The rule is strange because there are no such rules in other bounties before, the rules for trading 10 consecutive days are just the team's goal to increase the volume
VANTA's effort to create a FAKE trading volume to attract more investors and exchanges alike. I'm still asking myself is that even legal? it is a fraudulent practice, of course. |
|
|
|
Vanta network is one of the few projects out there that has been able too trade above its ico price .. without ethereum and btc market.. so on my opinion instead of crying here on bitcointalk.. pick up a few for yourself while it's still around 1.2krw..
Look at this stupid meritless scavenger. you are not even worth to be called a hunter rather a scavenger. what a senseless pig! |
|
|
|
I think Vanta is not a scam. I noticed myself that Vanta changed the requirements and unfortunately they have the right to do so. That a bounty changes the requirements is nothing new and it's the same as when they demand KYC afterwards. I myself think it's unfair, but if something like this happened, I wouldn't call it scam. Only if Vanta doesn't pay out any token at all, it's a scam, but since they have even provided the token for trading, it is somehow not a scam. Nevertheless I understand your situation and would also be annoyed about it, but unfortunately that does not help you either.  Seems like you're the one here saying VANTA is not a SCAM, errand boy. Go back and tell your masters VANTA is a SCAM. I'm letting the whole world know how shading the VANTA project was. Forcing bounty hunters to trade VANTA for 10 days in order for VNT to get listed on Upbit, is that even legal? I think that is the question that I should be asking? VANTA scammed bounty hunters yet trying to scam Upbit as well. Dude, I just wrote my opinion on the subject. If you don't like it, I really don't care. Keep crying, maybe somebody will comfort you somewhere. I have nothing to do with Vanta, I just write my opinion here.  Why support it, if you really don't care, huh? VANTA is a SCAM! Fake volume, it lacks momentum. By the way, you may never get to Upbit  |
|
|
|
I think Vanta is not a scam. I noticed myself that Vanta changed the requirements and unfortunately they have the right to do so. That a bounty changes the requirements is nothing new and it's the same as when they demand KYC afterwards. I myself think it's unfair, but if something like this happened, I wouldn't call it scam. Only if Vanta doesn't pay out any token at all, it's a scam, but since they have even provided the token for trading, it is somehow not a scam. Nevertheless I understand your situation and would also be annoyed about it, but unfortunately that does not help you either. Seems like you're the only one here saying VANTA is not a SCAM, errand boy. Go back and tell your masters VANTA is a SCAM. I'm letting the whole world know how shading the VANTA project was. Forcing bounty hunters to trade VANTA for 10 days in order for VNT to get listed on Upbit, is that even legal? I think that is the question that I should be asking. VANTA scammed bounty hunters yet trying to scam Upbit as well. |
|
|
|
PowerWall 2 specs are as follows:
Usable Capacity: 13.5 kWh
Continuous discharge rate: 5 kW
So if you set the 1660Ti to draw 90 Watts, you can power about 55 of them from a PowerWall 2. So that's about 7 rigs with 7 or 8 GPUs each.
Keep in mind that after 2.7 hours, you have completely drained the PowerWall 2 module since the capacity is only 13.5 kWh.
A single 1660Ti will draw 2.16 kWh a day (90 Watts * 24 hours), so if you are looking for how many 1660Ti's a PowerWall 2 can keep running for 24 hours, that comes to 6.25, or a single rig with 6 GPUs.
I'll say it again, using any type of off grid battery system for powering mining rigs is a really bad idea except for a tiny experimental setup. Once you get into needing 100's of kWh a day to power your mining operation, a grid tied system makes much more sense.
Yesterday my 128 panel array produced 183.4 kWh and the peak output was around 26 kW from around 1pm to 2pm. If I was to use PowerWall 2's, I would have needed 14 of them to store that energy. Instead, I just pumped it all into the grid and now have 183.4 kWh of credit with the power company that I can pull back out at my leisure. So no upfront cost for PowerWall modules, and no worries about maintenance down the road.
