We will investigate why the 'Inactive' is written there and what it means. In the meanwhile, any honorable client who needs order confirmation or status update, can email us directly at office@butterflylabs.com or just post a PM here. Let me explain some basic business to you. Read the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registered_agentYou have no registered agent in the state of your incorporation. An email address isn't good enough. If for example someone sued you for delivering a product that didn't meet your claimed specs, you wouldn't receive the official notice and would fail to appear at court, automatically losing the case by a default judgement. |
|
|
|
If you store some tiny ass amount in an account and expect it to be there in 20 years, that is ridiculous.
No, it's not. There are countless banks in the real world that provide free checking and savings accounts. My jar of pennies on my shelf also stores cash indefinitely at no charge. Digital currencies should also be free to store their value. Transaction fees and block rewards provide plenty of value to the miners. |
|
|
|
Why do you consider BFL as being "shady"  I really don't understand. They have 10 years experience in FPGAs too. Only disadvantage is high UK VAT import duty cost ... You're joking, right? Let's search https://wyobiz.wy.gov/Business/ViewCertificate.aspx for their business standing: Name: BF Labs Inc. Status: Inactive - Administratively Dissolved (No Agent)
|
|
|
|
We would like to let all our clients know that, in case of Bitcoin failure, we will make all our units OpenSource,
and thus making it possible for the clients to sell their units to various industries at almost certainly higher price
than they purchased it in the first place.
What industry buys used Singles for greater than the purchase price? |
|
|
|
Here is one example of a significant improvement: "Dual signature accounts allowed with MC$"
More code copied from Bitcoin, eh? Will the source code include the required licenses? |
|
|
|
Yes and transaction fees aren't evaporating your cryptocurrency savngs in Bitcoin I guess?
That is right. Savings means it's not being transferred, therefore no fees. A wallet from 2009 will have exactly the same number of Bitcoins today and forever. So if a miner charges you 100 BTC to send a transaction then you have to pay.
Wrong again. No miner can force a fee on any transaction. If a transaction doesn't meet a miner's fee requirement, then the transaction will simply be mined by someone else. |
|
|
|
Transactions done up to today are only the beginning. Are we really going to drag around 2, 3, 4... years of transactions? WHY?
Because my coins are there, and I really want to keep them. I don't want my coins to evaporate because you can't spare a little hard drive space. What sort of crap system do you have? Even my phone can run a Bitcoin client just fine. If SLC has figured out, how prune this massive "transaction list", we better copy this or BTC/LTC become useless faster, than any of us wants to imagine.
It's already been implemented in some of the Bitcoin clients. |
|
|
|
hmmmmmmmmmmm... I got about 5 grand I am looking to invest in FPGA. I think this just sold me. BFL it is. I will wait the 2 months. And I disagree that a BFL is 900 dollars since you could make 300 bucks while you wait. That is just stupid math lmfao
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=78239.0Add this one to the list. With the introductory pricing it looks amazing and will probably sell quite a few units very fast. They don't seem to have the production issues BFL is plagued with. |
|
|
|
So the more MicroCash you have the higher the percentage of the fees you get. It doesn't necessarily reward early adopters, it rewards people who have MicroCash.
MicroCash: Taking from the poor and giving to the rich. |
|
|
|
It's true boards could be used for some other purpose probably a processing task. However as this boardis cost optimised this will restrict usage to very similar processing tasks.
Will this be an open board, i.e. will community developed bitstreams be relatively straight forward? |
|
|
|
|
Shouldn't this be in the alternative clients forum?
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure the heatpipe design has bought them anything in terms of better thermals; the same temperatures could be achieved by putting the Sunons into the original Rev2 box.
That was my thinking. Heat pipes are great when you need to move the heat output to a different location so a larger fan will fit. But their heat pipe design doesn't move the heat any more than a large heat sink would. |
|
|
|
Is the $15,000 required up front
Yup. Full payment up front, and in 6 months you may get a Mini Rig. |
|
|
|
Ok you think bitcoin is not a pyramid scheme, that's fine. But are you denying the block reward for bitcoin cuts in half over time to eventually reach a low of 0?
That is exactly what Bitcoin does, and has done since the very first day it was released more than 3 years ago. There have been absolutely zero changes to the block reward. It is that trust that has been built over time that makes Bitcoin successful. Answer this: How many times has SolidCoin changed the reward scheme? Pyramid scheme, bait-and-switch, pump-and-dump, I not sure which scam term is most accurate of SolidCoin, but make no mistake, SolidCoin is very much a scam designed to benefit early adapters at the expense of later adopters. |
|
|
|
Why is there no mention of the source code being open source? Because it's implied it's open source? They may even be going back to a MIT license. SC started out as open source, but then progressed to a more restricted proprietary license. It's quite logical to assume that no mention of the source code in the announcement means there will be no source code released. I know, silly of me for thinking anything about SC follows logic. |
|
|
|
And Warning: Don't let those who are intimidated by MicroCash steer you away from taking part in revolutionary/game changing technology.
That's what you said when SC1 was released. That's what you said when SC2 was released. Now you're saying the same thing again. More of the same. Big promises that turn out empty. The only thing I'm wondering is, where's the source code? |
|
|
|
I'll explain it once again:
A buddy of mine is an ASIC designer here in Silicon Valley.
When asked to implement an FPGA on a standard ASIC design flow, he could obviously do that, have some other people in his company implement and verify the physical back-end and then ship the design files off to TSMC or some other foundry.
A few months later, you receive your first sample ASIC, which implements an FPGA.
You are confusing ASIC with IC. An ASIC has fixed-logic, an FPGA has programmable-logic. While they are both ICs, they are two very different kinds of ICs. |
|
|
|
Right, I should clarify: yes p2pool itself should be able to handle it, but I doubt many miners would remain when the difficulty is so high that they may or may not get in a share in each block. It would have a negative feedback kind of effect, I would think.
Who cares if you get a share in every block? You'll still get roughly the same number of payouts each day, even at a deepbit-size level. Now if p2pool was 10 times the size of deepbit, then the difficulty would be so high that lots of small miners would not get daily payouts. That would be a problem. I look forward to p2pool growing so large that becomes a problem. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
