 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2
|
So I recently tried updating cgminer on two of my windows machines from 3.12.0 to 3.12.3 that are connected to multiple hashfast babyjets, and whenever I try running 3.12.3 cgminer just crashes on startup, yet 3.12.0 works...
I strongly advise people wait till they have new firmware as the new cgminer code is optimised around it and vice versa.
Sorry keeping up with everything is hard sometimes. When's the new firmware being released? Greetings masked brother from another mother, Take and start 3.12.0 and enter the url, user, and password ~IE get it running... Now start 3.12.3 and again enter the url, user and password data ~when it starts, shut down 3.12.0 with Q command. This worked on my 2012 Server... it runs for a while then crashes, I'm still poking it with a stick so I can't say much more at the moment. I realize this is a horrible hack, forgive me CK |
|
|
|
|
Greetings all,
I just sold some coin, very cool and smooth process. Must admit was a bit spooked by the first time thing...
The question I have is after the buyer has deposited proceeds/funded the purchase, can I as the seller immediately confirm the receipt of funds to expedite the transaction processing for the seller ~to help speed receipt of their coin?
|
|
|
|
Following a quick review of the photo, my professional critique of the installation is as follows:
FAIL
1 Side vents are 50% obstructed by mounting brackets on open side.
Comment: Rack, shelving modules should have been employed instead of mounting brackets.
2 Side vent between units appears fully obstructed (Rack to Rack)
Comment: Poor design, lack of knowledge and planning.
Look closer, there is an air-gap. Insufficient, either exhaust from one unit will buck the other, or they'll starve each other.
3 Bottom Unit in rack 1 is not readily accessible ~the unit above it must be removed to service the bottom one. (We don't put units on the bottom... (Dirt, physical damage, et cetera) start from top down.
Comment: Poor design, lack of knowledge and planning. Guess there is a first time for everything...
Yes it is. Again, look closer, the lowest unit is raised. You can tell by the shadow under the rear corner. Yes my blind protagonist, it is raised; not raised enough to clear the racks lower front floor bracket.
4 Rack density does not permit ventilation between units, again amateurish and problematic lending to sever thermal issues down the road that will undoubtedly require considerable configuration. Problem will likely present when they continue to fill the racks if they follow the same installation format.
Guy, you need to get your eyes checked. Only the first rack is secured. The rest are floating. Really?? Are you certain? I guess so, the first rack is secure; was it from reading what I wrote or looking at the picture genius? You even responded to the next statement where I wrote it, Duh!
For what its worth, this photo may be old ~except for the end rack units, the rest are not aligned or properly secured, looks like it may have been taken during the build itself.
Then what is the purpose of your "professional critique" of the installation? To initiate an educated discussion from qualified individuals on the viability of the installation and further to attempt illumination for those who don't know better or can't comprehend what they read. |
|
|
|
 We are very happy with the tech though, it is very impressive and works well. That's all I have for now, I will keep feeding you guys more information as it comes in  //DeaDTerra Cedivad, TY for the update. ~looks like a 'Few' to me... Doesn't surprise me though, all indications are the play is fast and loose with no forethought or qualified personnel. Following a quick review of the photo, my professional critique of the installation is as follows: FAIL1 Side vents are 50% obstructed by mounting brackets on open side. Comment: Rack, shelving modules should have been employed instead of mounting brackets. 2 Side vent between units appears fully obstructed (Rack to Rack) Comment: Poor design, lack of knowledge and planning. 3 Bottom Unit in rack 1 is not readily accessible ~the unit above it must be removed to service the bottom one. (We don't put units on the bottom... (Dirt, physical damage, et cetera) start from top down. Comment: Poor design, lack of knowledge and planning. Guess there is a first time for everything... 4 Rack density does not permit ventilation between units, again amateurish and problematic lending to sever thermal issues down the road that will undoubtedly require considerable configuration. Problem will likely present when they continue to fill the racks if they follow the same installation format. For what its worth, this photo may be old ~except for the end rack units, the rest are not aligned or properly secured, looks like it may have been taken during the build itself. General question to the forum: With the limited data thus far available, has anyone else calculated thermal output per GN? EDIT: PS~ The tech in the photo is named Aladdin; he is waiting for the HF Genie to make a wish... Not to fret Aladdin, the magic smoke will appear soon... |
|
|
|
|
Guess again... Batch 1's Are now shipping as Batch 2's
|
|
|
|
Since it appears we have verified cases where people received a USD check as a settlement, when they - Requested a BTC refund - Didn't request a refund at all (through the form they issued) For such people, the check is thus just an unsollicited donation from Hashfast. I was wondering, how long do you have before the check expires? I think in france you have 1 year to cash it in... So just keep the check, resolve the dispute by getting a full BTC refund as promised in the ToS you agreed to. And when you have the BTC back, cash the check in to cover for the hassle!  You will likely be required to surrender the uncashed draft or it would be deducted from the settlement. In the US, in general, a draft (check) is only good for 6 months before it expires and becomes a 'dead draft'; please note that each bank follows different policy however the aforementioned is the usual. |
|
|
|
For those in the states, has anyone considered doing the arbitration yourself, without a lawyer? If the lawyers are taking a big cut, and if they lose would demand payment for services anyways, then I would think going without a lawyer may be a way to negotiate a better deal/compromise for yourself, or no? Thoughts?
