Bitcoin Forum
July 23, 2019, 06:50:46 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 [106] 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 ... 277 »
2101  Other / Meta / Re: Josh from BFL is bribing his forum members to leave negative feedback here!!! on: March 31, 2014, 03:46:26 PM
Looks like Kano is angling for more free hardware vapourware from BFL?

Ethically challenged people stick together. If you find nothing wrong with the ethics of BFL on this and combine that with ignoring their total lack of business ethics and economic damage they have done to thousands then you are part of the problem Kano. The premise that BFL is attempting to prove the flaws in the system of trust ratings seems a lot more than disingenuous given the fact they picked the targets that benefit BFL. What their experiment proved is many people hate BFL and rightly distrust them. You don't get that sort of reaction without some justification.

2102  Other / Meta / Re: BFL bringing down the trust rating? on: March 31, 2014, 10:44:42 AM
It shows your ignorance.
Bitsafe will be OpenSource. I think I have enough knowledge to check for a backdoor  Wink
Lol at opensource, lol at you finding a backdoor in the rng.
Posted from Bitcointa.lk - #HZ4O7EoyLJwrLPpE

Alten's work.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=152517.40

All the Bitmit listings regarding the Bitsafe and Bitsafe development are now live!
https://www.bitmit.net/en/q/?q=bitsafe
2103  Other / Meta / Re: Josh from BFL is bribing his forum members to leave negative feedback here!!! on: March 31, 2014, 10:09:21 AM
Backfired... his own ratings went to -1425 in less than 24 hours.  Still a lot lower than it actually should be given the theft he has presided over.
2104  Other / Meta / Re: suggestion to unsticky "List of all cryptocoins" on: March 31, 2014, 09:56:20 AM
Good suggestion it should be removed.
2105  Other / Meta / Re: BFL bringing down the trust rating? on: March 31, 2014, 09:36:18 AM
So leaving negative trust for a new miners is trade deal?

You sir have no ethics.
I'm just pointing out that the trust system is not working. At least this issue is already noticed, and maybe it makes theymos reforms trust rating. In any case, I'll remove my trust feedbacks(which are not a description real trades) when this contest is over.

You are posting negative feedback that has NOTHING absolutely nothing to do with me. You copy and pasted the wrong trust information. If you are going to lie at least be consistent with Inaba please. You copied what I posted about him. Foolish and lazy. You are deserving of the free Monarch and a 600+ Negative rating. Enjoy it you are now on my ignore list I have no time for people that sell their ethics for mining hardware and then try to make about the trust system. We read what you posted in the butterflylabs forum fool admitting you did it to "win" a Monarch. You lost any moral high ground admitting that you are looking for a pay out.
2106  Other / Meta / Re: BFL bringing down the trust rating? on: March 31, 2014, 09:27:37 AM
He asked me whether he could demonstrate that the Trust system is broken. I said that he could, though I didn't know exactly what he was planning, and I don't like what he's doing here. Trust isn't the right way to respond to people whose posts you dislike. If I'd have known that he was going to do this, I would have warned him that it would probably result in significant backlash...

I'm happy with the performance of the Trust system here so far. I have a few more default-untrusted negative ratings, but Inaba's default trust score went from ~5 to -261 overnight. (I did not change anything about how the Trust system works for this.)
But that happens all the time on here with no way to challenge it.  Trust system isn't broken, default trust is.  I mean FFS I'm red to myself.   Cool
EDIT Also consider that in your own words Inaba's default trust score went from ~5 to -261 overnight.  Mind you his company and probably he by extension deserves every single red possible but what could he have done OVERNIGHT to any of these people that left him that trust?  If that isn't a sign of a broken system what is?  This isn't a trust system it's a popularity system.
Yes. Trust rating is broken. It should have only trade deals! But everyone leaves only their comments, although they did not make real trades.
Quote
BadBear 2: -0 / +2(2)   2014-03-30   0.00000000   Reference   Was bribed to leave fake feedback
BadBear, you(and other people do the same) are the reason why trust rating is broken.


So leaving negative trust for a new miners is trade deal?