Well, I'm finally mixing all the two in one (both the grid and solar) to cut the high cost from the grid. During the day time, I will use solar power while in the night when there is no sun then I'll be using the grid power. I was planning to go completely off-grid when it comes to power because my goal is long-term. Once my power is completely off-grid I don't have to worry about paying the power bills anymore. |
|
|
|
I spent 6 weeks working on a project called VANTA and finally end up without a payment. I started working on VANTA since from the 1st week to the final and yet I got no payment. After we started working for VANTA 3 weeks in, the Bounty manager comes out with a new rule saying, everyone must trade 2308 VNT on Allbit for 10 consecutive days, if not, no payment. If there was that rule from the beginning many would not join the campaign. It's funny to see how this kind of projects conspire with the bounty managers and work away with our tokens every day. I was previously scammed in projects such as HDAC, Envion, REGA, GIZER, Confido, EOSex, and now VANTA. I started thinking now is time say enough for that. Note: I even traded VNT on Allbit for about 3-4 days and I stopped because I was busy working on other projects as well. By the way, I'm a proud bounty hunter, not a trader and ain't trading for nobody  trading is different from the bounty hunting. For VANTA, if you think stealing our tokens (for not trading 10 days) is good, add them to your supply and surpass bitcoin in market cap. So guys, what is your take on VANTA, A scam or not? For me, any project that is not legit enough to pay the bounty hunters is not worth investing. This should go to the scam accusation. This is definitely a scam, they cant force anyone to trade for 10 consecutive days for their coin. That is a RED FLAG. I guess don't do any bounty projects anymore. I'm surprised that https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=228301 btcltcdigger is the bounty manager of this campaign he is my bounty manager in many campaign that I've participated in and always received my stakes you should a thread in scam section so you will have a proper forum forum for this. The truth is people change over time. thus, you don't have to trust them all the time. Like me last year, I had an issue, with my favorite manager of all-time, Sylon about some bounty. I don't why many good managers betray their buddies. it is heartbreaking to see them betraying us all the time. |
|
|
|
|
Ok, hence GTX 1660ti consumes less power compared to RTX 2080ti - May I still use Powerwall 2 to power the 1660ti rigs?
If not, the industrial power setup is the solution then e.g. Tesla Powerpack or Tesvolt TLC 1000 1MW setup.
I want to know if PowerWall 2 can power 1660ti rig and how many to be exact? I like to use Powerwall because I can hang them anywhere I want.
But if they can't provide enough power for at least 100 GPUs 1660ti(s) then there is no need to be looking all fancy anymore.
|
|
|
|
I spent 6 weeks working on a project called VANTA and finally end up without a payment. I started working on VANTA since from the 1st week to the final and yet I got no payment. After we started working for VANTA 3 weeks in, the Bounty manager comes out with a new rule saying, everyone must trade 2308 VNT on Allbit for 10 consecutive days, if not, no payment. If there was that rule from the beginning many would not join the campaign. It's funny to see how this kind of projects conspire with the bounty managers and work away with our tokens every day. I was previously scammed in projects such as HDAC, Envion, REGA, GIZER, Confido, EOSex, and now VANTA. I started thinking now is time say enough for that. Note: I even traded VNT on Allbit for about 3-4 days and I stopped because I was busy working on other projects as well. By the way, I'm a proud bounty hunter, not a trader and ain't trading for nobody trading is different from the bounty hunting. For VANTA, if you think stealing our tokens (for not trading 10 days) is good, add them to your supply and surpass bitcoin in market cap. So guys, what is your take on VANTA, A scam or not? For me, any project that is not legit enough to pay the bounty hunters is not worth investing. This should go to the scam accusation. This is definitely a scam, they cant force anyone to trade for 10 consecutive days for their coin. That is a RED FLAG. I guess don't do any bounty projects anymore. I already posted one here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5125099.msg50335196#msg50335196Thanks for the help. I really appreciate it. |