Very strongly not recommended!!! Ever hear the saying he who represents himself has a fool for a client... The world of law is another dimension wherein they speak words that sound like English but have totally different meanings, they even have their own dictionary, go figure... |
|
|
|
you never been to court have you? fight the battles that you can win not ones you want to win.. in fact anything you know you can't win you shouldn't even bring up. Go after what they said in the early refund responses
They attorneys taking it on contingency on the amounts above and beyond the offered settlements sure don't seem to agree with you. Everyone can also see the clear and explicit promises of 1:1 Bitcoin refunds both in public and in private communications. By all means, anyone who somehow didn't get the message that 1:1 refunds on failure were part of the deal and didn't make their purchasing decision because of it: take the settlement— leave the assets for the recovery of those of us who relied on the original terms. You missed what I said.. I said go for what they said in the early refund replies.. which was what you say. I am just saying don't think they advertised the selling of the miners at btc prices. They never posted that like Avalon did. Should just harp on what they promised as refunds in full btc. Why give them an area for them to make a case.. just focus on the refund side of the promise At the most basic level the courts are bound to uphold what is fair and right... they will do this though it usually takes a while. $5,600 back in August does equal $5,600 today in us dollars, sort of... Which, for all intensive purposes, is what it is as the USD is the coin of the realm. So, for this part I am saying that you can take the refund (offer) as it stands and be happy, or try door #2 #2 Now let me be clear, this likely does not apply to all of you: If you have in your possession a written sales agreement, signed, that has all the transactions listed in btc and can prove with transaction records that you compensated them for the trade in btc you have a good case. Again, contract law is very specific. If I agree in writing to trade you ten magic beans for a unicorn and the contract guarantees a refund of said beans, in this case which has been both expressed, and implied from HF Admin repeatedly {btc=beans}, then when my unicorn don't show I shall have my beans, not any beans, my magic beans. Point of order: A contractual agreement was entered into by two parties, one party is in breach of contract. End of story; to what extent the courts will decide. The fact that these are dated products, meaning their value rapidly decreases in a short amount of time, is also a compensable argument. |
|
|
|
To Me it sounds like they may have just royally screwed themselves and sent you guys a whole bunch of money to pay your Attorney with to get your BTC back... Wouldn't that be ironic  so it means that we are all stupid, and that there is something like 1% of the customers requesting a proper refund. Legal processes in the states are tricky but contract law is extremely explicit for US citizens; generally covers the Brothers and Sisters North of us pretty well and to some extent the ones South also. Those overseas might have some difficulty. What's the buyoff, like 2,500 Pounds  |
|
|
|
Batch 1, Paid BTC, Canadian, and received an unsolicited USD refund cheque today.
