LOGIC DICTATES!!
Logic dictates that a scam tries to maximize its profits. That means, as long as your (expected) sales > actual payouts (that few if any people manage to withdraw), you will continue serving your "pudding", which proves nothing other than what is implied in this sentence. Logic also dictates that if you score a solid 7/7 in on my ponzi sniff test: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=860400.0one better assumes it is a ponzi. |
|
|
|
|
Prisma's are more efficient than that. Around 0.7W/GH
And I have no idea how much they actually pay, my point is that if these large mines pay less than 0.06 (which is a safe assumption), then difficulty isnt going down anytime soon.
|
|
|
|
I have also an account at that site. i get daily payout. but im in since a week. wait what coming.
read the subsequent posts on the matter, and you will hopefully realize not much good is coming. |
|
|
|
Puppet, sorry, didn't see your opinion. What do you think about GAW? You call them still "Probably legit", don't you?
They are in the list. Too many red flags for "probably", so I labeled them "possibly legit". Aside from the rating, I have a unsubstantiated suspicion they are mostly preselling; ie they are selling hashrate they dont have, but that they do expect to deploy in due time. If true, it gives them cheap financing and potentially lets them overprice the hashrate (at least for scrypt) , as the impact on difficulty is delayed. And of course, customers take on the full risk if for whatever reason the hashrate doesnt materialize. |
|
|
|
Are you sure you guys are talking about the same service? BCS seems to be good on payments so far. How long it's going to last, however, I don't know.
I messed up. Removed the rating, Ill look in to bitcoincloudservices later. (edit: done and reinstated) Although at first glance, when I see 10% referral, 5 year contract with no (fiat denominated) maintenance fees, I think I already know what the outcome will be. |
|
|
|
Sharing the mining address means is to be tracked by not all your customers but also by your competitors (company's internal spending and other things) and it can constitute a security vulnerability also as you know most of those firms have their own proprietary software for max the output of their hardware also renting their power to 3rd parties time to time. Nonsense. It reveals nothing other than what they want to reveal. If for whatever reason they are paranoid about their BTC expenditures other than to their investors, they can easily mix those coins afterwards, instead of mixing them before they pay their investors. So this is their internal company business do you know any cloud mining company sharing their BTC mining address? Yes. In fact all credible (cloud) mining companies do. You can see a list here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=860400.0 |
|
|
|
I realize this doesn't prove anything but if you want your words to be taken seriously maybe you should lean more on facts than on paint jobs. So now we have 2 screenshots, great! And indeed it doesnt prove anything, even if the screenshots are genuine. All it proves is that someone with ~80TH allowed to change their btcguild name for a brief moment or someone rented the hashrate out for what appears to have been a very short period. Also, please stop trying to turn the burden of proof around. Hashie is claiming to own the hashrate it sells and gives away. Hashie is the one collecting customer coins. The burden of proof is upon them. If they are truthful, its ridiculously easy for them to prove, we have a public blockchain after all. |
|
|
|
This is not true. If the difficulty increases at a slow enough pace then you can potentially earn more then the cost of the miner (or cost of mining contract for cloud mining) plus the cost of electricity.
If/when there is that potential, then why would it not be exploited by other miners, or more likely, the asic vendors themselves? And as they exploit it with their cheaper hardware and usually, cheaper bulk electricity rates, in smoke goes your potential profit. The comparison with gambling wasnt bad at all, some gamblers will win, but the average gambler will make a small loss due to the house edge. Just like the average miner will lose, just substantially more and it all goes to the asic vendors. |
|
|
|
@Puppet: "MN (1/2)" from Crypsty should be in your analysis-list.
I dont see it being for sale anymore. Perhaps it can still be traded between users on cryptsy, but then its a game of hot potato, no different than all the scam coins being traded there. |
|
|
|
Yeah I feel like people are too hard on Hashie. I mean sure they rent the hashing power, Rent it? Who do you think rents out real hashrate at even lower rates? And if they rent it, whats stopping them from no longer paying the rent and running off with your coins? but they were honest about that and told people upfront. I must have missed that. Can you link? They also went out of their way to get the AMHash deal just to prove to people that they are here to stay. First of all, what does it prove? Not a damn thing. Secondly, why would they even offer AMhash if they have their own mine? If you read hashie's homepage it says " Plenty of cloud mining services oversell or don't even have any hardware. Hashie's AMHash miners are guaranteed to be 100% real hashpower, operated jointly by ASICMiner and Rockminer." Thats a true statement from start to finish. BUt they are not saying anything like that about their own hashrate. Which implies exactly what I and so many others have been saying all along: They 'oversell or dont even have any hardware'. Ergo, hashie is a mining ponzi. Along with moving their hashing power to public pools so people could see with their own eyes that they have the hash available. Where? You mean that screenshot of btcguild?  |
|
|
|
CloudMinr.io is paying consistently to everyone. That is the biggest proof for them.
If you think that proves anything, then you're an idiot. Of a course a scam like this will pay out for as long as new sales > fake mining revenue. They will continue to pay promptly right until the day they vanish. But you already knew that, you're just trying to profit from this scam with your refs. |
|
|
|
If you have no solid proof , this is fake, then please keep it to yourself.
