Simon said "BTC" refunds not USD. He'd have otherwise provided specific clarifications obviously. Bartering and non-legal tender is not explicitly forbidden for transactions among private individuals for California businesses at all so that argument can go to sleep. In any case, whatever we may dream of, back when he said it there was no other literal interpretation irrespective of whatever the Supreme Court or any other legal institution ultimately decides. His intention was clear (yes, very stupid of him because that's very risky but nonetheless sufficiently conclusive). Let's move on...
The only reasonable interpretation of "BTC refunds" is a refund of the purchase price (which was always in USD) via BTC as a medium of exchange. Other interpretations are not reasonable because they would imply a windfall in the event of BTC appreciation or a loss in the event of BTC depreciation, neither of which are logical, much less legally permissible. If you chose to seek to take advantage of a "very stupid" and "very risky" interpretation because you are greedy, you got what you deserved.  Don't return a faulty mouse next time you buy a bad one in Amazon. You might possibly be 'taking advantage' of the merchant/manufacturer good intentions. Lol. It's simply execution of a guarantee made by THEM, not customers. Reasonable or unreasonable is not customers problem. I personally had a call with HF way back in the day and they told me BTC refund after wanting to get clarity. In addition, the protection program was in BTC (oh, wait...but not the refunds?), which makes even exponentially more stupid to think that HF meant refunds other than in BTC. BTC refund = BTC refund as stated by him. Not in USD or in chickens or anything else no matter which way you want to look at it/slice it/cook it/hash it ;-) |
|
|
|
Looks like the prices aren't that bad and some people are buing in bulk.
GAW just announced that they bought over 5 Petahash from them.
Sure but GAW is jacking prices up. Just compare the price per GH of Genesis hashlets vs S3's. |
|
|
|
It was also possible for BTC to collapse. So what?
In which case they would provide BTC refunds. Simon promised BTC refunds, when he really meant "We'll give you the smallest refund possible. If bitcoin goes down, we'll provide BTC refunds, if bitcoin goes up, we'll provide USD refunds." Correct. Simon said "BTC" refunds not USD. He'd have otherwise provided specific clarifications obviously. Bartering and non-legal tender is not explicitly forbidden for transactions among private individuals for California businesses at all so that argument can go to sleep. In any case, whatever we may dream of, back when he said it there was no other literal interpretation irrespective of whatever the Supreme Court or any other legal institution ultimately decides. His intention was clear (yes, very stupid of him because that's very risky but nonetheless sufficiently conclusive). Let's move on... |
|
|
|
|
So is there any likelihood of getting any refunds at all for those who first sued via class action lawsuit??
|
|
|
|
|
Hello,
How is "Amplitude" in the chart calculated for any given bar? I can't quite figure that out yet.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Same here. PM if interested to buy some 1 TH/s miners from me. :-)
|
|
|
|
I'm also selling some of my 1 TH/s Dragon miners as well. PM me if interested |
|
|
|
|
Bitmain,
Please provide at least product dimensions for S4!! This is key for rack planning purposes!!! Thanks,
|
|
|
|
I sold my hashlets yesterday, but noticed I have no payout now for today Since we are paid about 16 hours after we "mine," there should have been one. Contacting support...let's see how much of a hassle this is. GAW certainly does not do details well. How exactly did you "sell" your hashlets?? I haven't seen any exchange or market to sell them....Please elaborate |
|
|
|
|
Does anyone know what were the stress tests on Trezor? If it'll be the way of secure funding of the future, it'd better take lots of button pressings . :-)
|
|
|
|
|
What do each of the 4 numbers next to the "OFFSET" legend in the chart mean? I couldn't find any post on that. I sort of figured only one of them but please confirm.
|
|
|
|
Someone with the username GAW Miners_CEO just pmed me and asked what I was upset about.
Thats the CEO, the liar! He is known to message people that talk crap about gawminers on the forum and offer them miners in exchange of them deleting their posts and defending gawminers.. Why do you think there are so many *GAW* lovers here. Maybe thats why volder has such a hardon for gaw, josh gave him a lot of free stuff. I did mention early on in the thread that I was curious how long until he contacted crash or I. Guess it wasn't that long afterall. "....a hard on.." <------ "HAHAHA. You just made my day. Just the comment I needed to hear before going home with a smile.  |
|
|
|
Already read lots of posts and it seems like nobody knows how payouts are calculated. What I'm extremely afraid of is to put money in Hashlets and experience the same of what happened to my Scrypt miners: payouts fell dramatically in a matter of days and never ROI'd. At least with BTC, we can minimally observe and forecast upcoming difficulty.
What guarantees that the pool contracts cited as one of the source of those payouts will continue to be honored by those who sign them it up until the point there's positive ROI? Maybe they were paid in advance to cover a long contract duration so as to guarantee payouts? That would seem unlikely and highly risky by those people.
Can we conclusively say that Hashlet payouts are better than BTC payouts per $1 invested?
