One Question. Was the PETA Project not same fucked up till it got the turnaround? I mean it will take 6-12 months to get to IPO Share prices back but isnt it possible? If we reinvest everything every week into new hashlets and we have a bit luck with mining profibility ? Then also a bit luck with BTC prices in the next 12 months?
I don't understand how people can give up and don't try to make the best out of the worst. I think that crypt x is listening to us the first time is a good first move.
In my opinion, PETA was being bled dry from the start. I don't think it ever had a turnaround. If you're referring to the May/June IPO, investors simply didn't understand what the exploding network hash rate, uncompetitive hosting fees and repayment for the loan really meant. Given the past history, there's no chance that a new IPO by cryptx will be met warmly. I don't think there's any chance for SCRYPT to return to IPO prices. |
|
|
|
|
The only way this could be more obvious, and justify that it is not a scam, is if they renamed it to ponziminer and add wording that they will pay... until they stop.
|
|
|
|
Seems like a lot of rose-colored glasses in here IMHO. Last year AM was poised to be a giant, but they have fell pretty far. They just weren't quick enough and didn't have as many resources as the other giants who entered the field.
There huge first mover advantage was not fully taken advantage of. When the price was 0.25 for a long stretch I thought AM was overvalued, as I said about 20 pages back or so. But 0.16 does seem much more reasonable. But I do not see how anyone can expect any grandiose movements some people are going on about here.
I get the sense that the profitable elements of the company have been removed, or planned to be removed, from AM's stock and into other entities.
I still think Friedcat and his team have tons of talent and know-how but it just seems like AM share holders are really secondary, the leadership is pursuing sustainable profits off the books.
All heresay and speculation, just my 2 cents, seeing this company go from +4 BTC share down to 0.15. The bitcoin space changed massively in a year.
I would have to agree with you...I think off books they are killing it, and that explains the lack of interest towards this thread and shareholders. Obviously I am just speculating like everyone else here since we do not know anything, but it does fit the scenario pretty well. If this were the case and AM was transitioning profitable aspects of the company into other areas off the book, board members would likely be the first to be aware of this and sound the alarm. A few of the board members post here the odd time, I would expect this would have been vetted here in the shareholder thread by now in such a scenario. Not saying that this is happening, but if it did happen and the board members could not stop this from happening, what would they do? Find ways to sell whatever shares they could? Or sound the alarm? And to what ends? |
|
|
|
|
I think you know the counter to that argument - if you believe bitcoin will go to the moon, just hodl bitcoin.
As for whether ASICMINER will ever return 0.17 btc over the rest of its lifetime, that's a bet that havelock traders are currently split on.
|
|
|
|
Due to the effectiveness of this campaign, we will add 20 slots for Hero Member.The pay is 0.1BTC per month. PM me if you want to join in the campaign.
1. Paging aahzmundus & Mabsark. 2. Go forth and spread the good word. 3. I guess it's good news that the campaign is very effective? Though I don't know how that's measured. |
|
|
|
whats the point. thats just paying crypt x as a middle man?
You seem to have the impression that is not cryptx's purpose for this project. |
|
|
|
I tend to think the Amazon agent has no idea what Bitcoin is.....at least that's how it comes off to me. Considering that was over 3 months ago, it was certainly faked or agent has no clue. Sadly... |
|
|
|
|
Yes, BE200 chips missed their design target. But it was hardly as though AM intended this to happen.
How much power does a single BE200 chip consume anyway? If it's ~0.7 W/GH and nominally 10GH like I read, that's approximately 7W. I guess it should still be possible to run them on high power USB ports. Feel free to buy a batch of chips and turn them into consumer-friendly USB miners, if you're convinced about the potential.
On the other hand, even if the BE200 hadn't missed its power design target, it would not have squeezed within the 2.5W power envelope that standard USB ports would provide. I trust that FC and team had good reasons to aim for the large scale and high density market.
|
|
|
|
|
Who knows? Ghash also seemed to be experiencing a bunch of problems at the same time. Maybe whoever operated this mining farm simply decided it was better to solo mine.
On the other hand, most farms have pretty hefty electrical bills to pay. By leaving 9 days of mining rewards untouched, perhaps this farm really has another big chunk of hashing power elsewhere that can pay the bills.
|
|
|
|
|
I reckon it's about 10PH.
Organofcorti figures it to be about 9.3PH, and pointed out that GHash lost 10PH on the same day that 1Nd99 started mining.
|
|
|
|
I'm sorry, why is GAWMiners a good deal for us?
