When mastercoin was proposed and launched, market participation was smaller, not many people trusted the project, so the value shot up like a rocket as people who watched started to want and then buy because they missed the boat.
A similar thing happened to NXT
Alot of people saw these gains so when counterparty was proposed people salivated to jump on-board and make profit. An interesting thing to note was that this project was more publicized and market participation was much larger so those that really wanted it, got in initially. IE: all the main speculators got in on it from the get go. This mostly left a group of people that now needed to be convinced they wanted xcp. Compare this to mastercoin and NXT where the idea had not been validated so not many invested because of the risk. Once the idea became more valid the risk became less and so the watchers immediately wanted it, thus raising prices.
I'd imagine Etherium will be similar, everyone will jump onboard initially, unless of course they sell out too quick and the public still wants it. (MaidSafe will be interesting to watch)
But on to IbeX counterparty (The Goat, LOL) (The third incarnation of the bitcoin metacoin)
Ix has fallen off the radar for the most part. Since not many yet are watching this, and there is no IPO style extra coin for these features, expect the price to shoot up as people realized this one snuck in under their nose and decide to start buying once the features get complete. And at $.05 expect much profits when it inevitably goes to $1.00 and BEYOND THE MOON----INTERGALACTIC GOAT!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yes, there surprisingly is no IPO, IXC already IPO'ed 3 years ago! |
|
|
|
|
ANYTHING Bitcoin can do, iXcoin can do *cheaper*
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I would like to start a small contest (just for fun).
Make the proposal for an animal representing iXcoin. Possibly not a dog.
Any idea? I got one but I just wait for yours.
Come on! A funny animal. Send the picture and let's connect it with IXC.
Maybe we could take away the boriness from this coin.
Alright now that's something I can get in on. 1. Aardvark 2. Snark and I'd nominate that mythical creature that only exists when you don't believe it exists but I can't remember the name. Well obviously is should be an IbeX |
|
|
|
I believe the photos of the box show further evidence they did no planning at all, no power supplies, no heat sinks except for 99 cent store ones, and they did not even bother being proactive and have boxes read for shipping the miners!
I suspect the proprietors have absolutely no experience even shipping computers to customers. I would not be surprised if they even have experience with electronic manufacturing or even basic electronics. In the beginning I had hoped that they were just assemblers. Unfortunately, they took the approach of manufacturing their own boards. To make matters even worse, they selected Bitmine instead of Technobit. |
|
|
|
Yes, we're working on the professional aspect now.
1. is definitely a go.
2. Is getting there as long as we can source the heatsinks by the end of the week. (dynatron setup has potential but when it comes to technobit its usually best to keep it as is because that's how it has been designed to work).
3. Is happening as well but will not be up and running until mid next week, realistically.
Not too many takers for the rest. But we'll include a payback option as well, just for other clients which have not been following this thread.
So here's the next step. We're working on the site now, creating a specific section which defines these options in detail and we've been having the lawyers draft/review them and we'll have the final draft back tomorrow. We just don't want to say/offer something wrong or something that could make the situation worse or who knows how people can spin it right. Tomorrow afternoon we'll post this section as well as send out a mailer to all clients who would like to review the options. Those of you which have already made a selection or mentioned a preference here have been noted but we'll still need you to officially select the which option you'd like tomorrow as well.
This was posted 2 days ago. Waiting for new info. |
|
|
|
AMT_MINERS - IT HAS BEEN 6 MONTHS OF FAILED ATTEMPTS...
(SNIP)
THIS IS HOW AMT SHIPPED ME A $6,000 COMPUTER THEY DID NOT EVEN USE A REAL BOX, THEY MADE ONE OUT OF CARDBOARD PIECES. THEY DIDNT EVEN BOTHER ORDERING PROPER BOXES.
I can't read this... too many caps! The boxes are really amateur. I usually buy broken computers on eBay, even those broken computers come in much more sturdy boxes and packed in foam and bubble wrap. It is like AMT did not even have in their budget the need to buy boxes! This is indeed very odd since the boxes of the original cases would have been sufficient. I suspect the case that AMT is trying to build now is an attempt to persuade the court that they have made an honest effort to fulfill their obligations. Unfortunately, from my perspective, I don't see proof of that. Has anyone had significant interaction with them to verify if they've actually made an effort to deliver 1.2 TH/s *working* miners. |
|
|
|
The same 'filtered block' line (but different hash) in the last crash too. Perhaps something wrong with whatever filtered block handling is?
