Is it really that difficult to delete the 343 levels of nested quotes?

Call me slow, Im still trying to understand how it supposedly works
So staked coins do the mining and gaw will hold like nearly all of them. What happens if someone with a few staked coins decides to DDoS GAW. Can he double spend at will?

Seems like Cloudmining.website took the "Masters Cub" cloudy mining concept and ran with it:


Yep, its reinvesting 100% by default. Wonder why they did that

"We want laws to be built around Paycoin. "

Is that guy for real?

One more question; if mining stops, who ahm.. mines the blocks? I assume GAW does that with some left over miners ? How is that secure then against a 51% attack?

1% per day? LOL? Does that compound? And so there is no upper bound to the amount of paycoins in circulation?

What does the "staking" achieve, and what does it do for the 96% or whatever gaw premined if they are staked?

You should indeed assume any financial scheme in the crypto world to be a scam or ponzi if no credible evidence to the contrary  is provided by whoever is promising you profits. One cant prove a negative, but its usually bloody easy to prove a positive, especially when we have public ledgers.
IOW, show me a unicorn and I'll believe, but dont invest based on the promise of one.

They wont, their customers will.
A ponzi only works as long as more money flows in than flows out. Now think what those "some settings" happen to achieve and why they were activated...

*tick* *tock* *tick* *tock*

I assume they endorse themselves, since they sell hardware too.

You wouldnt even have to prove its a ponzi. Just that its an unregistered security should be enough to force him to provide a full refund.

Since PMmining later claimed to derive income from "other sources", you should consider this an unregistered security. Not sure who's in charge of that in Canada, but if you take that road, it wont even matter if he still pays.

It means fraudulent mining services are extremely unlikely to provide you a with a profit, since they tend to collapse long before that. Their prices and fees are therefore irrelevant.

As for the legitimate offerings, its possible, but IMO unlikely to be profitable.  It would require BTC exchange rate to go up and difficulty not following suit, which I doubt will happen with 3-4x more efficient miners just around the corner, I expect difficulty to skyrocket even if BTC remains flat.

ltcgear and bit-x are both listed. Common guys, the list is getting long, but not so long you cant find those.

In other news, looks like cloudmining.website is running on its last legs. It stopped automatic payments and enabled 100% reinvestment for everyone without even asking:


Thats pretty desperate.

Whats that deep,  rumbling sound?
Yep, thats the sound of imminent collapse of yet another ponzi.

Its not for me, I have no interest in promoting any cloudmining, be it legit or otherwise.
Its for people who want to carry my 101 sig as well as get paid for AMhash's sig

Thats because its impossible to prove a negative. One can not prove that there is NO hardware, just like one can not prove there is no teapot orbiting the sun or that unicorns do not exist. Its trivially easy to prove the positive if its real though, so the burden of proof lays with the claimant, in this case, the cloudmining service that claims to have the hashrate they are selling.



I agree . But in the other sense than you meant it. If cloudmining services offer less proof of their legitimacy than there is proof for unicorns, Id rather stake my money on the existence of unicorns.


Bitcoin by itself is already risky and potentially lucrative enough. Trying to invest bitcoins makes as little sense to me as trying to invest gold.
FWIW, Ive been around bitcoin for a fair bit longer than you appear to be; in all my time, I have seen ONE bitcoin denominated investment that overall returned substantially more BTC to its investors than it collected (AM). Well maybe two if you count satoshidice, even if that was hardly substantial. . And thats out of 100's if not 1000's of iPO's and investment vehicles and scams of all kind. Good luck spreading your risk in this minefield.

Why on earth (pun intended) would I want to store my private keys somewhere completely out of reach, where they are irrecoverable (I assume reentry is a ball of fire)  and prone to catastrophe ? I might as well engrave them on a piece of metal and sink that t in the Mariana's trench.

Fair point; this started as a brief expose and quickly grew in to something thats becoming hard to maintain. I often dont remember myself why I gave a certain score, but I guess there is an upside to that, it allows or forces me or anyone to reexamine the data, which may not be a bad thing.

As for hashprofit, there is an address and matching phone number on their site:
https://hashprofit.com/en/contact/

I admit thats not exactly overwhelming evidence, which is also why the added text reads "address/identity is unconfirmed", but at least it allows anyone in cyprus to go there and verify if they exist. Ive not heard anyone try that and report there is nothing there, so I can only assume its a valid address until proven otherwise.

I dont know what happened with cloudhashing specifically, so Im not going to comment on it, but any company that complies to my list if criteria, even if it breaks its contract, it can be held accountable. Which is more than can be said of the majority of anonymous scams listed.


I wholeheartedly disagree. First of all, investing in a ponzi makes you complicit in the scam, as your goal of making a profit depends on luring in new victims that will not profit. Thats not how I would want to earn a satoshi. It also funds and enables the scam, while the chances of profiting are actually extremely slim. Very few ponzi's will live long enough.

Secondly, "testing" a cloudmining service doesnt tell you anything. Every well executed scam will pay perfectly. Until the day they pull the plug.

Lastly, spreading risk only ensures you will lose money because there are far more scams than there are legitimate services.

IN short, your strategy of spreading and testing and not asking too many questions is exactly what ponzi scammers want you to do. If instead of that, people demanded credible proof before sending them a satoshi, these scams would quickly be a thing of the past.