Yo, bros...I got two words for ya's: cheap shares.
For real though, the fucking bull run from The Lion King where Mufasa died lasted longer than that schizophrenic pump attempt. And the bid on the float can't survive another dropped board seat.
Why would anyone listen to your advice? You clearly sold your shares for 0.098 BTC for a "sad loss" just before the news of the sample chips. You're either not very good at trading or are trying to manipulate the market. Also, from what I can see, very few shares traded down to around 0.13 BTC, but most trades are increasing in price. It's almost like someone is trying to cause a dump. I wonder who that could be.  |
|
|
|
Anyone else using these sites?
A few other people who didn't bother to do any research before investing in a ponzi that's pretty much identical to PB mining. People, do some research or you'll just end up like a PB victim. |
|
|
|
If you do the calculation manually though, you can use different difficulty adjustments for each period. Also, it's good to know what's going on behind the scenes with those calculators. |
|
|
|
Well with coins miners ripping me off and the PB mining crap. I had a few coins left and have researched and gone for these and another company. Will post my dealing with them and I have a good feeling. But this is a sector that is mainly run by people with no scruples and half don't care who they hurt. the bad eggs won't be going to heaven I know that one for sure lol pmpl
So let's see if these guys come good. Had some good customer service from them and hope in a few months or sooner to invest more in one or the other. But if these and the other site I have invested in go ponzi then I am out this game for good :-)
It is like russian rullete but should not be In this day and age should it :-!
You clearly didn't do your research. Check out Puppet's Cloundmining 101 (ponzi risk assessment). This company is almost certainly a ponzi and refuses to provide any evidence of its legitimacy. If you would have looked at the last few pages of this thread you would have known that. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but you might as well count that money lost. |
|
|
|
|
The following equation lets you calculate the reward:
Reward = Hash Rate * Block Reward * Time Period * 65535 / (2^48 * Difficulty)
At the current difficulty, over a period of a day, 1 Gh would mine:
1*10^9 * 25 * 86400 * 65535 / (2^48 * 40007470271) = 0.00001257 BTC.
First you need to calculate your electricity costs.
A 1 Gh/s miner that consumes 1 W and has electricity costs of 0.1 $/kWh would have a running cost of:
0.1 * 0.001 * 24 = 0.0024 $/day.
So, with the exchange rate at 350 $/BTC, a 1 W/Gh miner with electricity costs of 0.1 $/kWh would make
0.00001257 - (0.0024 / 350) = 0.00000571 BTC per day.
Once you've calculated your electricity costs, you then have to guess when the next difficulty adjustment will occur and calculate the amount mined for that period. You then subtract the electricity costs for that period.
A full difficulty period would last for 14 days if the network hash rate didn't change. If the hash rate increases, blocks are found faster and the round will be shorter. If the difficulty decreases, blocks are found slower and the the round will be longer. You guess when the next difficulty adjustment will occur, calculate the amount mined for the round and subtract the electricity again. You repeat this process until the amount mined is less than the cost of electricity, adding up all the results for the profitable periods. Finally, you go back to that last round, guess when mining will become unprofitable, calculate the BTC mined for that period and add it to tally. If this value is greater than the cost of the contract, you think you'll make a profit.
|
|
|
|
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/DifficultyThe expected number of hashes we need to calculate to find a block with difficulty D is therefore
D * 2**256 / (0xffff * 2**208) Yeah, the meaning is the same. Thanks for the clarification! An excellent approximation for calculating BTC per Gh per day while the block reward is 25 BTC is simply 502906 / Difficulty. |
|
|
|
I love the smell of money in the morning - it smells victory....  So did the PB mining victims...while they were still getting it. I took the risk and invested  Received Payment 102.00 USD from account "U4802888" to account U1285815. Batch: 72940727. Memo: Shopping Cart Payment. Deposit in ECCoin LOL, took the risk investing in your own HYIP, seems you forgot to switch to another account  I'd like to hear his explanation for that, it should be funny. |
|
|
|
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/DifficultyThe expected number of hashes we need to calculate to find a block with difficulty D is therefore
D * 2**256 / (0xffff * 2**208) Yeah, the meaning is the same.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not precisely the same.
2^32 = 2^48/2^16 = 4294967296
2^48/(2^16-1) = 4295032833
Compare the two when using 1 Th/s:
1*10^12 * 25 * 86400 / (2^32 * 40007470271) = 0.01257051 BTC/day
1*10^12 * 25 * 86400 * 65535 / (2^48 * 40007470271) = 0.01257032 BTC/day
You can see the values starting to diverge.
|
|
|
|
|
The way I see it, you should trust nobody and use the trust ratings for further investigation.
|
|
|
|
I am not defending you or der_troll. Personally, I feel you've a vested interest, but I don't have conviction or the power to influence anything.