You sir have no ethics and clearly deserving of a NEGATIVE 600+. You leave me negative feedback that makes absolutely 0 sense given you are saying I am posting negative feed about Big Picture Mining Cooperative members. Obviously as a former member of BPMC I would definitely like to see where I have done that? You misread what trust ratings were posted copy and pasted then expecting to get a free miner out of it from BFL for the that effort? Really. At least learn the players and do a better job than cutting and pasting your bought testimony.

Finally if you were really concerned about FRAUD then you would be posted negative feedback against BFL and Josh for the BS they have pulled here in the community. There are countless threads and 1000's posts about this with evidence to support what BFL has done and continues to do. You are a paid shill now enjoy the label and the free Monarch. Getting paid to lie is one thing. Getting paid to copy and paste whatever they tell you is simply ignorance especially when you copy my negative feedback for josh and then posted to me. Cripes. Idiotic.
2107  Other / Meta / Re: BFL bringing down the trust rating? on: March 31, 2014, 09:21:24 AM
Edit: Look at the last one... "Bribes people for good trust ratings" from a 4 post newbie. Not only does it not make any sense and is highly contradictory, but someone with such low activity/a throw away account that's not posted in 6 weeks shouldn't be able to participate in the trust system.

Technically speaking his opinion (although I do agree it is highly contradictory) has as much weight as your opinion considering that to a general layperson who knows neither of you it is hard to choose which is deemed trustworthy. This is the reason that although they are allowed to create trust ratings they are not on the DefaultTrust list as they are not deemed to be trustworthy by the mods on this site. Sure it is open to revenge attacks - but a moderated trust system is completely worthless as it simply propagates the views of a few people. The way it is set up is that you can create your own trust list and hence only 'trust' people you actually feel you can 'trust'.

The trust system seems to work when people use it.

Arguing to make it better is great and that is what should be happening. When you kick the hornets nest you are going get stung. There was only one result of doing this for BFL and that was to raise more awareness to their inconsistent and often negligent behaviors.

We don't need moderation of trust what you really need is active participation. If people had simply used the trust function previously in addition to posting their concerns about BFL practices those ratings would be exactly the same as they are now.  The reality of this situation is there is a moral line and when it is finally crossed people will act. Some will act in their own financial best interest to get a free miner but most will turn around and do what is ethically right. This to me exposes the strengths of the system and the weakness of people to stand up and take notice of what goes on pretty much on a daily basis. Josh in particular has abused 100s of people in this community from day one as a member of BFL. But you know what really his pattern of behavior is more in tune with someone attempting to simply misdirect and fud the waters. If that doesn't warrant more than huge negative trust bubbles then I think the forum here doesn't care to moderate people who are systematically trying to degrade and destroy the fabricate of reasonable discussion. What he does is in effect spam it should be treated as such. Ban him.

2108  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Why you shouldn't buy Hashfasts new "up to 800GH/s" "product" on: March 31, 2014, 08:36:09 AM
Why doesn't Coindesk do better more indepth reporting on BFL, Avalon and HashFast? They all seem to get a pass on the hard questions.
For the same reason why their articles are link campaigns sometimes.
Posted from Bitcointa.lk - #kJ3DA4DMXizwTFah

Paid for articles or advertorials?
2109  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s on: March 31, 2014, 08:13:00 AM
"BROKE"
2110  Bitcoin / Group buys / Re: [Group Buy#1] Avalon ASICs CHIPS! Using JohnK as escrow! FINISHED! on: March 31, 2014, 08:03:14 AM
Has this not been RESOLVED yet?

Really?
2111  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: IN STOCK AND SHIPPING - 25+ GH/s USB connection $210 / 183 includes shipping on: March 31, 2014, 07:41:49 AM
Still any more in stock? Are the new ones coming out soon any timeline Ben?
2112  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [ANN]ASICMiner Publicly Looking for Potential Customers/Partners for New Chips on: March 31, 2014, 07:33:18 AM
WPC notified we will be receiving samples of the chip. Thanks Friedcat we PM'd you our EE's address in Seattle.
2113  Local / Политика / Re: Украина on: March 31, 2014, 07:01:08 AM


I just will try voice my disagreements. If I accidentally will win the monarch, it will be a nice bonus.

Feel free to leave appropriate trust ratings for anyone that sells them.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=42514


-426: -5 / +3(3)
Warning: Trade with extreme caution!
2114  Other / Meta / Re: BFL bringing down the trust rating? on: March 31, 2014, 06:57:00 AM
I just will try voice my disagreements. If I accidentally will win the monarch, it will be a nice bonus.

