A lot of people PM'd me asking for advice on what miner to buy and if this contract or hosted mining is profitable blah blah blah.
People. Reread the original post.
Maybe people dont agree with your original post. To be honest, you seem to have an agenda of some sort. Its 3am so i am too tired to speculate on what it is. But its probably something annoying. You are utterly ignoring the glaring flaw in your logic. You could've preordered a KNCMiner 3,000 Gh/s for $9999 in December, probably receive it Feb 15, and believe me, not only will you pay the thing back in a matter of a few days, but you'll be sitting on some very nice profits. Sure, its not 100 BTC a week. But 5-7 BTC a week is going to be a very happy day when BTC hits $10,000. So i honestly have no idea what you are going on about. The $10,000 units are getting more and more powerful. They have to, or they couldn't sell them. The ONLY point at which consumer mining is over, is when the hardware *legitimately* starts costing $25,000+ to get the most basic coin return. BFL had a 500 listed for $24,000 I think several months ago. Obviously way overpriced if KNC offers a 3,000 for $10,000. I am waiting to see what the next KNCMiner preorder is going to be. In order for it to be worth selling, its going to be significantly more than 3,000... and as a result you'll get a profitable mining machine for the same price. -------------- You also rejected someones comment that alt coin mining can work. That is utter hogwash as well. I have a pithy 8 GPU system pushing 5600 MH/s and with DOGECOIN currently at 230 satoshi, I am generating roughly $95.00 per day, which means I will generate a bitcoin from it in 8.7 days. And do you know how much I spent to get set up? About $4,000. So with $4,000 you can mine alt coins and generate 4 Bitcoins a month. Get another 4 GPU's, (total of 12) for another $2,000 and make that 6 BTC per month. Assuming DOGE stays high. Even when it was low I was doing 1-2 BTC per month. Mining LTC was giving me 1.4 LTC per day. With LTC @ $24, thats 1.3 BTC per month. With a crappy 8 GPU system. Worst case scenario. So you're wrong. Its still possible to mine Bitcoin. And if 1 BTC is worth $10,000 soon (and it will be), then even 1.3 BTC per month is a beautiful thing. -B- You are completely talking out of your ass. A KNC Neptune order from November will be lucky to take delivery in July. They haven't even completed the design phase yet. The fools who funded KNC's R&D for that project will be lucky to get to break-even in 2 years. And Dogecoin? Making profits from scam coins is picking up nickels ahead of a steam roller. Somebody holds the bag and loses everything. |
|
|
|
The questions that will not be asked: - how much did the acquisition cost, and who are the guys who got it? (wouldn't be a surprise that they are related to our friend kslaugther)
- how is it going to fit on single slot pci express miners with no active cooling?
- would it have been better to refund all that was left to investors? oh wait, how much is left?
The only good news is that trading should happen and those that didn't appreciate being lied to for six months will be able to get out; though it will only be through scamming bigger fools. If only they just kept their bitcoins... #3 is the only relevant question. Even if it was free, a 55 nm design isn't worth the engineering costs to tape out, design boards and firmware for. 55 nm asics cost more to produce per Gh/s than you can buy hardware from 28 nm suppliers at retail prices today (and last October for that matter!). Spending money on 55 nm guarantees you a loss compared to direct ordering from Cointerra. It does give Ken a way to save face. He wasn't incompetent and or lying when he said the RTL was done in June of last year, he was collaborating with a stealth start up! Want to place a wager? I already placed my bets. And they are paying off. How did your bet on Terrahash work out? Out of pure macabre curiosity what is it that you want to bet me about? |
|
|
|
The questions that will not be asked: - how much did the acquisition cost, and who are the guys who got it? (wouldn't be a surprise that they are related to our friend kslaugther)
- how is it going to fit on single slot pci express miners with no active cooling?
- would it have been better to refund all that was left to investors? oh wait, how much is left?
The only good news is that trading should happen and those that didn't appreciate being lied to for six months will be able to get out; though it will only be through scamming bigger fools. If only they just kept their bitcoins... #3 is the only relevant question. Even if it was free, a 55 nm design isn't worth the engineering costs to tape out, design boards and firmware for. 55 nm asics cost more to produce per Gh/s than you can buy hardware from 28 nm suppliers at retail prices today (and last October for that matter!). Spending money on 55 nm guarantees you a loss compared to direct ordering from Cointerra. It does give Ken a way to save face. He wasn't incompetent and or lying when he said the RTL was done in June of last year, he was collaborating with a stealth start up! |
|
|
|
|
LMAO at the morons who invested in this right now.