Are there any guaranteed contracts on the market? I highly doubt it. There was a thread made by a company that supposedly holds the equivalent of your investment in silver but it comes down to the same point where you have to trust them with your money. BTC investment? I tried that before and bought some when the price was close to $600. Everybody kept saying that it's really cheap  So my payouts from BTC investment are negative. Nobody "has" to trust them. This is a little bit more than your regular faith. Sure. I can trust them more as I collect some minimal information first so I can base my decision on with a little more clarity just like with the risk of any other standard vendor. Hashlet is quite unique as we all know. Here you are not buying BTC, you are MINING so that's an entirely different animal. I'm just referring about 2 different mining scenarios, not buying vs mining vs something else. How is it different from what CEX offers? I'm talking about trust here. Any cloud mining company can fail just like Mt.Gox did so I'd say you need some trust to invest. Of course any business can fail but bobody is talking about the likelihood of failing or succeeding but the fact that Hashlet is a new model, so CEX is completely irrelevant since we don't know that it's in fact the same model or not. With those companies there was at least a disclosed/understood model in advance irrespective of whether they were going to honor it or not or whether they were crooks or not. I'm completely neutral. I'm neither excited to have any stupid "faith" nor irrationally pessimistic. (In fact, I've had excellent interactions with the Gawminers team). I'm purely talking about understanding the *Hashlet MODEL* . |
|
|
|
Already read lots of posts and it seems like nobody knows how payouts are calculated. What I'm extremely afraid of is to put money in Hashlets and experience the same of what happened to my Scrypt miners: payouts fell dramatically in a matter of days and never ROI'd. At least with BTC, we can minimally observe and forecast upcoming difficulty.
What guarantees that the pool contracts cited as one of the source of those payouts will continue to be honored by those who sign them it up until the point there's positive ROI? Maybe they were paid in advance to cover a long contract duration so as to guarantee payouts? That would seem unlikely and highly risky by those people.
Can we conclusively say that Hashlet payouts are better than BTC payouts per $1 invested?
Are there any guaranteed contracts on the market? I highly doubt it. There was a thread made by a company that supposedly holds the equivalent of your investment in silver but it comes down to the same point where you have to trust them with your money. BTC investment? I tried that before and bought some when the price was close to $600. Everybody kept saying that it's really cheap So my payouts from BTC investment are negative. Nobody "has" to trust them. This is a little bit more than your regular faith. Sure. I can trust them more as I collect some minimal information first so I can base my decision on with a little more clarity just like with the risk of any other standard vendor. Hashlet is quite unique as we all know. Here you are not buying BTC, you are MINING so that's an entirely different animal. I'm just referring about 2 different mining scenarios, not buying vs mining vs something else. |
|
|
|
|
Already read lots of posts and it seems like nobody knows how payouts are calculated. What I'm extremely afraid of is to put money in Hashlets and experience the same of what happened to my Scrypt miners: payouts fell dramatically in a matter of days and never ROI'd. At least with BTC, we can minimally observe and forecast upcoming difficulty.
What guarantees that the pool contracts cited as one of the source of those payouts will continue to be honored by those who sign them it up until the point there's positive ROI? Maybe they were paid in advance to cover a long contract duration so as to guarantee payouts? That would seem unlikely and highly risky by those people.
Can we conclusively say that Hashlet payouts are better than BTC payouts per $1 invested?
|
|
|
|
Man I'd love to see a new specialized computer product which sole purpose is to run a BTC node.
Trezor has hardware for wallets, mining companies have hardware to mine, there are hardware units to make paper wallets...
why not a piece of hardware designed specifically to run a full node?
Because Bitcoin needs a node to be as simple and ubiquitous as possible and be as decentralized as possible without depending on specific hardware. What would be the incentives to run a dedicated hardware node other than being a Bitcoin enthusiast? |
|
|
|
Summing up what we have learned for Zen/GAWMiners/Josh email.
Hashlets are some kind of virtual shares of a larger mining/business operation. The yield of Hashlets is currently tied to a pool, but at least for the Prime Hashlets (most expensive) that could change at any point in the future. A Hashlets seems to have some software associated with it as seen in the variable hashing rate.
Money taken in form Hashlets sales isn’t used to directly play out daily yields, although that may be more of an accounting gimmick in some sense. Anyway, it seems likely that those funds are used to invest in the various mining operations. These operations produce the income that is paid back to the Hashlet owners. Various operations are in part:
- From at least scrypt, scrypt-N and bitcoin mining;
- Crypto Currency day trading;
- Mostly from leasing out hashing power to other companies.
The amount income paid back to the Hashlet owner is currently limited by a pool yield and reduced by a maintenance fee. The maintenance fee is could be related to the actual cost of mining hardware used in the profit generation for GAWMiners or it could be just an accounting expense used to reduce gains.
Slowly we are starting to get a picture of what these Hashlets are. Personally I don’t have a problem with virtual mining as I have done very well with B.Mine, B.Sell and B.Exch on HavelockInvestments. I haven’t done well with real mining.
