This is a civil case since it was a loan. I got a loan I can not pay back.
you took a loan knowing you would not pay it back. |
|
|
|
DONT GET BFL'D!!!!
|
|
|
|
Eh just started my refund process, this should be fun.
1-800-LAWYERS I eagerly await watching the folks at Butterfly Labs take it for every victim of theirs with every drop of the soap. |
|
|
|
Based on what I've read, you self test for FCC compliance. You do not file something with the FCC. The FCC can request from your company a copy of your testing. If they find that you're in violation, they can have you stop shipping out products or fine you (Or both). BFL doesn't have to file anything with the FCC unless that is requested of them.
So I think you're banging your drum about a situation that doesn't exist. You'd basically have to prove to the FCC that BFL is in non-compliance, they'd have to request from BFL the testing results, and then if they are incorrect, then maybe they'd fine them until they are compliant.
Everyone with a non-compliant machine gets to fix it themselves, because the FCC requires the OPERATOR to fix the device, not the manufacturer. So if you manage to prove that your device isn't compliant, you also get to not use it any more unless you can fix it so it is compliant.
The point isn't whether BFL is compelled to get FCC certification. The point is that BFL boasted that they were "two weeks" from getting it back in November of 2012. Phineas is just reminding BFL of their promises, and of the fact that BFL was boasting about a certifying product that could not possibly have existed at that time (given what we know now). If a company is capable of lying about something so mundane as having their entire mining rig line in the process of getting FCC certification, what the FUCK else are they lying about? And what the fuck is wrong with you people who stand behind BFL espousing that BFL is not lying about anything? If Sonny Vleisides is a Saint since he claimed to turn over a new leaf after serving his felony conviction for fleecing the elderly outta hundreds of millions of dollars with his 15 year running lottery scam, then I will start sucking dicks. Prove to me Sonny's a Saint, and I'll show you one happy cocksucker--ME! (No offense to the gay community!)
Bottom line, people who ordered based on Josh's statement about the FCC certification which is a proven lie have to now claw like animals to obtain a refund. Those who don't request a refund and receive there equipment months from now are double fucked. LoLz Josh, why you so douchy tho? |
|
|
|
A brief Overview on Ocoin can mine this with ASICs? |
|
|
|
It was a different addy i used my desktop client address not my other wallet Congrats on getting the loan filled. You should post the TxIDs so you can have a public record of successfully receiving and paying back the loan to help build up your rep  I was going to give up on this thread, but thank you for clarifying what I meant to say when I see no TX of his loan. |
|
|
|
FILLED Thanks to none of you guys. I might be back to try and get another loan later in the month.
I hate how EVERY one claims a jr. is a scammer. No im just trying to get a loan and if someone gave me a chance on here i might get some more feedback.
but its filled now so please dont send me any bitcoins currently unless there are a donation
must have gone to a different addy, cuz nobody put any coins in 1CbtWjtBSgG5iLJgMges2LWfAVuPNie941 |
|
|
|
Unless they start denying refunds, they shouldn't be labeled as scammers. They are 6 months late, but they are legitimately working on a product.
 |
|
|
|
I ordered a BFL SC Single back in June of 2012 and did receive my order last week. It is not a scam but I would advise applying some common sense when investing into a new order today. I was with you until you typed that. How do you figure it's not a scam when you were told you'd receive your order in October, November, December of 2012 and you instead received it in August of 2013...some nine months late? Two more weeks =) Off topic, anyone know what a mining patty is? Eligius has them listed as 'coming soon', but they were awesome about shipping BE's. |
|
|
|
You're not regulating the 'unregulatable'. BitInstant was a FIAT<->BITCOIN conversion business. It was not wholly anchored in Bitcoin and therefore assertions that no laws can be brought to bear on it are likely baseless.
Bitcoin maybe make-believe money but US dollars are not. When people are out-of-pocket on the scale that BitInstant was running; things like class action suits are an almost inevitable ugly consequence.
What I was saying was that the only way I think you can "regulate" is to sue someone in small claims court. How is the government going to control the flow of bitcoins? It does not seem possible. also, if your quotes were used to imply that I was not using an actual word, my source is: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/unregulatablehttp://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1kg0ok/what_bitcoin_laws_or_bitcoin_regulations_could/ |
|
|
|
Continued situations like this are exactly why you see regulators serving subpoenas and looking to establish rules of the road. While many here see regulations and regulators as bad, the truth is that much of their job is providing consumer protection. Whether they overreach or abuse their powers is a topic for another discussion.