|
|
|
I spent 6 weeks working on a project called VANTA and finally end up without a payment. I started working on VANTA since from the 1st week to the final and yet I got no payment. After we started working for VANTA 3 weeks in, the Bounty manager comes out with a new rule saying, everyone must trade 2308 VNT on AllBit for 10 consecutive days, if not, no payment. Among the bounty rules, no KYC - but on AllBit KYC is mandatory! If that rule was there from the beginning many would not join the campaign including myself. The bounty program was originally 4 weeks, the 2 weeks was added later when they implemented the new rule for 10 days trading on Allbit. The worst thing is yet to come after the bounty manager finished calculating the stakes once handle to the VANTA Team for payment they cut down our tokens from 10/1 - meaning if you get 100k VNT is down to 10k VNT. It's funny to see how this kind of projects conspire with the bounty managers and work away with our tokens every day. I was previously scammed in projects such as HDAC, Envion, REGA, GIZER, Confido, EOSex, and now VANTA. Now, I started thinking it's time to say enough for that. Note: I even traded VNT on Allbit for about 3-4 days and I stopped because I was busy working on other projects as well. By the way, I'm a proud bounty hunter, not a trader and ain't trading for nobody. Trading is different from bounty hunting. For VANTA, if you think stealing our tokens (for not trading 10 days) is good, add them to your supply and surpass bitcoin on market cap. So guys, what is your take on VANTA, A scam or not? For me, any project that is not legit enough to pay the bounty hunters is not worth investing. Thanks for the support everyone. Always remember, united we stand, divided we fall! |
|
|
|
I spent 6 weeks working on a project called VANTA and finally end up without a payment. I started working on VANTA since from the 1st week to the final and yet I got no payment. After we started working for VANTA 3 weeks in, the Bounty manager comes out with a new rule saying, everyone must trade 2308 VNT on AllBit for 10 consecutive days, if not, no payment. Among the bounty rules, no KYC - but on AllBit KYC is mandatory! If that rule was there from the beginning many would not join the campaign including myself. The bounty program was originally 4 weeks, the 2 weeks was added later when they implemented the new rule for 10 days trading on Allbit. The worst thing is yet to come after the bounty manager finished calculating the stakes once handle to the VANTA Team for payment they cut down our tokens from 10/1 - meaning if you get 100k VNT is down to 10k VNT. It's funny to see how this kind of projects conspire with the bounty managers and work away with our tokens every day. I was previously scammed in projects such as HDAC, Envion, REGA, GIZER, Confido, EOSex, and now VANTA. Now, I started thinking it's time to say enough for that. Note: I even traded VNT on Allbit for about 3-4 days and I stopped because I was busy working on other projects as well. By the way, I'm a proud bounty hunter, not a trader and ain't trading for nobody. Trading is different from bounty hunting. For VANTA, if you think stealing our tokens (for not trading 10 days) is good, add them to your supply and try to surpass bitcoin on market cap. So guys, what is your take on VANTA, A scam or not? For me, any project that is not legit enough to pay the bounty hunters is not worth investing. Thanks for the support everyone. Remember, united we stand, divided we fall! |
|
|
|
JAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJJA
omg people are just dumb!!!! hey CRYPTO IS ALMOST DEAD, NO PROFIT AT ALL, HUGE MARGINAL TRADERS, THAT HAD BEEN DUMPING AND PUMPING COINS, DON'T EVEN WANT TO PLAY ANYMORE, REASON WHY THE MARKET HAS BEEN ALMOST FLAT FOR ABOUT 1 MONTH, ROI (6 RX 570 X 200$ EACH, + ALL THE HARDWARE NEEDED, 1500$, CAN TAKE YOU TO ROI FROM 5 TO 6 YEARS AT CURRENT PRICES, EVEN MORE DEPENDING ON HARDWARE, BUT HEY!! I WILL BET ALL I HAVE FOR A FUTURE THAT DOES NOT EXIST AT ALL.
And you want to spend a huge amount of money in solar power and at least 50.000$ only in gpus, to ROI when???
When i see 142.000GH/s on the ETH network, at current prices, i understand why many people have lost all their money in this shitty market.