CMerkleBlock is used for filtered nodes. It holds a CBlockHeader. This is assigned in CMerkleBlock::CMerkleBlock using GetBlockHeader. This function doesn't copy the auxpow field. This is possibly why the null pointer accessing auxpow occurs. Possible fix: diff --git a/src/main.h b/src/main.h
index bd21fe9..1221a88 100644
--- a/src/main.h
+++ b/src/main.h
@@ -1411,6 +1411,7 @@ public:
block.nTime = nTime;
block.nBits = nBits;
block.nNonce = nNonce;
+ block.auxpow = auxpow;
return block;
}
I'll put this test in production and see what happens. Thanks! Keep us informed. The pool got a filtered block request today and didn't crash. I think this confirms the fix works. I've done a pull request for it. Excellent development! Merged your pull request. Thanks! |
|
|
|
And the historical bitcoin loss is not speculative, if it was future loss that would be speculative.
MPP was referred to as the computer being worth only 1/3 as much now.
Ran the math, on a 1.2 THs with a difficulty rating of 3.5 million (in march) revenue would be $75 per day. In April, with difficulty rating of 5 milling revenue would be $52 per day. So lost revenues for months or March and April would total around $3,810. Note: I did not include February revenues. In short, any settlement that delivers the same 1.2 THs should at least compensate for the lost mining revenues (in this case $3,810). Yes, $3800 other damages, an 3-4T of mining power, maybe much more when this goes to trial. Personally, I am seeking every penny I can get. Yes, the damages are indeed piling up over time. Also consider the cost of litigation. AMT will have to pay the defendant's lawyers in event of a loss. The case though is not even remotely winnable so this is practically guaranteed. I think if AMT does not come up with an acceptable settlement with the next week or so, then we will need to see how we can freeze their assets just like they've done with HashFast. see: https://coinreport.net/court-freezing-hashfast-bitcoin-wallets/In addition, the company will require an audit. |
|
|
|
I missed the "IPO" do to the extreme demand but am today still considering converting some BTC into Maidsafe.
Can this still be done, as the website still says, "any BTC sent will be returned." This leaves a lot of people feeling like they missed the boat if they were unable to get in the first 4 hours there was actually a sale.
I am also going to buy Ethereum, and frankly I think Ethereum has a huge advantage - they are going to make the IPO available to everyone who wants in at the beginning. No feeling of losing out, or being cut out by big players.
With this in mind, if it is possible, why should I not just skip this and buy Ether? I will know I was able to get in on the ground floor, on the same terms as everyone else. This also means a lot more people advocating for Ethereum.
Would just like to hear what is the benefit of buying Maidsafe second hand today? Why should a person put 10 BTC into this, and why would that be better than the Etherum IPO?
I am wondering if anyone can make a convincing argument. I know the engineering talent is here, but I think you don't have the community, and now no way to adequately reward those who missed the botched IPO process.
If anyone can explain why someone should today try to get some Maidsafe second hand, and are looking at this as a speculative investment, should do so I would love to hear it.
At least NXT is on all the exchanges and I can be sure about consensus market value (no I am not a NXT advocate but respect them for letting the financial markets dictate their future) but Maidsafe should "float" on major exchanges also imho.
Because I'm so careful with my investments, I find it amazing you're happy to throw 10 Bitcoins into something you've clearly read nothing about. The fact you don't even realise it's traded at below the crowdfunding price on masterxchange makes me a bit worried for you. How's this investment technique worked out for you in the past?  The fact that you are criticizing this persons speculative investment without any good arguments lends me to think that you are just trashing talking. Lot's of folks have read the whitepapers about safecoin and felt that it was worthing of their investment. You however are constantly in this thread without a valid reason to be here. If you don't like the price, then you should just sell. What is the point of hanging around? There are over 200 other alt-coins that you can be *concerned* about. |
|
|
|
And the historical bitcoin loss is not speculative, if it was future loss that would be speculative.
MPP was referred to as the computer being worth only 1/3 as much now.
Ran the math, on a 1.2 THs with a difficulty rating of 3.5 million (in march) revenue would be $75 per day. In April, with difficulty rating of 5 milling revenue would be $52 per day. So lost revenues for months or March and April would total around $3,810. Note: I did not include February revenues. In short, any settlement that delivers the same 1.2 THs should at least compensate for the lost mining revenues (in this case $3,810). |
|
|
|
I look forward to talking in court to tell the story how AMT caused financial loss to active duty military and US Veterans and everyone else here as well. Jurys and judges don't usually don't like to hear about someone stealing money from US service members. I love the fact it will be in Philly too, my home town.
