The Ethreum Classic price is less than 4% of the Ethereum price. So it is not profitable to mine now .
There is something called "difficulty". |
|
|
|
|
That's too bad. The sum is indeed a big one. Will try to help you via Twitter.
|
|
|
|
Looks like Razorcoin started as something as a service and it is probably not related with the altcoin, BUT: 1. Exactly in May 2014 I bought 7 x 60MH ASICs and RazorCoin was one of the coins, which I mined. I was able to mine like $1000-$1300 worth of coins/day. I was one of the people, which were screwed the most by Weiner and company, but that's not important. More important is that I followed their thread and I've never seen (at least I don't remember) some of the "other" Razor guys to say that Weiner & company stole "something" (whether it is a coin or name). 2. I invited the guy to an open discussion, but he insisted to contact him via e-mail. Something else:  Do you know why you can't see his tweets in FailCommunity's profile? Because he blocked the account! |
|
|
|
P.S. I will tweet to Cointelegraph, but I don't blame them. They just write articles and it's their business, though I do agree that scams should not be promoted. It's like blaming the exchanges that particular coin is a scam. Actually it isn't the same. An exchange can argue that it isn't responsible for what a coin project ultimately does, but a news website has responsibilities to unbiased and factual journalism. A cursory glance at the facts related to 'Razormind' and this 'crowdfunding' raises sufficient concerns that would warrant not posting the article in the first place. It isn't like CT have to post an anti-Razormind or anti-DeOS piece, either, they simply should not have posted anything at all about this obviously shady project. But to not only fail in that regards but to actually fucking make statements prior to the promoted ICO implying that it is a serious contender to MS and IBM et al. smacks of highly suspect motivation to do so. Well, I have to agree with you. I made this statement, because I don't have anything against Cointelegraph, but they indeed failed with these 2 articles (they wrote two articles about Razormind). P.S. Don't know you, but already like you. Good thinking! That is how people should discuss things and work for the prosperity of cryptocurrencies. |
|
|
|
What this means is that if bitcoin gets screwed by stupid and arrogant decision coming from lead devs all u can do is blame ur tits.
ROFLMAO! I couldn't have said it better!  But this guy continues to compare Ethereum with Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
What.The.Actual.Fuck?
LOL. Yeah, definitely legit, #shutupandtakemymoney.
So what's worse here in your opinion, the obvious scam ICO or Cointelegraph's tacit promotion for it in the face of easily-checked and recognised warning signs?
That's actually the guy (Jawad). How "professional", eh? P.S. I will tweet to Cointelegraph, but I don't blame them. They just write articles and it's their business, though I do agree that scams should not be promoted. It's like blaming the exchanges that particular coin is a scam. Tweet: https://twitter.com/FAILCommunity/status/757512318020423680 |
|
|
|
You can't gather $200 million to make experiments were there is possibility for failures. They somehow fixed things, but fact is that a lot of people lost money. There are not only coins/assets/platforms/DAO's, there are also tradings. A lot of people bought on higher prices. Forking is always a bad news (when it is made to fix an exploited code), which hurts "investors".
I don't remember there was a promise of profits for everyone and never losses, do you? Take Bitcoin, it is deliberately called an experiment, beta software after 8 years, because it can fail completely. "Investors" are kids who want to get rich quick, well it's not how it works, they must learn or get out of the kitchen if it's hot. Nobody asked you to mine/buy Bitcoin and nobody asked for money to create it. Asking for money and making an offer to invest in a high risk project with no guarantees are two different things. I didn't read ETH's contract because I don't own it, but were there guarantees of profits? I don't think so even though I didn't read it. You want guarantees? Find something stable, municipal bonds lol, crypto is very high risk. You know, hackers hack it all the time. You can't have a cake and eat it too. But you kids think you're entitled to both getting profits and no risk, not going to happen. You should refrain from such stupid statements (and "attacks"), because of 3 reasons: 1. What do you mean no guarantees? They had $200 million reasons not to make such stupid mistakes (that was (at least in the coders view) a stupid mistake)), which can hurt people's "investments". 2. Who is saying that they must guarantee profits? Is your IQ equal to a room temperature? 3. Kids? I am 35-years old. When I say no guarantees I mean no guarantees, don't matter if it's $200 or $200 million. You're 35 and don't know that investing is not safe and there are no guarantees? Keep learning. I am simply speechless.  |
|
|
|
In case of ethereum, this might be a very controversial statement. I think that foundation did indeed ask for money.