They are jumping around excited because their alcoholic CEO just paid to tape out a 55 nm design. When they were promised 28 nm chips 5 months ago! Now he buys out some schmucks who realized that you can't build miners on 55 nm for the retail cost of Cointerra's 28 nm systems, and the investors are happy. Good god you people are stupid. Do some math. Antminers are selling at $8 / Gh/s TODAY. And you supposedly have $6M in backorders at $15 / Gh/s that you are going to fill in 3 months? Every one of those people is going to realize they can have twice as much hash today rather than many months from now and demand refunds.
Sigh. MPOE-PR is right. It's just the natural process of stupid people with money returning to their natural state of poverty.
|
|
|
|
He deleted that post and not mine? How odd. I expected my posts to go bye bye. Maybe sometime in the future they will disappear.
How telling is it that he attacked me (and effectively all of the people who had helped a lot, including vbs) rather than answer the question? Disappointed.
Ken deletes my posts that clearly point at the legal problems his actions have created. I suspect he spends far more time talking to regulators and lawyers than he does working on actually making anything at this point. |
|
|
|
Because merely "trying" with investors and customers money when you fully know you don't have the skills to do it, and you just intend to pay yourself a salary while not doing much, is a scam.
This is already a very well-known way to get paid to sit on your ass in the fiat world. They didn't invent anything.
Saying it's not a scam because they are incompetent is just disingenuous, if not retarded. They claimed they were competent.
And it's what I've been saying from the start, I don't care about eASIC press releases or whatever the fuck they come up with. They never had an intention to turn up a profit for the investors.
I agree with the bolded statement, but realistically there are plenty of competent individuals that start business that fail due to multiple reasons. ActM hasn't failed yet if you take away the detractors opinions so this argument is purely educational I assume. If I felt Ken was incompetent I would have said that in my report. I told him as soon as we started talking that I did not care for his current business practices personally. After talking for over 3 hours I'm confident that he is competent even though I would have done a lot of things differently. Thankfully they are doing something regardless of your opinion as I have physically seen the progress. You are very good as assuming intentions but you would be incorrect. Edit: I have no intention on arguing with you over opinions. You will continue to cry scam, make up scenarios, and cause a fuss until there are chips. Once there are chips you will then rinse and repeat about anything and everything about them. Agree with Augusto. Just because BFL set the bar for failure incredibly low in 2012 does not mean the bar is the same in 2014. Activemining's plan was to take a short cut to ASIC by using a FPGA hard copy route. That route could have paid off if they had hardware ahead of the custom ASIC suppliers in October as they first claimed. With 3 custom 28 nm suppliers shipping, 3 more claiming to be ready within a few weeks, and 55 nm hardware flooding the market today, VMC is a total failure. Even aftermarket pricing for gear is going to drop into the $5 / GH/s range shortly, and AMC/VMC can't even produce gear for that price at their cost. |
|
|
|
|
Ken is back to working hard at deleting posts. I guess being caught in his fraud about having 'product' shipped in November is touching a sore spot.
----
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.
You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.
Quote
Quote from: WildFire.ca on Today at 01:56:55 AM
No No... Giving insider info is not against the law. Trading on that info is.
Selectively disclosing material non-public information is, in fact, a violation of SEC reg FD. Since Ken is in violation of many, many SEC regulations I doubt he cares.
Never do business with someone who deceives you using semantic games. And never trust anyone who would defend such behavior.
|
|
|
|
I said months ago that I sold them when I quit and I have had no ActM shares since then.
I'm also not going to get into an argument with you ken because despite what you may think, I actually want you to make this work. However, it's depressing seeing a mistake like that happen and it's a symptom of you needing help running your business rather than it all being on your shoulders. This is the kind of mistake that shouldn't be happening.
Still insider trading, you sold on inside information. That is a lot worst that anything I may have done. That is like the pot calling the kettle black. If FF69 had insider information to trade upon, then you would be liable for that trading under regulation FD. I'm sure the SEC has much larger axes to grind with you than selective disclosure of material information. |
|
|
|
Ken hasn't shipped anything.
He has also missed his milestones by months and failed to produce any proof of a working device. He did spout some nonsense about 20% speed improvements.
Reading between the lines, I would guess their first build with easic resulted in chips that were non-functional.
lol please...there is a difference between opinion and fact. there is no way u can conclusively say he has or has not shipped, there is just not enough proof as to validate either. that being said i wouldnt be surprised if he has absolutely nothing. also, to elaborate on milestones...u can't just scoop up all events in one swing and say, no, he didn't make any. he has missed some and not missed others (eASIC annountment, transfer to BF, transfer to CT( ill let u figure out which have and have not been made)). please keep the activemining shitstorm in its designated thread. the rest of the world does not need this. So, between your opinions and my facts, who turned out to be correct? |
|
|
|
Due to the preorder cycle, it will take 3-4 months for the feedback of difficulty to impact buying behavior. So difficulty continues ramping up way beyond your expectation, and prices in the secondary markers collapse. The overshoot might be moderated by a major supplier going bankrupt and not delivering but otherwise expect your year end prediction to be reached in July.
