Yes, but at this time, I cant see or verify how much of those 1PH they sold, so they could be doing fractional reserve mining without anyone noticing.


cex.io used to be where bitfury sold their hashrate, or so I thought.

Im curious, does the underside of the board (bottom of  picture) get warm at all? Looking at the design, I would think most air pressure will escape there,  following the path of least resistance, and relatively little air will flow particularly over the top heatsinks. Id try channeling the air by blocking most or all of the clearance to the underside and using a fan with perhaps lower CFM but high static pressure.

Think you got that backwards. Maintaining an arbitrary wall would be giving money away

Added bit-x.com (thanks to mabsark for pointing it out) which have been confirmed by bitfury as being their (only) reseller - for just 1PH:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=896350.0

Not sure what that implies for cex.io

Upgraded cointellect rating based on livestream and stats in contract manager.

I see they accept bitcoin donations. But no paycoin :p

That live feed is actually neat (Im not being cynical). Just a shame I cant tell if those are file servers in those cabinets or miners.
At least they have some hardware apparently. Are there no pictures?

The pool IP doesnt tell me anything though. Id need pool stats and block signatures.


I dont call them, I usually do reach out to them via the forum, but as Ive explained a few times, I base myself solely on publicly available information for the very reason I want everyone to be able to double check my findings and do their own due dilligence. IOW, I shouldnt have to call them to get answers to these questions. But if there is something I missed, Im more than happy to adjust the ratings. Not sure yet if what you provided warrants that just yet.


I deliberately ignore profitability questions.  A scam can easily appear as profitable as the scammer wants it to appear, thats not something that should be balanced against the fact they are a scam and may not pay a penny after x weeks. So I only try to ascertain how likely it is a given company will comply with its contract, not how (un)profitable those contracts might be.

Dude.. do you see the "shares" count? Thats how long it took the pool to find the block. To use a highly technical term: "luck".
cex.io fees are defined in dollars and per GH per month. From the above its clear those fees are calculated per block on each block. If a block took twice as long as average, you'd expect to pay twice as many on fees. If a block takes half the average time, you'd expect to see half the average fee. Reward remains the same (ignoring variations in transaction fees), and therefore long unlucky blocks will yield a negative return, short, lucky blocks will yield a positive return. This is completely normal.

What could indicate fraud is if the average length is statistically (very) unlikely. But its not according to the man who should know:
http://organofcorti.blogspot.be/2014/12/december-7th-2014-weekly-bitcoin_10.html
http://organofcorti.blogspot.be/2014/12/december-14th-2014-bitcoin-mining-pool.html

An unlucky week, but a CDF of 88% is completely within the expected range. Or do you think slush (72%) and bitminter (78%) and eligius (77%) are also scamming and even more than cex ?

Here is the thing: if organofcorti tells me cex.io numbers dont add up, I wont hesitate for a second to change my view, but when someone who doesnt understand the first thing about this, hasnt even realized his dragon miners are costing him a fortune because you cant do a long division, if someone like that makes gratuitous  claims, I will gladly ignore that.

What do you mean? Status of these ponzi, which are still paying and whch have collapsed, is that what you mean? If so, its utterly meaningless.


There is only one way that can be proven. A "ponzi" is defined by the absence of an underlying business model that can generate the promised investor profit. In this case its absence of mining hardware. You can not  prove a negative, so of course, I have no proof for my ponzi claims.

My ponzi claims are based on the absence of evidence of the opposite. The same way we assume there is no teapot orbiting the sun and unicorns don't exist. The same way we assume Nigerian princesses emailing you lucrative investment opportunities are scams. There is absolutely no proof for those assumptions and they are unprovable. But reasonable people will accept the utter absence of evidence to the contrary, as sufficient to deny they are real.

For cloudmining, disproving my ponzi claims is ridiculously easy for a legitimate company. Walk around the datacenter with a smartphone and show me the coinbase transactions in the blockchain. If they cant even do that, then you can bet its a unicorn.


Nope, those days are long gone.  I do still love my cold wallet though, its never failed me.

Firstly and for the umpth time, early investor profit ≠ proof  of legitimacy. If it where, Pirate and Madoff wouldnt be in jail.

Secondly, Ive defined my criteria based on my experience here, then I applied them as best as I could and without prejudice. If I misapplied any, point it out, Im human I can make mistakes. But if not, accept the outcome. BTW, if anything, the outcome for GAW is pretty favorable because Im only looking at their cloudmining contracts. If I looked at the bigger picture, it has ponzi and delusion written all over it. Here is a good summary written by eigntycylinders: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=857670.msg9868670#msg9868670

Thanks for writing that down, very useful for people like me who just glance at this debacle from a distance!

So you are accusing them of making a profit? Is by your definition Amazon a "scam company" because they charge more than it costs them?


Im pretty sure you cant, and that you are unable to distinguish between pool luck and hashrate variation.


Again, I strongly suspect you dont understand pool luck, but prove me wrong.


No, because you can sell your contract at any time, why would it be fair to have to pay fees for the entire month on the first day of that month? Moreover, throughout the month the price of bitcoin can vary pretty wildly.. If BTC exchange rate doubled in the course of a month, Im sure you would accuse them of scamming if they charged you based on the exchange rate of the beginning of the month. So if cex.io does that calculation every block, I have no problems with that as long as the average works out. If it does not, then prove it.


Stop ranting and show us the numbers. Cex.io has many thousands of users and a profitable business model that doesnt require skimming or scamming. If what you say is true, Im fairly certain Id have seen the evidence from someone able to do basic arithmetic.

Thing is, like many you seem mad at cex.io because you didnt make a profit. and/or their prices are absurd The same goes for cryptx users. In both cases I went out of my way to show people those prices were insane and predicted what would happen, but also in both cases these companies to my knowledge have provided exactly what they promised, which is more than will be said from the majority of companies on my list.

So? Its a classic trick, just about every ponzi in history did it, including pbmining, pirate, madoff,..



Me, real member? If you meant to ask if I invested in any of these companies: absolutely not.


If you have evidence of cex.io not living up to its contractual obligations, by all means post it. But since you are the guy who claims to be able to make a huge profit mining with 1J/GH dragon miners and $0.38/KWH, Im not going to take your word for it without checking the numbers myself.


Ive never invested a satoshi in cloudmining, and dont expect I ever will.


Nope.

No questions that they would actually  (honestly) answer.
Finding out who they are, aka who to sue,  would be a first step though. But good luck with that.

You're right, that does look fishy.

Nah, what you see I think is just the border of the transition effect. You can see the same thing around the 12 second mark.
Im not saying it couldnt have been doctored, but it looks fairly convincing to me. Just not all that impressive, I dont think there could be more than 100 GPU's in that video, so likely less than 100MH. Compared to the 5200+ they claim to own.

You mean this part ?



Its not a photo, you can clearly see the fans spinning and the camera position changes. If its fake, its pretty well done.

Please consider making an exception for the signature in my, well, signature. Its not commercial and not only does it not compete with your offer, I think its very beneficial for you to expose all the scam offers out there.

Already did that, you're welcome to read it and discuss it in the thread linked in my signature.

Oh wait, you saw that and didnt like the results because your favorite ponzi didnt score well. Too bad.

Sponsorship is not and will never be a criterion. Just remember BT Trader sponsored all kinds of bitcoin events as well.

The video's on their site do count as something, its just that the only segment that shows any relevant capacity lasts about half a second, and the text reads 'Total power is near 350-400 MHs". Meanwhile the stats on their site show over 5000 MHs.

Oh, and I had to delete your post, no (ponzi) mining referral links allowed in this thread.