Bitcoin Forum
May 09, 2024, 03:22:09 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 [30] 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 »
581  Economy / Marketplace / Re: ["WAIT LIST"] BFL SC Pre-Order Information on: March 30, 2013, 02:05:01 PM
my order number changed from 7040 to 7171

this happen to anyone else?

where do you check your order #?


I logged into my account and checked my orders and their numbers there, and then compared them to the original emails they sent when I first ordered things.
582  Economy / Marketplace / Re: ["WAIT LIST"] BFL SC Pre-Order Information on: March 29, 2013, 01:03:09 PM
my order number changed from 7040 to 7171

this happen to anyone else?

Mine went in the opposite direction..going from 5467 to 5457. Either way, they're switching up numbers for whatever reason..
583  Bitcoin / Mining speculation / Re: Production stops 2017 on: March 29, 2013, 12:11:21 PM
If mining is essentially hosting a ledger and supporting the transfers of bitcoin, how will bitcoin survive past 2017 when they say they will stop producing at 21 million? If the miners are not being rewarded with bitcoin they will stop hosting the ledger and bitcoin transactions will end.

What am I missing?

2017 only marks the next reward split, from 25 coins per block down to 12.5...which will give us another 4 years before the next split to 6.25..and so on. We'll technically never reach the exact 21 million, and there will be a point when solving blocks doesn't generate any reward at all.

Instead, the reward would be the transaction fees..which I imagine will go up once the normal block rewards prove to be less fruitful.
584  Bitcoin / Mining speculation / Re: 3/28 What's BFL's big announcement? on: March 29, 2013, 12:06:23 PM
Link to update

Summary: They claim to now have working prototypes, but the problem is that the power consumption is missing their goal of 1W/GH/s by 70%+. The units weren't designed for such high power requirements, so they have to underclock them, thus reducing the hashrate.

So, I wonder which charity or charities will be the lucky recipient(s) of 1000 BTC?

Bummer. Not sure if anyone knows this, but how far are they underclocking the ASICs? My guess would be back to the initial 40GH/s they advertised during the first months.

Still 1.7W/GH/s still isn't bad (assuming I read that correctly...still early here Cheesy).
585  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Ponzi Satoshi? on: March 28, 2013, 07:55:56 PM
[...] so that they stop me from stating the facts about the design [...]

Have you ever thought that maybe..jjuussttt maybee..you're not stating "facts" at all? Which is why you're encountering so much resistance everywhere you turn?
586  Bitcoin / Press / Re: 2013-03-28 Businessweek - Bitcoin May Be the Global Economy's Last Safe Haven on: March 28, 2013, 07:29:50 PM
Finally something I can send my parents and friends.

This haha.

Excellently written article!
587  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: My Beef with BFL (Constructive Criticism Only) on: March 28, 2013, 07:10:18 PM
A company that is so far behind in promises and make further promises repeatedly and are still taking people's money with ship dates promised out two months should be considered a scammer. Why that offends your sense of fairness eludes me.

Now how does that make any sense? It's clear your definition of "scammer" is a bit falsely construed.

Based on your definition, I presume Team Avalon must also qualify as a scammer since they're taking people's money now for Batch #3, which won't be out for many months? They're surely a team of scammers since they promised to ship, what was it, 12 units a day at the end of January? Yet April is upon us and only now are they finishing up the delivery of the first Batch...

Even if they are working hard to produce the units paid for 9 months ago, their current actions of "order now" and giving new promises which we know not to be true, would qualify them to be labeled as a scammer.

How do we know their promises aren't true? (Before brashly responding, think about it from a rationalized point of view for a moment)

When you have screwed up, you should stop collecting people's money until you can actually physically deliver what you overpromised many times before.

Ideally I (and many others) wish this was the case. Down payment now, full payment when a product is available.
588  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Ponzi Satoshi? on: March 28, 2013, 06:03:44 PM
Guys, AnonyMint is just creating troll threads. He's got a few already, but that's because his primary one was locked by a mod.

Previous thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=158111.0
589  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: My Beef with BFL (Constructive Criticism Only) on: March 27, 2013, 10:14:40 PM
We all support a business decision that was first and foremost a pure benefit to BFL partially at the expense of ourselves. 

The reason I say this is if they would of only taken a deposit that was payable when they were close to shipping, we would of had our coins to invest with. [...]
 

I wish this was the case. It could have saved me a bunch of headaches instead of tying up my money for 7+ months, not to mention given many initial customers peace of mind. This, of course, raises the question of "why didn't this happen?", and my initial guess is that they did need initial funds to cover some of the costs to develop ASIC chips (..existing profit from FPGAs probably wasn't nearly enough).