The complaint appears to demand a jury trial... if I were AMT I would avoid a trial at all costs. It would be expensive and it clearly is not remotely winnable. A company advertises A but never delivers. I can't see how you can spin that ? I don't know if you know about Philly, a jury won't side with a business there for sure. It's a city that's all about helping the little guy.(Very, very democratic). I can't imagine a worse place to have a trial for AMT. The real question is not if its winnable, the question is how much damages. (1) Purchase Price (2) 2 - X months of lost mining revenues (3 MPP (4) Intangibles |
|
|
|
I look forward to talking in court to tell the story how AMT caused financial loss to active duty military and US Veterans and everyone else here as well. Jurys and judges don't usually don't like to hear about someone stealing money from US service members. I love the fact it will be in Philly too, my home town.
The complaint appears to demand a jury trial... if I were AMT I would avoid a trial at all costs. It would be expensive and it clearly is not remotely winnable. A company advertises A but never delivers. I can't see how you can spin that ? |
|
|
|
so glad we got our refund. what a mess.
Awesome that you got a refund.....that is the equivalent of stepping to the side as the shit hits the fan...bravo  also your experience in getting a refund sets a precedent that they should be issuing refunds and were discriminatory in who they issued them to. A huge legal mess they are in now with that. Here's the thing though, he got his refund because someone else paid for his unit. Which means that AMT will refund you, IF they have the money. I don't think they have the money. This type of business model is name after an Italian gentlemen. Sure sounds like AMT is very shortly going to find out that there is no legal definition for an investomer. A person is either a customer or an investor and it likely won't be long until AMT finds out the legal rights and the legal recourse for each class of person are VERY different. Because we gave them money and expected a return on that investment....which is what ROI literally is....and is covered under the MPP...it can easily be argued that we are investors in the company and as such AMT would have a fiduciary duty to provide us with the increase or break even of said investment. Interesting point.....and might be cause for yet another case seeing as the class action covers other aspects of product misrepresentation. As far as it being a Ponzi scheme.....technically its not....I say that because they actually do provide a product flawed and misrepresented as it is, it is indeed a physical product. BUT the investomer concept AND the fact that they refer to giving us an ROI via the MPP they pretty much opened up to the fact that we are in fact investors. It could be argued that way at least in a courtroom with relative ease. But I don't think the current complaint covers that. I would have to disagree here, mining hardware is equipment, it isn't an investment asset. You don't buy mining hardware in the hope you can sell it at a higher price. In fact, mining hardware depreciates extremely rapidly. The severest crime I can think of here is federal wire fraud. Goods where sold without any intention of delivery. In fact, if you can prove that AMT never had a 1.2 THs that could be delivered, then you can make the case that there was never any intent to deliver. The key evidence here is the complete absence of a 6 board backplane. That is the smoking gun in my opinion. |
|
|
|
There isn't an argument. And most courts frown upon bankruptcy to avoid a consumer debt. Most courts wont even grant it until the consumers have been made whole. Its been tried before. There are plenty of cases like that. And yea you can go and sue....as for agreeing collectively that largely depends on the terms they propose. If they say you will get X and we are mostly all ok with it....then great we move on....if not.....we can state that to the lawfirm.....at the end of the day tho I think the plantiffs registered clenell and the other dude (forget his username) would kinda speak on everyone behalf in that regard. They might push for better terms. But if an agreement can't be made in settlement it goes to trial which honestly could go either way BUT considering things it could work heavily in our favor with all the evidence and written documentation there is. But anyone not in agreement with whatever settlement they got would be free to find their own lawyer and get that litigated. The problem is you can't come at them for the same thing or you start to run afoul of double jeopardy and the case gets tossed out.
It clearly is in AMT's best interest to make sure that a majority are satisfied with the terms. I just can't see how this case is even winnable by AMT. I mean, a sale is made that promises A to be delivered on B date with a warranty of C and further protection of D. You then don't deliver A,B,C and D and you fail to communicate with your clients. How can they win? |
|
|
|
I'm sure Joshua Zipkin will rear his ugly head again soon - and give another excuse as to the delay on this particular update/plan. It will be more "talked about solutions" with no substance or anything you can take to the bank. This has been the case with EVERY so-called "update" for the past 6 months.
Joshua will continue to do this as he has each time in the past, buying himself more time.
Anyone that hasn't talked with a lawyer yet, has made a large error based on false trust. Do not get duped into holding off any longer, you can always cancel on the suit if AMT miraculously does right by everyone (not looking like that will happen).
AMT founder Joshua Zipkin deserves to be in jail and/or heavily fined and charged with fraud. Anyone else involved with this RUSE that is AMT should also be held accountable.