Feel free to leave appropriate trust ratings for anyone that sells them.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=42514


-426: -5 / +3(3)
Warning: Trade with extreme caution!

2115  Other / Meta / Re: BFL bringing down the trust rating? on: March 31, 2014, 06:51:26 AM
BFL_Josh  BFL_Josh is online now
Employee


Quote
Drawing date will be the at midnight UTC the day after we ship our first unit.

On a slightly different note, the Imperial Monarch will be shipped within the first 1000 shipped (so within the first few days of starting to ship, most likely, barring any problems), as I've secured an early spot in line. I figured that would be the case but I didn't want to commit to it until I was sure. So the winning entry will receive the Imperial Monarch rather quickly once they start shipping.


LOL! Eh... so what date are they shipping? Hahaha. No date... just promises to ship when they ship. Nice. If he only spent half the time he does defaming people they might actually ship the product. 13 months and counting... do you know where your bribe is?


https://forums.butterflylabs.com/announcements/8203-win-butterfly-labs-imperial-monarch.html#post79152
2116  Other / Meta / Re: BFL bringing down the trust rating? on: March 31, 2014, 06:33:43 AM
LOL....

Hahaahaha. I relish the fact they are putting bounties on my head. Amazing eh? You can't have people just post REAL trust ratings you have to pay for them. Ethically challenged? What a joke.

When will they get their rewards? March 2014?

If anyone takes BFL up on that offer they are selling their reputation for hardware. At least they are admitting they need to PAY FOR positive ratings and discredit me and dogie for the same coin and goes directly to the fact that Inaba has been abusing the trust system since it's implementation and a good reason to BAN him and BFL from the forums entirely.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=8198 (Inaba)
Code:
Bicknellski 14: -0 / +16(16) 2014-03-30 0.00000000 Reference Buying Trust ratings. What is wrong with that? (Delete)

Feel free to counter Inaba's attempt to trash the trust ratings by posting your own negative or positive feedback. He has already lied countless times in Trust ratings and people can verify that independently by just checking what he posts for negative feedback on the trust of various people. I suggest this is just another ploy to discredit the trust system and bring it down so that his negative ratings and BFL's negatives will disappear. Don't let him run from his past keep posting the TRUTH as you know it bitcointalk members. It looks like BFL is feeling the pain and is really working on their psyops full on now. Laughable.

Any of this look familiar in BFL's and Inaba's playbook? Anyone know exactly what sort of work he did in the past for the Army? Hmmm... funny his tactics seem to be right out of the psyops right? https://firstlook.org/theintercept/document/2014/02/24/art-deception-training-new-generation-online-covert-operations/


I already did bro and i gave you a good positive love Smiley

If you could edit that 500 BTC out though to 0 for me from you that be great. Although I have held as much as 781 BTC (Value $80,000 USD) for others and returned it when Avalon failed to deliver our group it's chips realistically I have not held larger than a few BTC in the limited trading I have done and the refunds we did offer to our BPMC customers was not held by me I just facilitated the refunds in the thread. Thanks for the trust and I reciprocated as I feel your work on exposing BFL BS is critical to getting this company shut down.
2117  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: The Wasp Project Collective Information thread. on: March 31, 2014, 05:55:28 AM
Just got notice from Asicminer that we will be getting some of their sample chips. We are grateful that Friedcat contacted us with this great news and have forwarded the EE's mailing address. Hope to see some samples soon and we are also keen on helping the community build their own miners using the new Asicminer Chips. Let us hope there are plenty on offer in the coming months.

Note that we currently have in development the following range of Wasps and will likely be adding at least one new ASIC 28nm chip to this list soon pending negotiations.

A1 Wasp Proto-boards are now being tested.

Specifications:

    Developed on 28nm HPP process from Global Foundries
    Custom IC package with power bars for low voltage, high current feeding
    Configurable in daisy chain mode for distributed work with up to 253 ASICs.
    Standard SPI interface
    Hashing power of 25 GH/s in nominal and up to 40 GH/s in Turbo mode
    Power usage of 0.35 W/GH in low power, 0.6 W/GH in nominal and 1 W/GH in Turbo mode
    Supply voltage of 0.65V in low power, 0.765 V in nominal and 0.85 V in Turbo mode

BF2 Wasp Completed Design. Prototypes are now being fabricated.