[...] fails of the Ethics of Care which looks at the overall affect of the action. They did not care about enough about how much power they weld and instead used it to beat the GPU & FPGA innovation into the ground.

Couldn't have said it better myself. I remember a thing or two from my Business Ethics classes Wink
590  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: My Beef with BFL (Constructive Criticism Only) on: March 27, 2013, 05:32:56 PM
I don't think the thread went to shit exactly, that won't happen until Josh shows up.

Ha, I suppose I was exaggerating a bit before. I totally agree with you on this one.

There's a whole lot of anger being directed at BFL and justifiably so, they've caused damage that extends to those that didn't even order from them IMO. I believe we have to get past this notion that their delays are caused by incompetence. While I've said the same thing myself in the past, in hindsight, I think it's pretty clear that they just want everyone to believe they're incompetent. Seriously, there's no way Josh could have believed there was any chance whatsoever that BFL would be able to ship a finished ASIC product before 12/31/2012 when he routinely implied as much in early and mid December. He's done the same thing over and over. There's simply no way. Josh is many things, but he's not dumb. When did they set up their new facility again?

That's an interesting way of looking at it (on the incompetence part). It could surely be that they're only playing dumb, but I'm not sure what the purpose of it is...giving themselves more time overall, sure..but I'm not sure what else. People can say it's to pull in more and more money, but the vast majority of orders (that we've been informed of) so far have all been in the early months (June-September). After that, reported pre-orders have been slowly dwindling..which is understandable given bucket after bucket of bad news has been dumped on our heads.

And I agree that they couldn't have shipped before the end of 2012, even if they stuck with their original chip design.

At this point I'd like someone to explain to me like I'm five how there's any chance at all that BFL didn't deliberately dismantle the FPGA market and cause a whole lot of people to lose mining revenue by making what in hindsight were awful decisions based on misinformation supplied by BFL to support their blatantly premature ASIC announcement. I believe they had a very limited supply of FPGA chips and when their source dried up they concocted this elaborate scheme to damage their competitors and gain the upper hand in the future ASIC mining market. They very plainly had next to nothing done in fall of 2012, yet they consistently pretended as though they could be ready to ship at any time. This isn't tomfoolery, or shenanigans, it's fraud. They've cost people a lot of money with their market manipulation games.

Unfortunately I wasn't as involved in Bitcoin during the dawn / spread of FPGAs, so I don't have much of an opinion on that side of things. But what I can say is that premature offerings are a great way to build up a customer list (and massive piles of cash), especially since BFL was the first (IIRC) to offer a reasonably priced ASIC device for "pre-order". And as long as they keep pretending they know what they're doing, they can keep playing the "incompetent" card (or at least trying to) in order to fend off fraud accusations when shit hits the fan.

You're obviously bright Korbman, and I know you have BFL orders, can you explain to me where I'm wrong here?

D'aw thanks Creative, and you're quite intelligent yourself Cheesy

As for my orders, the early orders were primarily driven by the notion that BFL was going to ship first..which it did seem that way at the beginning. The later, more substantial orders, were the result of a mix between timing (it was either get into BFL now, or attempt Avalon Batch #2), power efficiency (ordering 8 Avalons would rape my power bill), and space considerations. Not to mention the gamble between which would ship first (at the time).

In short, you're not wrong (yet Tongue)

...also as to Josh specifically and his PR job, I think he's done an absolutely masterful job of isolating and attacking any and all outspoken outliers here. If someone asks tough questions about BFL, particularly about their financial solvency, Inaba nearly always shows up and begins with the verbal assault. Shortly there after the thread is moved to the "troll museum" or newbies begin to attack Josh's target like a string of over protective groupies. Think about his comments about how a few posters here allegedly increase BFL sales by asking tough questions about BFL. That stuff is brilliant because it sticks with people and plants a seed of doubt in their minds.  

I partially agree here. He mostly responds to trolls with more troll-ish behavior and ignores people with valid questions or concerns. But you're right, it quickly derails the thread into a heap of garbage..usually to the point that there's just pages of "User Ignored" (as someone called it, an "Ignore Party") haha.
591  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: My Beef with BFL (Constructive Criticism Only) on: March 27, 2013, 02:18:43 PM
Off topic: I like how this thread went to shit after, like, 4 posts. Though I suppose that's to be expected..

On topic:
I have no doubt that they're working on developing some "top tier" tech (compared to everything else coming / already out). My biggest qualms come from the blatant dispersion of misinformation and lack of solid evidence.