Oh, I got that. I was just pointing out that I was using the trust system as intended. I've also just removed negative feedback from one service like I said I would if they could just provide a shred of evidence. I do have a vested interest, as does der_troll. My interest lies with customers choosing an unquestionably legitimate service. Der_troll's interest lies with customers choosing an almost certain cloud mining ponzi. Also, given that I used the Trust system how it's meant to be used based on the descriptions of the options, his negative feedback complaining about me abusing the trust system is hypocritical. That would be the actual abuse of the system given that I'm not a scammer and he has no reason to suspect me of being a scammer. |
|
|
|
You can give neutral feedback instead. Thats why its there.
I didn't want to leave neutral feedback. Like I said earlier, when leaving negative feedback it states. Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer. I'm using the system as intended. |
|
|
|
Mabsark negative trusting exclusively rivals does look as serving his own interest.
CanaryInTheMine is active and have taken action by removing der_troll and putting a new trust on Mabsark. Now the responsibility lies with him. If it feels to the other trusted members or Theymos that Mabsark is abusing his privilege then CanaryInTheMine will be held responsible and would likely lose his status.
I think the trust system works fine, would like to monitor this and see how it ends.
Everyone serves their own interests. That doesn't mean they can't serve the interests of others as well though. Stopping scams before they can rip people off is in the best interests of the whole community I'd say. Wouldn't you? Those companies I left negative feedback on are not rivals. They're scams. If they're not scams, then they'd be able to provide some form of evidence of legitimacy. They've been asked many times by many people and simply refuse to do so. If they do so, I will remove the feedback like I said. AMHashs's rivals are CEX.io, Hashnest, KNC Cloud and PetaMine. Do you see me leaving any negative feedback for those services? |
|
|
|
What do you know, if anything about the idea of smart property cloud mining? Could AM do something similar to the AMHash whereby the actual chips or miners could be cryptographically transferred from one owner to the next? Imagine I could sell my friend down the bar 1TH of AM cycles and they could then prove ownership and maybe even decide which pool to point those hashes at. AM would run the farm and then offer a choice of several different pools but take operational costs out of any rewards. ?
My thoughts on the idea is that it would be far to much hassle without enough benefits to make it feasible. Think about it, each contract would require a separate worker. So, for a 5 Ph/s mine with 1 Gh/s contracts you'd need a maximum of 5 million workers for customers and each miner would potentially require thousands of workers. That would create significantly more overhead and administration work. An easier solution to implement would be for AM to spread hash rate across numerous pools and let users choose from those pools that have open slots available. The list of pools could be adjusted according to demand. That way, you could just have 1 worker per miner and assign x amount of miners to y pool. |
|
|
|
In not expecting many people to buy any miners at all. I'm expecting cloud mining to dominate next year and I'm not the only one. From the article you mentioned: What are the challenges you see home miners and smaller miners having as we go forward with larger and larger mining farms and cloud mining coming into play?
We expect Bitcoin transaction processing farms to continue playing a large role in the industry in the near future. Home users will switch to Cloud services and portable consumer Bitcoin processing devices. We believe that in few years more and more users will have consumer electronics with Bitcoin transaction processor inside. Bitfury is working on such a portable bitcoin processor for home users – this is one of our next products that we plan to present in the near future. From this CCN article: The SP20 is a step to get miners into more people’s hands. How was it developed and what are your thoughts on home mining?
The SP20 is one of the most ambitious projects we have done. We wanted to make it so anyone can have a Bitcoin miner. We addressed the size and noise aspects of the previous generation miners with the SP20.
Home mining is not going to be around much longer though. The big mining farms are making it so you cannot compete or get ROI. Whether we like it or not mining is moving to the cloud. There will still be some home miners, but not many and most will be in the cloud. For me, the biggest problem for AM at the moment is communication. I think it absolutely essential that PR, sales, customer service and technical support are relocated outside of China as soon as possible. |
|
|
|
Someone's regretting selling their shares methinks!  |
|
|
|
I HAVE BEEN REFUNDED IN FULL BY PBMING just today as he promised
Show us the transaction then. |
|
|
|
So what was so special about the $1.551/DAY/TH Christmas promotion??
The Christmas Bonus is the upto 6% extra hash rate. The reduction in maintenance costs is just general improvement of service. |
|
|
|
1. Leaving -ve feedback on businesses that has not scammed anyone, but competing a company, where he is a shareholder.
2. Leaving -ve trust on people talking against HaveLock, because he is a shareholder over there.
3. Did not leave -ve trust on Hashie, though they were doing everything same the others are accused of, except that they started to resell the hash power of a company, where he is a shareholder.
1. I don't need to wait till they've ripped people off in order to leave negative feedback and my reasoning for doing so and conditions for removal are sound. When leaving negative feedback it quite clearly states: Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer. 2. I'm not a shareholder of Havelock. 3. I didn't leave negative feedback for most cloud mining companies, just a select few. |
|
|
|
|
The simplest equation is:
Reward = Hash Rate * Block Reward * Time Period * 65535 / (2^48 * Difficulty)
The hash rate is measured in hashes per second and the time period is measured in seconds. For example, at a difficulty of 40007470271, 1 Gh/s would mine:
1*10^9 * 25 * 86400 * 65535 / (2^48 * 40007470271) = 0.00001257 BTC/Day
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