You're making assumptions about assumptions hereon buying behavior based on the huge price jump in Q4 last year. You can't automatically factor in that happening again, so as soon as the difficulty hits about 15000 x 10e6 the current (yet to be delivered) $3/GH rigs will never be profitable and it's not going to take a genius to see the trend, The companies that have their own asics are in a slightly different boat but even they have to look at RI and they might not be quite so keen to load in capacity which might not make their ROI target. Time will tell what approach is right, neither of us have a crystal ball. Time may tell, but I can already tell who is talking his book. Hello folks, greetings from Novello Technologies Ltd in the UK.
We'll shortly be launching a funding campaign to finance the development of a family of low cost, high performance mining rigs.
How does $1 per Gigahash/second (or less) sound to you? But before you groan "not another mning asic startup" wait until you see our plan, it's not what you might expect.
Gordon
|
|
|
|
I did also a forecast, but only based on history:
Development of difficulty since 15.09.13
Dates days to solve 2016 difficulty increased in %
15.09.13- 26.09.13 11 112628549 --
26.09.13-7.10.13 11 148819200 32,13
7.10.13-17.10.13 10 189281249 27,19
17.10.13-26.10.13 9 267731249 41,48
26.10.13-06.11.13 11 390928788 46,02
6.11.13-18.11.13 12 510929738 30,07
18.11.13-30.11.13 12 609482680 19,29
30.11.13-11.12.13 11 707408283 16,07
11.12.13-22.12.13 11 908350862 28,41
22.13.13-03.01.14 12 1180923195 30,01
03.01.14-14.01.14 11 1418481395 20,12
14.01.14- ?? 1789546951 26,15
= average time to solve 2016 Blocks: 121/11 = 11
= average difficulty increase: 316,94 / 11 = 28,81 %
Forecast
dates days for solving 2016 difficulty increased in %
14.01.14-25.01.14 11 1789546951 26,15
25.01.14-05.02.14 11 2305115427 28,81
11 2969219182 28,81
11 3824651228 28,81
11 4926533247 28,81
11 6345867476 28,81
11 8174111896 28,81
11 10529073533 28,81
11 13562499618 28,81
11 17469855758 28,81
11 22502921202 28,81
11 28986012801 28,81
11 37336883088 28,81
17.06.14-28.06.14 11 48093639106 28,81
I was to lazy to put in all the dates :-D
We've spent a lot of time on a Behavioral Model to try to make some sense of what's going on. It pretty soon became clear that there is tipping point where miners will stop buying new kit, because they simply will never make a profit. The difficulty can't keep going up exponentially as a result (unless the Bitcoin value follows the same trend).Our prediction shows difficulty in mid-June at around 18,000,000,000, 25,000,000,000 by end 2014. At that time a TH will earn about $400 a month and eat a good portion of that in electricity costs. As a result, it's worth less than $1.3 per Gigahash/sec. Due to the preorder cycle, it will take 3-4 months for the feedback of difficulty to impact buying behavior. So difficulty continues ramping up way beyond your expectation, and prices in the secondary markers collapse. The overshoot might be moderated by a major supplier going bankrupt and not delivering but otherwise expect your year end prediction to be reached in July. |
|
|
|
|
I think you are on track.
The long delays between hardware orders and delivery mean that difficulty will shoot far past the level where a rational person would not decide to invest in mining hardware. Buying mining gear now is essentially a bet that BTC will be far more valuable in the future.
The trouble is buying BTC is the same bet, and you can probably get more BTC today for your dollars than buying mining gear will ever yield.
|
|
|
|
I did a bunch of deals. I was very careful. I did not get scammed!!!
LOL. If only your counterparties could say the same. (For those not in the know, good old Burt here invented the Pirate pass through scam.) Yes, to be perfectly honest and accurate: I did get scammed for a huge amount of BTC in the past by Trendon (fucking bastard) Shavers, learned from my mistakes, moved on, have not been scammed since. I don't know what to call your role in the pirate ponzi, but victim definitely isn't it. Co-conspirator, accomplice, errand boy... something like that is more appropriate. It's a shame you aren't in a jurisdiction where the courts could decide what to call you at the same time they send Trendon off to prison. |
|
|
|
Hi All.
My Avalon 4 Module has been working fine, over-clocked at 350 (on OEM PSU) and suddenly not working anymore.
I can access Luci via Wifi and have re-started, rebooted and power-cycled to no avail.
