic or did that happen later?
Nothing specific was mentioned about it other than the name. From the inception of the website, there were always 3 products showing. Yeah, that is what I remember as well. I guess I just assumed that the super computer was just a bigger rig-box  for more money, heh. Originally it may have been that, but times change... The point it they've been working on the asic for a year or more. |
|
|
|
|
Adding my voice to the "proceed with due care and caution" crowd.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