I would discount the "day trading" source of "revenue" from that list. I have personal experience day trading for several years and know other traders and hedge fund managers. Not only is it an extremely hard profession but I seriously doubt any person would possess so many simultaneous skills in so many levels. Not to mention volatility has been low but even after the last price moves, this would require massive investments. Unless he has previous professional currency trading experience in Wall Street or is one of the 1%-5% of successful traders or he is a genius with an 180 IQ, I don't believe this is a realistic not to mention minimally sustainable source of cash flow for payouts. By the same token, it's statistically probable that he might also run the late shift for drinks as a bartender in a local bar collecting tips in bitcoins. hehe. We might probably add instead professional services revenue from cryptocurrency software or hardware development consulting to the list. Now that's at least more realistic if he has some experience on that that we don't know of. |
|
|
|
|
Is there a way to install the bitcoind package in Ubuntu to be able to run commands but without having to download the blockchain?
For example, I'd like to use getblock, getrawtransaction, etc but not having to get the entire blockchain....
|
|
|
|
Can someone please explain how exactly total return swaps work on bitfinex with USD. What type of risk is the offerer exposed to? Is the rate of return per day really .1469%? I dont understand how the rate of return could be so high without there being effective risk for the person offering the swap.
Risk is the exchange might go bankrupt. The rate was high because the expected return of bitcoin investment is high. If investor is expecting more than the rate being taken, they will have no problem paying the lending rate. Where did you get the 0.1469%? Today it's 0.04% so it's not high but low and it's low because the USD lender faces virtually no risk (other than systemic exchange issues, etc). For the offerer , there's low risk-return. It's high-risk (and potentially high return) for the USD BORROWER because if the bitcoin spent with the USD moves down too much, he might not be able to cover his debt fully. So even if if you were referring to an old, higher lending rate, that's still low risk compared to the bitcoin holder/USD borrower's. |
|
|
|
It's bearish. The amount of money loaned out to take longs is now at an all time high meaning prices have been supported on fake money. Now the supply of real money to lend out has dried up which results in the supply/demand you mentioned. This is going to cause interest rates to rise. The higher interest rates will force people to dump as it is no longer profitable to hold with the way the trend currently is. This could end up turning into a cascade of stop losses and margin calls as 40,000BTC purchased with loaned money are dumped.
uh, what? it means that people want to borrow 11 million USD, (to buy Bitcoins, what else?), but they can only get 1.1 million isn't that extremely bullish?! No. Loan demand is not bullish because in order to fill the loan, someone else has to front the USD, which means that those USD cannot be used to buy bitcoins. It all sums out to zero. The only thing that really causes growth is when new fiat is wired in, which actually increases the amount of USD which can be used to bid on Bitcoins at a given time. Actually I would prefer no loans were given out at all and that all USD were directly used to obtain real bitcoins. The margin state is actually more bearish than the non margin state. Here are some more reasons why: 1. The margin positions only exist on paper in the user's account. The only thing he can possibly do with his position is dump it to take the shiny green profit figure shown next it. The user cannot withdraw those bitcoins or participate in the bitcoin ecosystem. 2. The user is subject to an interest rate which means it is most likely intended only to do a short term trade, and if the trend is not rising fast enough to be worth interest rates then he will dump. 3. The above factors reveal the psychology of a margin user which is just to do short term trading, dump, and make profits rather than being a long term investor in Bitcoin. 4. The rising interest rates entice bitcoin holders to dump their bitcoins to obtain USD to fulfill the loan demand. 5. The margin user can be liquidated and forced to dump if the price drops too low. 6. If people with real USD decide to leave the exchange after the margin contract period is up, this will also force liquidate the margin users. FYI actually the loans can also be used to buy Litecoin and Darkcoin (duh) but the points above are stronger / more relevant. A couple of holes in this analysis. Without the benefit of any hindsight, those conditions do not necessarily represent a zero sum game or negate a bullish trend. You are assuming that both parties have the same risk profile and they'd necessarily use the same money to bid on bitcoin so that they always swing to either side. Otherwise, if what you are saying is true, one half of the USD swap's order book would always be empty or largely empty. I could just as easily wire in USD to lend it without being interested at all in bidding bitcoin and absorbing larger volatility. It's precisely the order book imbalance AND different risk profile that makes it a NON-zero sum game. Rising interest rates are normally accompanied by rising bitcoin price , which can produce vastly larger returns than the collected interest rate after selling the those coins and lending USD. In this case you are again making a similar assumption as before: that the higher-risk profile of a bitcoin speculator can just as easily be converted to the low-risk, low-return lender. Even after giving the benefit of the doubt why would they not instead lend bitcoins at a locked high rate if they start to see price stagnation or foresee a decline?? It doesn't necessarily have to be USD lending. It's not apples to oranges so in sum: I think the data and charts we see is so convoluted and represents different people with different interests and different investment horizons that it doesn't necessarily mean a move in any particular direction. Better use and return of time spent in understanding the REAL fundamentals and valuation modeling of bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