After everything that we've seen so far and the difficulties BFL has run into, there's no way they would have actually shipped in 2012..and my guess is that they very well knew that. Essentially they create intricate company timelines as to how everything will proceed, but consistently fail to take Murphy's Law into account during it all.

Their general incompetence was pretty clear when they put Josh in charge of PR. If you're representing a company and trying to create positive public relations, there's absolutely no reason to go about trolling. A PR person should be able to let insults roll off, like "water on a duck's back". Simple as that.
592  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Any counter-proof that Satoshi Nakamoto did not design a ponzi scheme on purpose on: March 27, 2013, 12:32:11 PM
You are batshit stupid.

New Topic:

Any counter-proof that AnonyMint is not batshit insane?

The reason I am so warlike in this discussion, is because I understand that the future of our human race is at stake.

Question posed and answered.

Anyway, why is this thread still growing? Anony rage quit on page 8 (twice)..yet still comes back to argue the same points (this time with a global mod)?
593  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Any counter-proof that Satoshi Nakamoto did not design a ponzi scheme on purpose on: March 27, 2013, 12:19:05 AM
I QUIT

Nice. Since that's supposedly the end of this ridiculousness, my summary has been updated: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=158111.msg1676413#msg1676413
594  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Harder Mining - Why the difficulty hikes lately? on: March 26, 2013, 10:08:57 PM
most likely just lots of gpus coming online from the press spike.

http://blockchain.info/pools doesn't show anything too crazy (i wanna know who that 6GH/s pool miner is though in btc guild)

That would be ASICMINER setting up all their ASIC gear: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99497.0
595  Economy / Computer hardware / Re: [WTS] BFL Preorder Single SC (In negotiation) on: March 26, 2013, 10:07:25 PM
The Ordering system was not up or running correctly until Feb:

https://forums.butterflylabs.com/blogs/bfl_jody/103-order-system-open-mostly.html

[...]


Makes sense, I stand corrected. And then they went and updated the system again to include those 1000***** numbers haha
596  Economy / Computer hardware / Re: [WTS] BFL Preorder Single SC on: March 26, 2013, 09:31:36 PM
When did you place this order? I could be wrong but this looks like a very recent order.

Initial order for this Placed Dec 24th 2012.

I have two orders (16100 and 16252) placed and paid for on January 8th and 10th respectively. The #19xxx orders came in around beginning February.
597  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Any counter-proof that Satoshi Nakamoto did not design a ponzi scheme on purpose on: March 26, 2013, 07:47:10 PM
[......]

Sorry to tell you this @WishIStartedSooner, but there's WAAYY too much logic and solid reasoning in your post. AnonyMint will be writing up an essay on why he disagrees with you momentarily.


EDIT: Called it.
598  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Any counter-proof that Satoshi Nakamoto did not design a ponzi scheme on purpose on: March 26, 2013, 05:28:10 PM
I'd suggest going through the previous posts to get a sense of the depth of the discussion, or at least check out the excellent summary on page 5.

I've updated page 5 with a more accurate summary, taking into account the past 2 pages. It's a light read compared to everything else, but the same valid (and important) points are covered.
599  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Any counter-proof that Satoshi Nakamoto did not design a ponzi scheme on purpose on: March 26, 2013, 03:21:41 PM
Yeah I am clever. Satoshi did not think of this perhaps:

http://anonycoin.org

Btw, I have better name coming soon...

but I don't know if I will implement this. I need to see some support and desire for it first.

Ahhh there it is. I was wondering how long it would take before you started advertising your own Alt-coin Wink

Communist.  Wink

(I expected you to do exactly that. I knew you were waiting for DataPlum to ask me to share my algorithm)

What is your retort now you fool?

Hahahahaha I stopped seriously reading this thread and giving it merit after I put up my summary back on page 5. Since then it's just been a laugh-fest. I've literally been laughing out loud at your recent bout of paranoia.

Retorting here is a fruitless effort as you'll continue to pedal your ignorance against all voices of logic and reason (regardless of how sound and well thought out they are). It's incredibly clear that your sole agenda is instill doubt about Bitcoin in order to push your own coin.

Thankfully, many of us here see right on through your nonsense Wink
600  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Any counter-proof that Satoshi Nakamoto did not design a ponzi scheme on purpose on: March 26, 2013, 02:49:23 PM
Yeah I am clever. Satoshi did not think of this perhaps:

http://anonycoin.org

Btw, I have better name coming soon...

but I don't know if I will implement this. I need to see some support and desire for it first.

Ahhh there it is. I was wondering how long it would take before you started advertising your own Alt-coin Wink
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 [30] 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!