|
I want to warn you that coupon code are not transferrable. At least the ones that MtGox offers for free to their existing customers.
MtGox emailed me a free Yubikey coupon code. I sold it to someone. But MtGox ended up shipping the Yubikey to my address, tied to my MtGox account. MtGox Support confirmed that coupons are tied to the account they are first offered with.
|
|
|
|
I don't play around with stuff that I don't understand
Then don't run around shouting "scam!" on stuff you don't understand. You have the right, and it is normal for you to be suspicious about it. But as I said, preface your criticism with "I think that", or "it seems to me that". |
|
|
|
The best available SHA256 semiconductor IP on the market does 73 Mhash/Joule at 130nm. I have tracked it myself, see: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=95762.0Therefore, if BFL delivers anything significantly above 73 Mhash/Joule (even if it is a mere shrink from 130nm to 65nm), it is a very strong indicator that the tech was optimized specifically for BFL or by BFL (even a shrink would require rework). This is why my bet specifies a Mhash/Joule number. If BFL was just re-using an existing non-efficient SHA256 implementation, they would fail to meet the Mhash/Joule target, and you would win the bet. All you need is to tell me which Mhash/Joule target would give you enough confidence to bet  |
|
|
|
Also... I do not like the stipulations outlined in id=665 for several reasons. Among them, the opportunity for BFL to simply buy someone elses technology exist. And, of course, being 10 months behind schedule is questionable to say the least.
Why do you care? As long as they deliver ASICs, I don't care how or who makes them, this is literally none of my business. Bet #665 was written to allow BFL to be 8 months late, not 10. This allowance is because we all know they suck at planning. I don't care much because BFL has none of my money and there was never any chance that they would get any. The only reason I care at all is that if/when the 'ASIC vendor scam' hits home it will probably be right up there near the top in terms of events which resulted in Bitcoiners being separated from their money. You did not answer my question: why do you care in the context of the bet if BFL buys someone else's technology? "Oh no, if they buy ASICs from someone, then they might deliver"... makes you look not confident about your scamming accusations. It is like saying "I am not betting because I might lose the bet". If so, then just say the latter. |
|
|
|
Je cherche des copies haute-qualités (576p ou 720p minimum, mpeg4/h264, ac3/dts) de ces films: Edit: films trouvés enlevés de la liste. Ces films sont impossibles à trouver localement (Californie). Les copies sur le Net sont réencodés en trop mauvaise qualité  Je suis prêt à rémunérer 0.8 BTC par film, ou plus pour disques DVD/BluRay usés originaux. Contactez moi par email: m.bevand at gmail.com |
|
|
|
As to the bet, it sounds like you and I agree that BFL has been utterly deceitful in efforts to get people to send them pre-order money. Where we differ is that I consider this scamming while you do not. Ergo, there doesn't seem to be much to bet about.
No, I don't think that BFL is deceitful, but that they are simply overly optimistic w.r.t. timelines. |
|
|
|
...
Am I misreading your "certainty"?
...
Yes, and more than that. I started out with a general musing on how long it would be before 'marks' of a hypothetical ASIC scam operation got suspicious when there was a failure to deliver. I didn't say anything about BFL. Yes, you said this about all ASIC manufacturers (or was it just BFL? either way BFL is included in your criticism): On roughly the same topic, it would be interesting to see a plot of the months past initial ASIC delivery estimates vs. the number of pre-order 'customers' who sense they have likely been swindled.
But you just clarified you were not "certain" of this swindling accusation. I advise you to word carefully your criticism next time. I took you as a troll making baseless accusations, when in fact, you were just expressing a "probability". I do not like the stipulations outlined in id=665 for several reasons. Among them, the opportunity for BFL to simply buy someone elses technology exist. And, of course, being 10 months behind schedule is questionable to say the least.
Why do you care? As long as they deliver ASICs, I don't care how or who makes them, this is literally none of my business. Bet #665 was written to allow BFL to be 8 months late, not 10. This allowance is because we all know they suck at planning. |
|
|
|
No, I am not that guy. But I did introduce the idea of down-plugging x16 cards in x1 slots to the Bitcoin community.
16x to 1 will not work as it still takes the bit that's broke off. I think you didn't read/understand what I wrote. |
|
|
|
|
Sold 1 more mobo. OP updated.
|
|
|
|
|
You made a mistake. What 6900 series? 6950, 6970, 6990?
For example at $0.11/kWh, with a stock 6990 (1.9 Mhash/Joule), it costs $8.20 to mine 1 BTC worth $13.50. So it is profitable. Not much, but profitable.
|
|
|
|
Find an example of where I was 'so certain' that BFL was a scam.