Guys, why this dude sounds angry? Crypto mining is a hubby that I like to try not for profit yet but for fun and you should at least get one. The real crypto enthusiasts are not into crypto to get rich like the majority of the people. we are just here to join the revolution and have a story to tell our grandchildren. Note: crypto is not a get rich quick scheme. thus, many of us here are not looking for one yet. |
|
|
|
No... You've got it all wrong. For power, I have to invest only $175,000 for 2 MWh batteries + 150 solar panels (off-the-grid) which would power up to 400 RTX 2080Ti GPUs.
so, 400 x 2080Ti GPUs = 400x 0.2kW = 80kW solar panels must be in 400-800kW range, then (i.e 1300 - 2600 panels, and not 150 ) I though he said 50 2080TI not 400 lol, for 400 of those you would need like an accre of solar panels. Instead you should maybe do 600 1660ti maybe , heck 800 1660 TI would give you the same hash power as 400 2080TI at about half the power, you would need far more space tho I guess 1660ti is the solution. it only costs around $300 or less It's cheaper, lighter, smaller, and it has less energy consumption compared to 2080ti Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Seemingly As Fast As Maxwell GTX Titan X At $279As per notorious leaker TUM_APISAK's tip, Nvidia's upcoming GeForce GTX 1660 Ti has been benchmarked by an unknown source with Square Enix's Final Fantasy XV benchmark tool. The GeForce GTX 1660 Ti certainly appears to give the GeForce GTX Titan X (Maxwell) a run for its money.  As a quick recap, the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is going to be Nvidia's first Turing-powered 12nm gaming graphics card that will not come with the real-time ray tracing capability. Built around the brand-new Turing TU116 graphics processor, the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti has been rumored to come with 1,536 CUDA cores operating at an alleged 1,500MHz base clock and 1,770MHz boost clock. The 6GB or 3GB of GDDR6 memory, on the other hand, runs at 1,500MHz (12,000MHz effective) across a 192-bit memory bus. Reference: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/gtx-1660-ti-leaked-benchmarks-pricing,38630.html RTX 1660ti it is, finally! |
|
|
|
Hello guys, I was navigating through the web and I found this information about RTX 2080ti GPU. Well, the question is what is the exact power consumption for mining? I guess based on this information, a 2080ti gpu is consuming ~279 watts (for gaming) ok, let's say ~ 300 watts for mining Therefore, a single 13.5 kWh Tesla PowerWall 2 will power approximately 45 GPUs. Guys, correct me if i'm wrong, i'm no expert on this... thanks 6 Tesla PowerWall 2s will roughly power 270 RTX 2080ti GPUs... 12 Tesla PowerWall 2s will roughly power 540 RTX 2080ti GPUs. But only if i'm right! Lol this is funny to read , he thinks it provides that power over 24 hrs smh What's funny about this? I'm here to learn but I don't know about you, Mr. Einstein  |
|
|
|
Hello guys, I was navigating through the web and I found this information about RTX 2080ti GPU. Well, the question is what is the exact power consumption for mining? I guess based on this information, a 2080ti gpu is consuming ~279 watts (for gaming) ok, let's say ~ 300 watts for mining Therefore, a single 13.5 kWh Tesla PowerWall 2 will power approximately 45 GPUs. Guys, correct me if i'm wrong, i'm no expert on this... thanks 6 Tesla PowerWall 2s will roughly power 270 RTX 2080ti GPUs... 12 Tesla PowerWall 2s will roughly power 540 RTX 2080ti GPUs. But only if i'm right! |
|
|
|
Practical answer is your BTC adress has to start with 3 or bc1 to be accepted in the campaign. But then again registration are closed, again.
Bitcoin Address that starts with "3" are not always segwit address as far as I know. I don't know much about segwit address but my memory still serves me right about some informations. Just like my Bitcoin address (in my profile) it starts with 3 but it's not a segwit address (or it is?). Anyway it's so cool that this campaign is still a competitive one. I still remember that I used to be one of those options So, what is it then if not SegWit? A legacy address? I know bench32 address is also a SegWit supported and it doesn't start with "3" rather bc1. You need you to provide more information about your argument because all bitcoin addresses starting with "3" are SegWit addresses. |
|
|
|
I've run these numbers before. 'OgNasty' is correct. You would need AT LEAST $500,000 in solar alone (not including batteries) for your 50x 1080ti setup to be 100% run on solar. Could even run you higher (~$1million). Good luck. ROI > 30 years.