Establishing such safeguards is good for Bitcoin because with consumer protections, comes consumer confidence. I hope we see wrongdoers dealt with swiftly and legitimate entities held within a fair regulatory framework but also not crushed by overbearing regulatory policy. Asking too much? Time will tell.
There is zero consumer protection, and i don't see how there ever will be. Bitcoin puts the responsibility on the individual, so perhaps we will see more small claims proceedings for BTC. The only point of regulation, as I can see it, is at the point of BTC purchase. You might want to reread my post again. The fact that there are no protections is a big part of why regulations are necessary. To provide those consumer protections and in turn, consumer confidence. When the masses believe they are safe dealing in Bitcoins, you will see more "regular" people giving Bitcoin a much deeper look. Expect as more lawsuits and crackdowns happen and Bitcoin entities comply with regulatory standards, the value of Bitcoin will rise and it could be dramatic, making $260 look like $2,60. Point as it relates to this thread, is this is good for Bitcoin. Entities are being held accountable but it also emphases the need for a proper and fair regulatory framework, moving forward. Rules of the road are necessary. No one likes speed limits but most agree they serve a good purpose. How do you regulate the unregulatable? |
|
|
|
Welcome to the end of bitcoin. Nobody can make a ROI mining and so existing miners will just consolidate until one has 51% and then everyone will stop using bitcoin.
It's pointless for anybody to buy new hardware now as the more is actually delivered the more it will become obsolete by rising difficulty.
No new miners means no new bitcoin owners with money to spend so shrinking bitcoin economy. It's been a fascinating experiment that looked as though it might actually work but alas the rising difficulty that protected it will actually kill it IMHO.
This is not the end of bitcoin. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=273184.0;all |
|
|
|
Would this be the second major Bitcoin "case" with the U.S. legal system? Do forum members perceive as this adding to Bitcoin's standing or it losing another piece of its soul?  cant speak for anyone else, but IMO these are to be expected growing pains. |
|
|
|
Continued situations like this are exactly why you see regulators serving subpoenas and looking to establish rules of the road. While many here see regulations and regulators as bad, the truth is that much of their job is providing consumer protection. Whether they overreach or abuse their powers is a topic for another discussion.
Establishing such safeguards is good for Bitcoin because with consumer protections, comes consumer confidence. I hope we see wrongdoers dealt with swiftly and legitimate entities held within a fair regulatory framework but also not crushed by overbearing regulatory policy. Asking too much? Time will tell.
There is zero consumer protection, and i don't see how there ever will be. Bitcoin puts the responsibility on the individual, so perhaps we will see more small claims proceedings for BTC. The only point of regulation, as I can see it, is at the point of BTC purchase. |
|
|
|
[Tycho] for gods sake
is it rocket science to implement a stratum server?
common now:)
do we need to make a petion or what?
The petition is leaving the pool. |
|
|
|
$250 dollars for one plaintiff, $500 for another. Not saying its nothing, but...it's a pretty low amount. Also, you don't need any special accounts. This is on /r/bitcoin =P http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1keodi/class_action_lawsuit_filed_against_bitinstant/It looks like the lawyer(s) here are looking to be "First to file" + trolling for more class: By being the first to file the lawsuit, the plaintiffs are able to pick their court venue. Then you troll for other disgruntled BitInstant customers to add to the class action. |
|
|
|
Some dick on ebay ordered 11 units from me - when I shipped them, the address he used didn't exist so they went to a holding depot. Then he asked for a full refund which I did. Then he tried to arrange a re-delivery to a different address. Luckily I was able to prove I was the sender because I kept the receipt from the tracked package.
Now I'm waiting for the units to be returned which could take up to a month.
Be careful selling on ebay.
Was the paypal address confirmed in the seller protection part? ^This do NOT ever ship to an address that isnt verified, ever. Here's a tip from personal experience -- I shipped to a "Seller Protected" address once, and the seller used a fradulent credit card. HOWEVER -- paypal ate the charge back as I explained to them that I had followed their instructions and did my due dilligence. How are we to know that someone isnt using a stolen CC? |
|
|
|
Learn how to read the trust feedback system people. That is feedback that HE LEFT. I had some guy trying to call me out because I had "red" in my feedback.  Still, references would be nice. I don't know why he is looking for ~ $68 and wants to pay back almost double that in less than a months time. If you see, UK1 left him feedback as well -- however it is out of OPs trust network. Whilst I have taken a loan for SR product before, I'm kinda reluctant due to the nature of the amount of BTC in the feedback. Have we heard from UK1 in person? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