When I look at the Cgminer API Log I see:
[Firmware Version] => 20131229
cgminer: 698d677
cgminer-openwrt-packages: aadd747+
luci: 346e3e7+
Socket connect failed: Connection refused
I have the API Allow set to W:127.0.0.1
I have been able to Ping and Traceroute.
I cannot figure what the heck I am doing wrong.
Thanks in advance!
cgminer is unable to get a response from a pool, so it shuts down. check your firewall. |
|
|
|
Can you point out where there was a promise? No? Oops, you are a liar!
I mean, god forbid you post true information... that would actually paint BFL in a kinder light. No, it's better to post false information to keep the BFL hate going, no matter what the truth of the matter is.
Pathetic.
Your attempts at avoiding the "late" issue are pathetic. BFL is months late. Again. And again. And again. Cash flow must be getting tight over at scam your customers central. At least one ASIC vendor will go bankrupt holding investor customer money this year. I'd feel terrible if it happened to as 'special' a guy as Josh. |
|
|
|
I did a bunch of deals. I was very careful. I did not get scammed!!!
LOL. If only your counterparties could say the same. (For those not in the know, good old Burt here invented the Pirate pass through scam.) |
|
|
|
|
It may affect cgminer though.
They show solved blocks so they must be tracking the current difficulty.
With all the embedded devices running cgminer it could be a real circus if anything breaks.
Good catch finding this and making sure people are aware in advance.
|
|
|
|
He can't say but I can since I ain't part of it
This is EXACTLY what that Canadian Fund for Gold & Silver is CEF. And CEF is also the discription. A Closed Ended Fund.
There are no redemptions in a Closed Fund. Only Shares. So he would get a group of old bitcoiners to pool their bitcoins and issue shares at a premium above the NAV. Those shares would then be traded above the underlying asset. Being that bitcoins can rise or fall the shares can rise or fall but the premium above the NAV can also rise and fall in relation to the actual value.
Kinda like CEF right now, there isn't much appeal for gold/silver holdings so their shares are selling very low because two things. Gold and Silver are down a lot from a year ago and also people do not think it is going to rise very soon so the premium above that NAV is low as well.
So, the holders of this Bitcoin CEF would probably issue some of their shares to cash out but also hold a portion in the fund as that would rise as the value of bitcoin rises.
Sometimes additional shares can be issued and there are some small dividends paid and expenses etc..
But this is why he wants to partner since he has people that would like to buy the shares with their IRA which can't go buy bitcoins from Mt Gox.
Now, anyone here that feels like doing this can go do it especially if they have the trust of some old money bitcoiners
You are probably right. The trouble is a CEF only benefits the administrator. The bitcoins in it would be diluted by all the issuing fees, and ongoing administration so contributing BTC leaves you owning less coins when all is done. And because you cannot deliver BTC for shares it doesn't allow for additional capital to enter the Bitcoin ecosystem like an ETF would. So it's vaguely interesting if you desperately want an exit from BTC and feel your coins won't catch a bid. Otherwise it's only good for the guy who gets to shave fees. |
|
|
|
Redemptions can only be done in blocks of 10000 BTC. To one entity.
....
Do you think you can buy 1 share of SLV and demand they deliver an ounce to you?
It's blocks of 50,000 shares of the ETF to basket holders which is a certain category of investors such as broker dealers who become members of that category. Anyone who thinks this is simple to solve can probably make some easy money by calling the Winkelvoss bros and the regulators and straightening them out-- good bet they'd be glad for the advice .....fact it's, it's not that simple.... it's a major hurdle and I will bet that if the ETF ever is launched it will not be with the same S-1 we see. Not sure why people are so convinced that there is no possibility anyone has come up with a better model than the ETF ...when clearly it is not working so far. Right 50000 shares, each share representing 0.2 BTC = 10000 BTC. It isn't the trusts problem what happens to the coins after redemption. Ready to withdraw your claims below?
No one has to sell because of ETF redemptions. They just need to deliver BTC to the redeemers.
You really have no fucking idea what you are talking about.
You are completely and totally incorrect. "Just" delivering What could be tens of thousands of BTC based on a huge number of transactions, collecting and reconciling which public keys to send the BTC to and matching those keys with account holders is a massive undertaking ....but it's irrelevant because you are totally incorrect anyway. |
|
|
|
No one has to sell because of ETF redemptions. They just need to deliver BTC to the redeemers.
You really have no fucking idea what you are talking about.
You are completely and totally incorrect. "Just" delivering What could be tens of thousands of BTC based on a huge number of transactions, collecting and reconciling which public keys to send the BTC to and matching those keys with account holders is a massive undertaking ....but it's irrelevant because you are totally incorrect anyway. Redemptions can only be done in blocks of 10000 BTC. To one entity. If you're going to claim you read the filing, you should actually follow through. Do you think you can buy 1 share of SLV and demand they deliver an ounce to you? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