Are you going to cash it? I don't think he has a choice. They're really fucking us over. Typically a bank draft (Check) of which one is attempting to buy another off, in the case of a settlement, will be a 'Conditional Draft' (should have something on it to the effect of 'For payment of refund in full') Cashing one of these types of checks will be viewed by the courts as an accepted settlement; a draft is a signed contract. The flip side is if you did not request a refund, specifically have not provided them with any signed documentation to that effect and paid in bitcoins, then they just sent you a check... Personally, I would cash it, then demand a refund of my BTC as per contract. If their accountant goofed and sent you a check in error, then they need to get a refund from you. Does not your contract state to be reimbursed in BTC? That would be fraud. You would have to first check with the letter as to what the intent is behind the check. Two wrongs don't make a right and certainly don't strengthen anyones case. Please qualify your statement, define where in what I stated you believe is fraud- And you are correct, two wrongs do not make a right. A 5% refund in lew of a contract is not right. As stated if the draft itself is not conditional, specifically stating it is for a refund, then it is the same thing as them handing you cash. What ever toilet paper came with it in the envelope doesn't matter. Just don't sign your rights away. Further I always recommend consultation with a qualified professionally licensed individual. To Me it sounds like they may have just royally screwed themselves and sent you guys a whole bunch of money to pay your Attorney with to get your BTC back... Wouldn't that be ironic  It says it right there in black and white. This is for a refund you requested. It does not say "...this is part of your refund. (1 of 10)" If you cash it, you are signifying you accept their payment + 5%. ============================ Gandalf, if they weren't worried about the legal stuff they wouldn't offer you 5% for free. They are giving you 5% on top of the value of the miner as a settlement. If they had only given you the cost of the miner and no 5% it would have been clear they were playing hardball. They are instead just seemingly playing "dead possum" and hoping (to the love of God) that their customers are stupid enough to accept their 5% (which is actually almost -90% by the way). If things go tits up and everyone decided to pursue other options, then HashFast is almost certainly done for. (Unless they can find 10 times their capital) Batch 2 through 4 can kiss their own asses goodbye as a result. People are either going to live up to HashFasts [I speculate] expectations, or they will be smarter than that. ============================ Accepting a check with a written notice as to what is for is not arbitration. You don't get to "invent" what you think the check is for. It is clearly spelled out what it is for. If you stand there in front of the judge stating your own arbitrary ideas and concepts about what the check was for and thought of using their own settlement money to persue a resolved dispute which you accepted....well...don't be surprised if you are laughed out of court. You're not Dumb or Blonde Gandalf, so stop trying to lure idiots into the fire. Just because tensions are high don't shoot the messenger or think for a moment I don't know thoroughly of that which I am speaking. I have previously reviewed all documentation you provided. The individuals doc presented is for a requested refund; my original response was to an un requested refund. The check itself is a contract that must bear the conditional upon it "Refund" or appropriate legalese to similar effect. The purchase agreement is also a contract that in some cases defines refund in BTC. The intent of the original instrument (purchase agreement) is clear The intent of the draft be it properly labeled as such or not is clear The draft does not abate the validity of the original separate instrument. The draft can easily be construed as a partial refund if it does not clearly state on the draft itself for refund in full. Consult your local consul, both legal and mental Edit addendum: Note that nowhere on the front of the physical draft presented above is anything to the effect of refund of any sort; as far as the back goes??? Further the draft, from the photo, appears to be a separate document from the letter. It appears as it is not a tear off, but that it was simply set upon the letter for the photo. Cura tibi est? |
|
|
|
Batch 1, Paid BTC, Canadian, and received an unsolicited USD refund cheque today.
Are you going to cash it? I don't think he has a choice. They're really fucking us over. Typically a bank draft (Check) of which one is attempting to buy another off, in the case of a settlement, will be a 'Conditional Draft' (should have something on it to the effect of 'For payment of refund in full') Cashing one of these types of checks will be viewed by the courts as an accepted settlement; a draft is a signed contract. The flip side is if you did not request a refund, specifically have not provided them with any signed documentation to that effect and paid in bitcoins, then they just sent you a check... Personally, I would cash it, then demand a refund of my BTC as per contract. If their accountant goofed and sent you a check in error, then they need to get a refund from you. Does not your contract state to be reimbursed in BTC? That would be fraud. You would have to first check with the letter as to what the intent is behind the check. Two wrongs don't make a right and certainly don't strengthen anyones case. Please qualify your statement, define where in what I stated you believe is fraud- And you are correct, two wrongs do not make a right. A 5% refund in lew of a contract is not right. As stated if the draft itself is not conditional, specifically stating it is for a refund, then it is the same thing as them handing you cash. What ever toilet paper came with it in the envelope doesn't matter. Just don't sign your rights away. Further I always recommend consultation with a qualified professionally licensed individual. To Me it sounds like they may have just royally screwed themselves and sent you guys a whole bunch of money to pay your Attorney with to get your BTC back... Wouldn't that be ironic |
|
|
|
Batch 1, Paid BTC, Canadian, and received an unsolicited USD refund cheque today.
