I am still looking for a round penetrating RPG if anybody has one on here  what the hell is a round penetrating rpg? A rocket propelled grenade whose fragments have enough velocity to penetrate standard ammunition, duh.  |
|
|
|
This video contains content from Scripps Local News, who has blocked it on copyright grounds.
Sorry about that. |
|
|
|
STOP talking with yourselves.  One sec let me switch to my other identity to respond. ok, is this better? Or how about this? Me too? |
|
|
|
The myth of selling BTC to fools locally is laughable. Nobody is stupid to pay more for BTC than market rate I would believe.
I've done just that, might only have been a few thousand dollars worth, but a 10-20% premium was still worth having. Did you find a fool, or someone using the coins for illicit means? For many people actually buying BTC is a huge pain in the ass. If you were only buying a couple hundred dollars worth of BTC it might be worth your time to just pay someone $40 extra to get you the BTC, especially if it also saves you a few bucks in exchange fees. I wonder if and how Bitinstant's cash deposits are affecting Pirate's operation. |
|
|
|
|
If it was going to be a problem, they wouldn't offer it as an option that could be enabled in the control panel, I would think.
|
|
|
|
They prevent me from even considering your platform as a way to promote anything.
Well since you realize that advertising services have to take strong measures to protect advertisers deposits from being wasted, maybe you can make a recommendation as to what I should do to sites that generate extremely high CTR on multiple banners spread through their website and have telltale signs of click fraud (and lets say there is other telltale signs such as a log with iPad clicks every 20 minutes with a matching browser version over a 48 hour period)? I wasn't referring to any specific anti-fraud measures at all, but to the CS perspective of how they may be handled. But nevermind. I don't need to worry about your service and I'll keep quiet. |
|
|
|
It concerns your whole business, or soon-to-be-lack thereof, because of an impending scammer investigation.
You didn't answer my question, how or why do allegations about me concern you personally? They prevent me from even considering your platform as a way to promote anything. |
|
|
|
So the common denominator for those receiving this e-mail are that they've dealing with anything but trivial amounts (e.g., $100-ish range and under) and have transacted with either bitcoin exchanges or with other bitcoiners.
Doing both will almost guarantee that you get this letter, though it may not happen until after your transaction has already occurred. You will not be able to withdraw the next time though without verifying first.
I have auto withdrawal enabled, so any deposit into my Dwolla account will be pushed directly to my bank. I logged in and checked, and there is no indication that the withdrawal is suspended, or that it will be late, so I am going to delay sending anything until after the estimated time of arrival shown in the withdrawal details. Will let everyone know how it goes. Winning! The deposit just showed up in my bank account. Hopefully now I can leave Dwolla and never look back. EDIT: However, I can't withdraw or send the remaining balance of $100. |
|
|
|
Yes they should since that thread shows that there is nothing but serious FUD in that thread. Why don't you pick on someone else? As I mentioned elsewhere, I want to make sure publishers get the best partnering experience possible. Also with regard to your comment on click fraud, I believe you are unfortunately formed that opinion by the trolls on the thread, there is no easy way to click fraud my service, we have various measure including limiting IP clicks and anti-proxy measures in place. There is a lot of FUD and angst in this forum so read everyone's comments critically. If you want to get rid of the trolls and FUD, you would actually start by addressing all points raised and not selectively ignoring the ones that don't suit your whims. Just because "that's the way google does it" doesn't mean fuck all for your tiny hole-in-the-wall business(es). How does that concern you? It concerns your whole business, or soon-to-be-lack thereof, because of an impending scammer investigation. |
|
|
|
They are waiting on cases of all things. There's a stack of boards sitting ready to go but nothing to put them in. At least that was the case last week.
I offered to take some of the bare boards off their hands, but strangely they declined.
Why don't they just get these boards populated in China or at least at a company that fabricates boards... Sounds like he means completed boards, and no enclosure, not bare PCBs. |
|
|
|
I seem to recall theymos stating that he has investigated numerous plugins that didn't meet the technical or security requirements, and since this one was written in 2006 I'm guessing it has been seen. But if it works, lets use it! |
|
|
|
Whether the mask exists now or not is irrelevant to the main point Entropy is making.
Really? Did you see the bolded part of his statement that was prefixed with an "IF"? In case you weren't aware, the mask is the main cost for this operation, the other costs are trivial in comparison. All costs are trivial if you don't have to use any of your own money. True, but how often does an investor throw good money after what could potentially be bad, without expecting anything in return? I have my doubts that any financing was "free". |
|
|
|
Considering BFLs history, Im not expecting products in customer hands from them this year. It took what, almost 6? months for the singles to really arrive, and those were "just" standard, off the shelve FPGAs. Product cycle for a custom asic is quite a different thing. So between now and then, a lot could happen. Who knows, maybe even Largecoin will turn out be legit To be sure, I am hoping they figured out that we don't really like announcements that are so far in the future as last time, and have accordingly waited for this release. I suppose we will see, eventually. When was Largecoin supposed to deliver, anyways? I have almost forgotten about them.... |
|
|
|
Whether the mask exists now or not is irrelevant to the main point Entropy is making.
Really? Did you see the bolded part of his statement that was prefixed with an "IF"? In case you weren't aware, the mask is the main cost for this operation, the other costs are trivial in comparison. |
|
|
|
The money required here is trivial, if the masks are paid for already. I could access enough cash today to leverage up to the majority of the hashes in 3 or 4 months.
You could even do it borrowing from the insane 7% / week ponzis that are springing up all over bitcoin. This would have the added benefit of hedging out all of your bitcoin value risk
They don't have money. That is the only reason that justifies the observed actions.
Anyone that still thinks anything BFL does is legitimate should read this over and over until it sinks in. Soo.. you are believing the words of some unknown noob, rather than someone who has delivered? Sure. And, pray tell, how do you think a dedicated Bitcoin mining ASIC mask already exists, that they can make a run off of? Answer: it doesn't, at least I have my doubts that someone created a mask and never used it. Use some common sense for fuck's sake. |
|
|
|
Shame that BFL will be the first to market with an ASIC.
That remains to be seen. Do you have something you are dying to tell us? |
|
|
|
It's not a downloading limit
You have no p2p limit, stay calm
It takes age to get the blockchain cause it verify each block. Check the hard drive usage, it will be using the hard disk like hell while getting the blockchain. The limit is the hard disk speed, not the internet connection. With a SSD it would be much more faster. If you setup a RAM disk it would be muuuuch faster
Thing is, many of these things were mitigated - quite a lot - with 0.6.2 version. It really shouldn't be taking so long. |
|
|
|
I do not like the fact that it will need 3 of the precious PCI cables....
I do not like to use molex connectors. much less having 4 sets of molex adapters on one rig if you want to run 4x7990
LOL I doubt you will be mining with this one. It is likely to be extremely inefficient and way too expensive. 7990 should be alright though. Expensive? Hell ya! Inefficient? It's probably just as "inefficient" as 2 7970s, which is gonna be what, 1100MH/s @ 250W? Yeah I suppose so, although if heat isn't managed well enough, efficiency could be affected. This 28nm stuff sucks down major power when it gets too hot. |
|
|
|
I do not like the fact that it will need 3 of the precious PCI cables....
I do not like to use molex connectors. much less having 4 sets of molex adapters on one rig if you want to run 4x7990
LOL I doubt you will be mining with this one. It is likely to be extremely inefficient and way too expensive. 7990 should be alright though. |
|
|
|
|
Yeah I went and looked at the github page and the original is C.
But damn, AGPL. What shit.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