Good question, since the whole situation doesn't make much sense when you start to break it down. We give Cryptx money, and then they use that money to buy cloud miners...making them an unnecessary middleman. In reality, the math sort of breaks down to: Cheapest Hashlet - $16.95 per 1MH/s + $0.08 in hosting / power / fees = $17.03 per 1MH/sGAWMiner War Machine - $13.89 per 1MH/s, + $0.20 * in hosting / power / fees = $14.09 per 1MH/s* - 1800W @ 54MH/s = 33.33W per MH/s = 0.8 kWh per day. This is $0.20 per MH/s @ $0.25 in fees per kWh. The hashlet is marketed toward the average consumer who doesn't have the space or electrical capacity to mine. We've got that with Scryptx, so why not just buy hardware? Those hosting/power/fees figures are per day. ie, Cheapest Hashlet per MH/s: $16.95 up-front, + $0.08 per day or $2.40 per month of 30 days GAWMiner War Machine, per MH/s: $13.89 up-front, + $0.20 per day or $6 per month of 30 days. So, plugging 1MH/s and 0W power usage into Litecoinpool's mining calculator, I get this based on current difficulty: Expected Rewards 24 hours 0.03439600 LTC 0.17 USD 7 days 0.24077197 LTC 1.18 USD 30 days 1.03187988 LTC 5.07 USD Clearly, GAWMiner War Machine at SCRYPT's ludicrous hosting fees is immediately non-profitable (unless you are cryptx). As for the expectation of profit with the Hashlet... I woudn't count on it. It's not just about litecoin difficulty (which seems to be somewhat stable), but also about exchange rates (which are on a long-term downward trend). |
|
|
|
@Korbman: Issue #3) A third of the original funding raised by the IPO should still exist...somewhere. Theoretically, it should still be in the ScryptX Havelock account, unless Cryptx lied to the Havelock team to have it all withdrawn. I'll save my judgement on this until I can dig in a bit more.
You won't see any of that, regardless of Havelock holding it in escrow or not. What are the conditions that must be fulfilled before Havelock releases escrowed funds to the asset issuer? |
|
|
|
NO. RANK USERNAME NUMBER OF POSTS DATE BTC ADDRESS
22. Full Member trynmpo 305 2014/8/18 1FKynGEboT5oLCALEamHy4Z15QPgWkfwtg
According to OP, sunxiaoxiao honoured his post to join on 18th Aug. By my count, 30 days from that is 17th Sep. But I'm sure you can count too, and what matters is sunxiaoxiao's count, not yours or mine. |
|
|
|
Neither TOR nor the "deep web" is controlled by the government.
Citation required. Of course, even if either tor or the "deep web" or both were controlled, influenced or monitored by the government, they would deny any such claims. So, how do you *know*? TOR was created by the government (actually the Navy) but is run by a network of volunteers of various nodes in a very similar fashion as how the bitcoin nodes operate. And what if it came to pass that a substantial portion of tor nodes were run by or monitored by the government? |
|
|
|
The government has passed a law indicating that it is OK to kill the leader of anything viewed as a riot or civil unrest via the use of military grade weapons not limited to but including sniper rifles with impunity.
Which law would that be? |
|
|
|
Ah. My bank's 2fa token is an EMV card that also has a ~ 14 key keypad, a display and a built-in battery so I figured it ought to be possible in a standard smartcard form factor. If I were to buy a hardware wallet, it would be to protect me if my computer is compromised. The use case where the wallet is stolen and I need to protect against brute force attacks doesn't seem too important, because $5 wrench attack. I'm not really keen on buying a hardware wallet if it doesn't fully cover the case where my computer is compromised. I guess your solution should be much cheaper than trezor though. |
|
|
|
I don't understand the intent of this discussion.
Sure, it's possible to "kill bitcoin" by strangling network connections. You can also attack piracy and kill p2p by fundamentally changing how networks work. Does this seem plausible?
It's probably possible and much easier to move bitcoin to a seedy, underground marketplace by outlawing bitcoin, putting the squeeze on exchanges, etc.
what do you mean with "strangling network connections", it mean you close the connection? ddos them? I was trying to paraphrase what the OP said (and what slaveforanunnak1 described as horse shit): First, create laws requiring interception of all traffic at the ISP level.
Second, lets give it a fictional name, like 'No Shitty Attacks' or NSA for short.
Place 'NSA Killbox' between ISP and the world. Switch to record mode.
This means A box between YOUR isp, and the rest of the world. Nothing you can do about this.
Linux users probably think they are cool and can bypass this.. no they cant. They think they can use TOR or some other ip spoofing method.. THIS is an illusion. Yeah it hides your ip from other end users, but YOUR isp has YOUR ip, period. Notice we are all given static ip's now? These are postcoded. Geo tagging is applied to ALL packets leaving YOUR pc at the ISP level, they can now decide where to send ALL packets using strict filtering rules.
When it's decided bitcoin is a threat to the security of any MAJOR country, they can force the isp to re-route p2p traffic to a dns dead end. At this point they can be clear and say, you want passed here, your paying for it.. This is how to tax bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
#3 is getting the reinvestment funds back into your hands - about 0.003 btc / share, if I did my arithmetic correctly. After this, the share price will probably drop by approximately 0.003 btc or perhaps even more. If you really want to reinvest in SCRYPT, that might be a good time to do so  |
|
|
|
|
Would that be a smartcard based wallet with a display like the trezor so that we can visually validate the transaction?
|
|
|
|
Most importantly, it can only be used to mine on one pool,
Which pool(s) must it be used to mine on? Wouldn't this be an indication that the self-mining is proceeding with these pools? Is this limitation because of the hardware, the controller, or ...? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