Are you going to cash it? I don't think he has a choice. They're really fucking us over. Typically a bank draft (Check) of which one is attempting to buy another off, in the case of a settlement, will be a 'Conditional Draft' (should have something on it to the effect of 'For payment of refund in full') Cashing one of these types of checks will be viewed by the courts as an accepted settlement; a draft is a signed contract. The flip side is if you did not request a refund, specifically have not provided them with any signed documentation to that effect, paid in bitcoins, and the draft has nothing resembling a Conditional then they just sent you a check... Personally, I would cash it and demand a refund of my BTC as per contract. If their accountant goofed and sent you a check in error, then they need to get a refund from you. Does not your contract state to be reimbursed in BTC? EDIT: Is their not a cancellation clause in the sales agreement that permits them to cancel a transaction at any time? A business has the right to refuse service to anyone at any time. |
|
|
|
When did they got the chips? Still not a single proof of a full board with all chips hashing.
Curious if there has been an update from Luke JR on BJ... seems like it may have smoked on day nine. |
|
|
|
Gmaxwell: What is the point of having a newbie section if you're going to let hordes of them arrive everyday and troll?
Ignore is only useful when people don't return with alts every few days.
What's the point of having a 'Stats' thread that being used for a refund investomer victims bitch-fest; take it to a new thread. The refund issues are of great importance and hold considerable bearing on several issues, they belong in their own place IMHO And for anyone who has an issue about this post: How about a thread for your highnesses with Omni vision, it'll have the ignore button locked for everyone so you don't have to bother censuring the rest of us... |
|
|
|
AFAIK Canada is in North America which IMO makes them American too.
This speaks more to your education than to the point at hand. Refunds are NOT confined to US citizens or residents. So, let's figure out if they are confined to Batch I. Is there anyone in Batch 2 through 4 that is happy with the latest turn of events? Or are you just waiting your turn? Whats your game plan Batch 2 through 4 customers? The current plan is to drive to SF later this week and knock on as many of their doors as I have addresses for. |
|
|
|
|
+1
It's a Love Love relation ship, LOL
Moving forward ~So talk is cheap... Actions speak louder blah, blah
What's better than going and knocking on the door? Anybody have an issue with that -explain please.
Have any of the might forum within range gotten off their keyboards and banged on HF's doors yet? [Tongue & Cheek]
That's how we used to do it.
|
|
|
|
As indicated previously, I spoke with them repeatedly Friday and asked the sales rep to walk back and physically confirm how many were on the shelf... I was told 5 and that I could pick up Monday. Have been attempting to arrange for colleagues' to get up there as I feel its important with what all is going on... Its about a days drive for me however if someone is close please PM and we'll see if we can catch a mythical GN |
|
|
|
Oh, yes, and you are selling an in hand product for 900$.
Qualify your false statement; My being new to the forum is one thing (New doesn't mean I have not read all posts) My posting a link addressing a topic pertaining to a point of order that you find distasteful is another As are your false claims that I am selling something which I am not. |
|
|
|
how far do you think it is from the bulk order point for boards direct from HF? It's not that far. So you are claiming that HF is selling in hand hardware, 550 GH of it (that should be the final figure per board, to anyone interested), at 900$. **See Post #7047 What price would you dump inferior products for? (their only specked to 400GH/s remember) What price per board did you pay on your bulk order?? You have been refunded already, correct? Thus no more NDA, so please share... |
|
|
|
|