It's not controversial at all. The did asked for money, but the guy still tries to compare ETH and Bitcoin. P.S. I'm not against raising funds, I even approve it. All I am saying that I don't like how they handle things. |
|
|
|
You can't gather $200 million to make experiments were there is possibility for failures. They somehow fixed things, but fact is that a lot of people lost money. There are not only coins/assets/platforms/DAO's, there are also tradings. A lot of people bought on higher prices. Forking is always a bad news (when it is made to fix an exploited code), which hurts "investors".
I don't remember there was a promise of profits for everyone and never losses, do you? Take Bitcoin, it is deliberately called an experiment, beta software after 8 years, because it can fail completely. "Investors" are kids who want to get rich quick, well it's not how it works, they must learn or get out of the kitchen if it's hot. Nobody asked you to mine/buy Bitcoin and nobody asked for money to create it. Asking for money and making an offer to invest in a high risk project with no guarantees are two different things. I didn't read ETH's contract because I don't own it, but were there guarantees of profits? I don't think so even though I didn't read it. You want guarantees? Find something stable, municipal bonds lol, crypto is very high risk. You know, hackers hack it all the time. You can't have a cake and eat it too. But you kids think you're entitled to both getting profits and no risk, not going to happen. You should refrain from such stupid statements (and "attacks"), because of 3 reasons: 1. What do you mean no guarantees? They had $200 million reasons not to make such stupid mistakes (that was (at least in the coders view) a stupid mistake)), which can hurt people's "investments". 2. Who is saying that they must guarantee profits? Is your IQ equal to a room temperature? 3. Kids? I am 35-years old. |
|
|
|
You can't gather $200 million to make experiments were there is possibility for failures. They somehow fixed things, but fact is that a lot of people lost money. There are not only coins/assets/platforms/DAO's, there are also tradings. A lot of people bought on higher prices. Forking is always a bad news (when it is made to fix an exploited code), which hurts "investors".
I don't remember there was a promise of profits for everyone and never losses, do you? Take Bitcoin, it is deliberately called an experiment, beta software after 8 years, because it can fail completely. "Investors" are kids who want to get rich quick, well it's not how it works, they must learn or get out of the kitchen if it's hot. Nobody asked you to mine/buy Bitcoin and nobody asked for money to create it. |
|
|
|
|
You can't gather $200 million to make experiments were there is possibility for failures. They somehow fixed things, but fact is that a lot of people lost money. There are not only coins/assets/platforms/DAO's, there are also tradings. A lot of people bought on higher prices. Forking is always a bad news (when it is made to fix an exploited code), which hurts "investors".
|
|
|
|
Forking is a standard operation in crypto.
Not in something, which claims to be decentralised. EDIT: If it is a coin with small community, then a hard fork could be convenient. P.S. I am talking about a hard fork. Bitcoin for example was never hard forked. |
|
|
|
I think that banner posted from BTChakan says all  . It's high probably that your coin are lost forever  Yeah. Will try to find Hakan Sahin, but it is a very common turkish name so it would be very hard. |
|
|
|
Seems like the RazorCoin guy/s are back with a new project called DeOS. They have some history of scams and so far nothing proves that they won't scam people again. I have openly invited Mr. Jawad Yaqub (he is most likely the Razormind's owner) to a discussion, but he wanted me to send him e-mail instead. Below I'll quote the info I have so far: Hello, guys. There is already a thread ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1531029.0), which you can find some of the information posted below, but I just wanted to bring more awareness. That is why I have decided to launch a new thread. Razormind guys are clearly behind the already failed RazorCoin ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=644498.0), which screwed a lot of people (me included, but that's not the reason for posting this thread), and this is enough for me not to believe in any of their future projects (or whatever): Proof for being involved with RazorCoin: https://cointelegraph.com/news/uk-based-razormind-emerges-as-blockchain-rival-to-ethereum-microsoft-ibm-and-eris“Your readers may remember we built the first digital currency factory - Razorcoin - and started selling custom digital currencies, with their related clients, seed nodes, enterprise APIs etc. to businesses directly. I’m glad to say we built the first version of IrishCoin which was featured in the Wall St Journal. Our motivations were clear - we wanted to make blockchain accessible and safe to use for everyone.”