No... You've got it all wrong. For power, I have to invest only $175,000 for 2 MWh batteries + 150 solar panels (off-the-grid) which would power up to 400 RTX 2080Ti GPUs. And the cost for 400 2080Ti GPUs is somewhere around $520,000. For land, this is going to cost me around $30,000 + miscellaneous ~ $20,000. The grand total of the initial investment is going to be $745,000, not a million. In the beginning, the return is going to look small $400-$500/day - After a year, once we got another market boom similar to 2017 - I don't need 30 years to get the ROI, I'll see it in a matter of months, or a year or so max  Let's do the math, at the market boom the average crypto gets 10x in value. So, let's take $400/day x 365 days = $146,000 Average crypto gets 10x in value during a market boom. Therefore, $146,000 x 10 = $1,460,000 for the year in the bull market. You see I told you I'll get my ROI in a year or so... The only thing to wait for is the next market boom |
|
|
|
Take a look at my Green Energy Project: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1783328.0I'm doing something similar with a Powerwall 2 and some solar/wind/man energy. I must say though, without the grid it would be very difficult to keep these powered a majority of the time. The Powerwall 2 has 13.5 kWh of power storage. Lets say you get 10 hours a day of sunlight, which leaves 14 hours of the day needing to be powered by the Powerwall 2. A single 2080 ti would use around 5 kWh during that period. This means you would likely only be able to power 2-3 2080 ti gpus per Powerwall 2. For 50 of them, you'd be looking at >17 Powerwalls 2s to keep them running off the grid. You'd also need to produce >400 kWh of solar electricity per day. A solar system that size would likely cost you more than $200,000, with another $120,000 for the Powerwall 2s and another $65,000 for the GPUs. It can definitely be done, but you're looking at spending over $400,000 before you figure in the costs of cooling and space to fit all those solar panels and Powerwalls. Seems like a lot of effort and risk for $45/day in income. For power, I found: https://www.tesvolt.com/en/tps.html1. Tesvolt Lithium Battery Storage 500 kWh TLC 500 2. Tesvolt Lithium Battery Storage 1MWh TLC 1000 PowerWalls can't deliver enough energy to my farm. |
|
|
|
 Miguel Vias, the head of XRP markets at Ripple, denied allegations of paying off Coinbase to list XRP on their cryptocurrency exchange. The response followed a series of bribery accusations shot towards Coinbase after its sudden announcement of adding XRP trading pairs to its platform on Feb 26. In contrast, the US exchange had earlier remained cautious of the said listing. As many speculate, Coinbase’s careful approach was due to XRP’s controversial history with Ripple Labs, a San Francisco startup that owns 60% of XRP – a stock worth billions of dollars. What also concerned the company was a pending $167.7 million class-action lawsuit against Ripple which would determine whether or not XRP is a security asset. However, all the genuine concerns Coinbase had were washed aside almost too suddenly, at least according to Allistair Milne. The CIO of Altana Digital Currency Fund reached Coinbase’s communications’ director, Elliott Suthers via an email with a set of interrogative questions. He asked Suthers whether or not Coinbase sought the permission of either the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or Commodity and Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) before offering XRP to the public. Milne also asked whether there was a private deal between Coinbase and Ripple for listing XRP pairs. According to a screenshot published February 26, Suthers told Milne that Coinbase was happy to discuss his questions “off the record.” Milne took the response as a piece of evidence proving that Ripple had bribed Coinbase. “You god damn right they did,” Milne hashtagged. Did Ripple pay Coinbase for their token being listed? "we're not discussing publicly"#xrp #youregoddamnrighttheydid pic.twitter.com/cuuxWGt6ch — Alistair Milne (@alistairmilne) February 26, 2019 Vias: XRP Not Our TokenMiguel Vias contradicted Milne’s statement in a February 28 tweet. He clarified that Ripple didn’t pay Coinbase anything to make the XRP listing happen. Vias also claimed that XRP was not their