I just got this email from a Nigerian woman, whose parents are recently deceased. She needs help to get and administer her inheritance which is gigantic. It sounds like a gold mine to me. I have no proof its a scam, would you invest ? You can not prove something is a scam. But Cloudminer could easily disprove most of the scam allegations, by simply showing some pictures, proving mining revenue and getting some of their large suppliers to vouch for them. The fact they cant do any of that, is the only proof you ever need to know its a scam. Oh, and the fact the only people who claim otherwise have a referral link in their sig. |
|
|
|
This list bases on a few criteria, so one must do their own research first. LTCGear has been so far good and so has been PBMining. But i would never put money down on PETAmine, the payouts they give out is far less than what should be for 1Gh, plus other users seem to think it is a long con. Criterias should include real world contact and reachability, a real person(s) behind this and has someone visited them etc. EDIT: Tho thanks for doing the work, it does cut some of the work vetting these out  Companies that play it honestly will generally get a bad reputation because they will usually prove unprofitable. Thats what mining at end user prices + operating and profit margin for the issuer tends to result in. THe ponzi's can promise far better profitability.. right until when they disappear. So yeah, you will find plenty people bashing the companies that I rated as legitimate and people raving the obvious ponzi's. Of course that will change over time. As for cryptx specifically; its kinda ironic Ive been warning against investing in them since last spring. Not because they are not legitimate, but because the market prices guaranteed a huge loss. That of course happened, and that is mostly why people are bashing cryptx, but simple math could have predicted that, I predicted it, but that is no fault of cryptx. There are some issues you can blame him for, like ignoring shareholder vote to switch pools, but by and large, thats small potatoes compared to the ponzi's that dont even mine anywhere. |
|
|
|
So really the only question is how good you are at predicting where the difficulty and the exchange rate will go. No, you are also betting hashie actually has the hashrate to pay your profits with if you do happen to win the above bet. And you are betting they will pay that. Considering they have already admitted selling hashrate they do not own, considering there is zero evidence hashie has any hashrate of its own and considering no one seems to know who they are, those are monumentally stupid bets IMO. edit: almost forgot; you are also betting hashie isnt going to arbitrarily increase its fees once its no longer getting more new sales revenue than it needs to pay in (fake) mining revenue. From the terms " We may modify the fee schedule at any time without notice". So they can just up the fees, and terminate the contracts willy-nilly. |
|
|
|
Of course the btc market as a whole now is worth alot more, so that must be factored in. Shares are BTC denominated, as is potential mining revenue. Rareness costs, bitcoiners know that.
Bitcoiners who have been around for longer know that "rareness" is irrelevant, and return is all that matters. Or do you still fancy a piece in a rare Cypriotic bitcoin banking venture? Perhaps a rare bitcoin real estate company? A unique bitcoin insurance company? BTW, you could invest in Cointerra too. And Im pretty sure some people here invested in other asic vendors, like bitmine and bitfury. Not btc denominated, and not publicly traded, but investments nonetheless. |
|
|
|
Truth is, I would not have pulled my sig if it were not Puppet making the allegations. He's often brutal, but I've never known him to be malicious. I will not purchase more nor promote pbmining further until there is some level of proof of their mining, or if they're doing something else legit to simulate mining, proof of that.
I'm arrogant, Puppet, but I'm willing to listen to reason from some people. You're one of them.
Sounds like you want a cookie? Sorry, no can do. You invested quite early in this, between ponzi payouts and ref links, you probably already made a nice profit for yourself, at the expense of more recent investors who believed you. That you now no longer participate in this scam doesnt make you a hero. If you want a cookie, then do two things: First put a warning in your signature. Id suggest: https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/gavin-andresen-suspects-ponzi-schemes-bitcoin-cloud-mining/or https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=860400.0Secondly, pledge to returning at least your net profit to victims benefit (legal fund, private eyes, whatever) if/when this ponzi collapses. Then you'll get a cookie from me. Same goes for anyone else of course. I got plenty of cookies |
|
|
|
Yeah, this is basically what 90% of the people around here accept as a fact. This has already been priced in mostly (hopefully) Has it? Look at the risk/cost/benefits and the competitive landscape prior to gen 1, compare it to the situation now. The cost of a gen 4 maskset alone would have allowed you develop, build, and deploy enough gen 1 miners to rule 90+% of the network back in the day. Also, back then, missing specs by a factor 3x or more was no big deal. If they miss gen 4 power efficiency by as little as 30%, they are pretty much hosed. So anyone who thinks a share today is worth the same as during its IPO, Ive got a cloudhashing contract to sell to you. |
|
|
|
1. As discussed in the board, it serves only the purpose of clearing OTC trades and showing
the founders' shareholding status.
2. Because of 1, please do not take it as a buy/sell indication.
3. The date of resuming dividends with meaningful amount is yet to be determined. It depends
on the upcoming company performance.
I would take 3 as a buy/sell indication. Clearly there is no money for divs right now, so gen 3 yielded 0 BTC for its shareholders. gen 4 is do or die. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