So far they gathered 2157 BTC from their crowdsale (source: http://www.razormind.co.uk/crowdsale), which (at least in my views), is a big amount of money. Can Jawad Yaqub ( https://uk.linkedin.com/in/razormind, https://www.facebook.com/jawad.yaqub) shows up and proves that Razormind is not a scam? I think that we have 2157 reasons for it. Tweet to Razormind from the FailCommunity: https://twitter.com/FAILCommunity/status/756941309466869760Some reference and good observations from the previous thread: Found out info about Razormind and DeOS ico in 2 Cointelegraph articles. After 30mins due diligence I'm 100% sure this is scam.I wonder how Cointelegraph let these bullshit articles to be on their website. (Author: Niall Maye) https://cointelegraph.com/news/razormind-targets-ethereum-by-crowdfunding-deos-blockchain-on-july-15https://cointelegraph.com/news/uk-based-razormind-emerges-as-blockchain-rival-to-ethereum-microsoft-ibm-and-eris1. Company Razormind has been registered twice. 1st time on 22.04.2014, dissolved on 01.12.2015 via compulsory strike-off: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/090052142nd time (current): 19 feb 2016 (5 months ago) https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/NI6365342 shareholders\owners. Statement of capital on 2016-02-19, GBP=1 - https://[Suspicious link removed]/kBsD0D Serious capital, enterprise solutions, yeah. As I understand, you can register a company in UK over the internet, providing owners, shareholders and company data + 12 pounds fee. 2. Website razormind.co.uk looks very cool, but almost all of the content is copied form other sources. 3.The owner of the company has not been seen in public by anyone. No photos or public profiles of the team etc also. Even though the article in Cointelegraph states that Razormind has 260 employees 4. Twitter account @Razormind also looks cool and has over 15000 tweets. Most of them are tweets copied from other sources. And if you manage to scroll down to the first tweet, you can see that account has been created on 29/03/2016 BTW, @Razormind blacklisted me right after my tweet about DeOS scam  5. No escrow for ICO funds. You need to send an email to deos@razormind.co.uk to invest to the ICO. After that you receive an email with "uniquely generated BTC Address" to invest. Oooook. Also, you can have bonuses as a wise early fintech adopter! Quote from the answer email: "Some perks for funders: * 2 BTC an email thank you written personally by CEO Jawad Yaqub * 5 BTC the above plus a tweet from @razormind to say thank you. * 10 BTC Dinner with Razormind * 75 BTC DeOS Foundation Membership" Hell yeah! Dinner, beeatch! Cheers, Spartak Tomanov Link to the original thread (I tried to create discussion and that is why I posted it in the Altcoin Discussion section): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1562962.0Cheers, Spartak Tomanov |
|
|
|
Was this ever resolved, this Jawad Yaqub has started an suspicious looking ICO called "DEOS", their website claims Bank of America, Commonwealth Bank of Australia as being among their customers Don't think so. And, yes.. the Razor guys are back. I have openly invited Mr. Jawad to participate in a thread, but he wanted me to send him e-mail instead. Will open a new thread in the scam accusations section and will provide all the info I have so far. Link to the thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1562962.0EDIT: I have opened a new thread in this section: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1564499.0 |
|
|
|
Thank you for the link! I am now 100% sure that this is a blatant scam! I did openly invited Mr. Jawad to explain some things in one other thread, but he wanted me to send him e-mail if I have any questions. This is the thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1562962.0
|
|
|
|
|
Of course they will hand over your info to the authorities behind your back. The policy is the same for you, me and a serial killer.
I've said many times that I am not all against ICO's (well, crowdfunding to be precise), because not all people have the money to spread out their (good) ideas/tech. A number of projects died, because of lack of funding and a few more are struggling for the same reason. I'm not sure if you ever played that "game", but if you did, then you should know that almost everybody are screaming: "MONEEEEY".
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