token. We’re happy to go on the record. Coinbase’s listing of XRP (also, not “our token”) was Coinbase’s independent decision – we did not give them anything to make it happen. https://t.co/xTVvACqsQa — Miguel Vias ⚡ (@miguelvias) February 27, 2019 The “not our token” theory signified that Ripple, as a company, didn’t issue XRP tokens. Ripple had faced a lot of flack for holding a majority of XRP stakes. In response, the company decided to lock their 55 billion XRP tokens away from themselves – in a cryptographic escrow account. The time-based smart contracts would release 1 billion XRP on the 1st of every month. At the end of each month, Ripple would place the remaining unused tokens into a new escrow account set to expire in another 55 months from creation. Still, Ripple had a say when it came to distributing XRP tokens. On October 13, 2017, Ripple launched a RippleNet accelerator program to increase the “XRP utility.” The company allocated a $300 million XRP fund from its escrow holdings and declared that it would reward those financial institutions with XRP that test RippleNet payment framework. As a result, Ripple was able to attract partnerships from mainstream financial firms. “This rebate — available in XRP or USD — is designed to accelerate adoption and usage of Ripple solutions.” the post read. Incentivization, or free distributions, became one of the significant tools for Ripple to boost XRP adoption. And a Bloomberg report published in April 2018 revealed the same. The $100 Million Incentive?Bloomberg reported that Ripple had suggested paying financial incentives to crypto exchanges Gemini and Coinbase for XRP listing. In Coinbase’s case, Ripple had allegedly offered to lend $100 million in XRP to start letting its users trade the token. The firm had reportedly made a similar offer to Gemini – albeit amounting to $1 million. Milne reiterated his accusation with the Bloomberg article. He asked Vias whether Ripple and Coinbase exchanged any assets in over the past 12 months or more. Milne also found it hard to believe that Coinbase, a company embroiled in multi-lawsuit accusations of insider trading surrounding its Bitcoin Cash listing, didn’t take a single penny but yet listed XRP. Has there been *any* transfer of assets between Ripple and Coinbase in the past year or so? Of any sort (loan, donation, deposit, etc.)? Extremely hard to believe Ripple offered $100mil of assets and then Coinbase decided to receive 0 benefit https://t.co/O9KETqsQuS — Alistair Milne (@alistairmilne) February 27, 2019 The Coinbase NostalgiaOn December 19, 2017, Coinbase had made a surprise announcement that it was adding Bitcoin Cash trading option to its platform. Earlier, the company had refused to list the said crypto asset, so the u-turn took the trading community by surprise. Indeed, the price of Bitcoin Cash surged on the news within minutes, reaching as high as $1,000. In response, Coinbase canceled and all the further BCH trades citing liquidity issues. According to Jeffery Berk, the primary plaintiff in the lawsuit filed May 2018, insiders were able to flood GDAX – a crypto trading platform owned by Coinbase – with BCH orders soon after the news went public. Coinbase, based on an internal investigation’s outcome, claimed that no such Bitcoin Cash insider trading took place. If both companies go on the record that there has been no transference of value in Coinbase's favour whatsoever (easy to do) I'll retract and apologise. So far, both are being careful with their choice of words. — Alistair Milne (@alistairmilne) February 28, 2019 Why would a regulated exchange risk its neck to list unproven securities? The jury is still out. Reference: https://www.ccn.com/ripple-denies-bribing-coinbase-xrp |
|
|
|
 The industry’s enthusiasm for a Bitcoin ETF (exchange-traded fund) appears to be waning — if you judge that by the dearth of new comment letters to the Securities and Exchange Commission in support of the investment vehicle. The SEC received just seven comment letters from the public in response to a solicitation for feedback it had requested in February 2019. Of those, six urged the agency to reject the application. (That’s around 84%.) Reference: https://www.ccn.com/bitcoin-etf-sec-receives-84-negative-feedback-on-application |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