Here, in this thread: you stated, as if it was a matter of fact: "[they] never did have any plan or make any steps toward actually producing an ASIC Bitcoin mining chip." That is a very blunt statement! Am I misreading your "certainty"? If so, would you want to retract this statement? I suggest you edit your post to communicate what you truly meant, for example your UNcertainty by saying "I believe there is a chance that they never did plan to..."? A trouble with bets of this nature is that it is both very cumbersome to line out the details of what constitutes a win or loss.
That said, I am at this point pretty sure that BFL is a scam by my definition. Here's the deal I would do, and I'll do it for 20 BTC (assuming my spending money is still available in instawallet and I don't have to go to my deep storage):
1) BFL had no program which could have feasibly produced, in time for their initial announced ship date of Oct 2012,
1a) a 60nm ASIC dedicated to Bitcoin mining
1b) largely their own design or a design commissioned by them for their exclusive use
1c) and for use only by them if _they_ so chose
These conditions (60nm, Oct 2012...) effectively retract the statement you made above ("[they] never did have any plan or make any steps toward actually producing an ASIC Bitcoin mining chip"), as you seem to want to redefine the bet so that you win even if BFL makes ASIC(!) that would not quite match the exact specs and timeline they claimed. So, I did push you to reject a bet that ASICs will not be produced, after all  Your new position actually matches closely what I believe myself (me too I doubt they could have feasibly made the chips alone by Oct 2012, and me too I doubt they will use 60nm, I estimate they will use 65nm.) Therefore where is our disagreement, what can we bet on? My beliefs are very precisely defined in: http://betsofbitco.in/item?id=665 Will you take them as they are written? You will notice they make performance efficiency claims (350+ Mhash/Joule) that can be measured by anybody (as opposed to betting on "60nm", since it would be harder to verify). I do have 20+ BTC available. PS: Graet is an escrow often use for hardware sales. I like the idea of the losing bet being gifted to the Bitcoin Foundation. |
|
|
|
I don't play around with penny-ante games of chance. I normally target large long term trends. Generally speaking winning such a bet would be a hollow victory and losing one would utterly suck.
By your own words, this is not a game of chance, since you are so certain that ASIC designers are swindlers who never plan to make an ASIC. Or... are you saying there is a chance that ASICs are legitimate? One way or another, I'm don't trust anyone to sit on my BTC, and in particular not some scungy betting parlor operator (who will want a cut.)
Fine. I offer you to take this bet, 1:1 odds against me, but with coins escrowed by a trusted third-party. I suggest Graet (operator of ozcoin, who will not take a cut). Deal? |
|
|
|
I mean 'Swindled' as in flat out swindled. By people who noticed that with a little effort and some industry-specific lingo they could get a lot of people to send them money. And never did have any plan or make any steps toward actually producing an ASIC Bitcoin mining chip.
I also have not seen a lot of any customers express the belief that they'll never receive their ASICS in spite of the now 4 month delays. What I am musing about is how many months (or years) without delivery would the condition exist. And what would be the shape of the slope formed by 'marks' losing hope.
Please put your money were your mouth is by betting against "Butterfly Labs ASIC is real". Right now your side is at 51.55 BTC. If you are right, you will roughly triple your coins. But I suspect you are full of it, and are not going to bet a single coin... |
|
|
|
ASICs don't make any sense, if they exist and are profitable, no one in their right mind would be selling them.
Without selling them, ASICs designers would not have enough capital to have them manufactured in the first place. Therefore they must sell pre-orders (or shares in a mining operation), in order to make them. |
|
|
|
|
I sold 2 more mobos - only 5 left! Updated OP.
|
|
|
|
1 mobo shipped to 55347?
$111.35 or the equivalent in coins. Email me to buy: m.bevand at gmail.com |
|
|
|
My question about IP law is a mocking statement.
Then edit your post to make it clear that you know they have laws. Be literal in your criticism instead of making it implicit or ambiguous, and letting the reader guess what you mean. And take your own advice: state facts (like I did), for example by citing known infringement cases. Instead you added nothing of value to this thread. If you really are a grown-up adult, either learn to criticize like one, or stay quiet. |
|
|
|
I normally dont post in pointless discussion... but China has IP protection laws? What the fck have you been living under?
Yes, China has IP laws. China has a Patent Law, a Trademark Law and a Copyright Law. China joined WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) in 1980 (probably before you were born, hence your ignorance of it ). They have a State Intellectual Property Office to enforce them. Sure, they have many infrigers. Enforcing these laws is tough, because too often local governments tend to protect local businesses instead of enforcing legislation coming from their own government. But you can't go around spreading lies that China has no such laws. |
|
|
|
|
I sold the last 2 5970s. Updated OP.
Thanks for the positive feedback, all.
|
|
|
|
|
No, I am not that guy. But I did introduce the idea of down-plugging x16 cards in x1 slots to the Bitcoin community.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