BTW credit is due you posted something useful so thanks for that. I am not above giving credit where its due...whether you care or not I am putting it out there anyway. FYI with the class action we don't need to talk to a lawyer...we already got one. The class affects everyone. That said separate complaints can be brought if the existing settlement is not adequate...which we don't really know as we don't have the actual details they were supposed to give us today. Yes, I'm curious of how that works. If someone say does not agree with the settlement, I gather he has the right to have his own lawsuit? Also, how do we all collectively agree on an acceptable remedy? I gather that AMT must come out with a settlement. I seriously doubt they have a winnable case. I mean, what is their argument for not providing a refund? |
|
|
|
Can someone who has received one of the 1.2 Th/s miners confirm that the heatsink on the A1 chip is only on the top (e.g., there is no heatsink on the backside of the PCB)? I ask because it is clear looking at Innosilicon specs that a majority of the heat is designed to go to the PCB side (back) and heatsinks on both back and front are *required* by spec... that could explain the meltdowns. Sorry if that was covered before.
There should be a heat sink on both sides. The top side however should have a heat sink that should transfer 30% of the heat. Unfortunately, AMT design has tiny heat sinks that aren't even close to twice the size of the back side heat sink. |
|
|
|
I missed the "IPO" do to the extreme demand but am today still considering converting some BTC into Maidsafe.
Can this still be done, as the website still says, "any BTC sent will be returned." This leaves a lot of people feeling like they missed the boat if they were unable to get in the first 4 hours there was actually a sale.
I am also going to buy Ethereum, and frankly I think Ethereum has a huge advantage - they are going to make the IPO available to everyone who wants in at the beginning. No feeling of losing out, or being cut out by big players.
With this in mind, if it is possible, why should I not just skip this and buy Ether? I will know I was able to get in on the ground floor, on the same terms as everyone else. This also means a lot more people advocating for Ethereum.
Would just like to hear what is the benefit of buying Maidsafe second hand today? Why should a person put 10 BTC into this, and why would that be better than the Etherum IPO?
I am wondering if anyone can make a convincing argument. I know the engineering talent is here, but I think you don't have the community, and now no way to adequately reward those who missed the botched IPO process.
If anyone can explain why someone should today try to get some Maidsafe second hand, and are looking at this as a speculative investment, should do so I would love to hear it.
At least NXT is on all the exchanges and I can be sure about consensus market value (no I am not a NXT advocate but respect them for letting the financial markets dictate their future) but Maidsafe should "float" on major exchanges also imho.
You can buy maidsafe at masterxchange.com . Right now it is below the IPO price, so you are lucky that you missed the IPO. When Safecoin comes out (maidsafe is just a 1:1 proxy of the coin), then it may likely be the first crypto-currency where the contributions of the "miners" / in this case the "farmers" have real value (storage). Proof of work systems really just burns energy but the value of the computation is worthless. Ideally one would like to value of the network to increase as more nodes participate in the network. Safecoin has this property, Bitcoin does not. Anyway, that's my reasoning. However, one warning, not every investment is going to be a slam dunk. There could be competitors that come in over time. Regarding, Ethereum, as I understand they wanted to raise 35 million, much more than the 6 million raised by maidsafe. So relatively, Ethereum might be a more expensive IPO. |
|
|
|
I am sure with a judgement which ever bank there banking at will have to give me the $
I don't think it works that way. I think it works by hiring a collections agency that convinces the debtor to fork over the money. Now whether you have to win in small claims court or not is an open question. |
|
|
|
Just called them a little while ago they said we are all involved in the class action law suite and if you want to file for a individual lawsuit you can also do this .
Looks Like I am going to file a small claims lawsuit against them I am tired of emailing these pricks I just want my $ back ..
If any one has done a small claims already please let me know . thanks
Well, use this info: http://www.montcopa.org/index.aspx?NID=300 to setup a date to file a small claims lawsuit. Note: Should be under $12,000. I think it probably is worth it to do so since it'll cost you only $200, however AMT needs to bring in their expensive lawyer to defend the case. I think in terms of demands, basically if you bought one unit, the purchase price and shipping ($6,000), plus two months worth of mining based on difficulty at the time. So that's probably around $2,500 in BTC. |
|
|
|
so glad we got our refund. what a mess.
Awesome that you got a refund.....that is the equivalent of stepping to the side as the shit hits the fan...bravo also your experience in getting a refund sets a precedent that they should be issuing refunds and were discriminatory in who they issued them to. A huge legal mess they are in now with that. Here's the thing though, he got his refund because someone else paid for his unit. Which means that AMT will refund you, IF they have the money. I don't think they have the money. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