Specifications:

    55nm process
    Full-custom hand-routed design
    Experimental low-threshold-voltage transistors
    QFN 48 7mm x 7mm package
    864 rolled hash cores
    Improved performance and lower power consumption
    Hashrate up to 3.85GH/s
    Power consumption as low as 0.45J/GH

AM BE200 Wasp Just Added. Wasp design will start soon.

Specifications:

    40nm TSMC process.
    Standard SPI interface.
    32 highly optimized hashing cores in single chip.
    The typical hash power is ~12GH/s in rated mode.
2118  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Why you shouldn't buy Hashfasts new "up to 800GH/s" "product" on: March 31, 2014, 05:24:57 AM
this should be set as a sticky..  or a buyers beware thread up top for all the bullshit scam companies
I feel like I can't reasonably do that because I can't vet every complaint with high confidence. And I don't want to just sticky vendors who have screwed _me_, while vendors who have screwed other people don't get the sticky.




Like BFL specifically. How about we sticky the post by Dogie about fabricators?

You guys see this:

http://www.coindesk.com/court-grants-order-freeze-hashfasts-bitcoin-wallets/

Why doesn't Coindesk do better more indepth reporting on BFL, Avalon and HashFast? They all seem to get a pass on the hard questions.
2119  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: BFL Product Failures / Underperformance. on: March 31, 2014, 04:02:52 AM
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=545641.0

Code:
My BFL Jalapeno Experience So Far
March 29, 2014, 03:54:06
Reply with quote  #1
First I want say a quick 'hello' to everyone, it's been a long time since I posted,
but I'm sure glad the forum is here when I need it.

So, getting down to business..

I received my little JillyJally back in late November, (mid-April order, sans upgrade)
Sad and to my dismay, it would never reach 5gh/s, it averaged about 4.7.
Things were going well with it and it was hashing along fine for about 2 months
without major issue. Valentines Day I noticed that the hashrate started to drop down
to 4.5 (I love you too BFL), but I didn't think much of it at the time. Given that 4.5
is still within the 10% range of variance, I simply chalked it up to getting the bare
minimum from my order. Yippee!!

For almost a month it had been running pretty smoothly at 4.5 and then over the
past week I've noticed that it's dropped again and now sits around 4.25. All along
the temps have been around 44C and HW errors around 5%, which from my research
is about normal. And oh yes, from day 1 I have had the outer casing removed, but
top and bottom plates are still on and switched the fan to blow downward, as per
the research I did before my unit was shipped.

Today I was a little frustrated knowing that I was supposed to get a Jally with a 10%
variance from 5gh/s and my unit is now more than 10%. Grrr.. So I decided to shut
her down and check her out, given that I haven't touched her in a few months.
Even before I had her unplugged I noticed that my heatsink was loose and was like
"WTF?" So I popped the feet off, grabbed a torx and took it apart to tighten it up.
And Ughhhhh!!!  Huh Angry Huh

[b]The screws holding the PCB to the heatsink were completely loose. The thing wobbled
like my grandmother behind the wheel. So, being curious if the chip(s) were damaged,
I pulled out the screws and wanted to check it out.[/b]

Stupid ZAIRA (292 or 274) or whomever put my unit together didn't use any thermal paste.
SRSLY WTF? Is this normal? Two chips. No paste. WTF?

I had some thermal paste leftover from building my Hackintosh, so I put a dab of paste on
each and put her back together. But I still don't get close to my original 4.7gh/s.
I didn't see any damage to the chips or anything else during my inspection. I do
however get close to the previous 4.5gh/s with 4.41gh/s

As with the consensus, I'm very unimpressed with BFL. Does anyone have
experience with RMA their sub-par Jallies?
2120  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Why you shouldn't buy Hashfasts new "up to 800GH/s" "product" on: March 31, 2014, 03:59:36 AM
this should be set as a sticky..  or a buyers beware thread up top for all the bullshit scam companies
I feel like I can't reasonably do that because I can't vet every complaint with high confidence. And I don't want to just sticky vendors who have screwed _me_, while vendors who have screwed other people don't get the sticky.




Like BFL specifically. How about we sticky the post by Dogie about fabricators?
Pages: « 1 ... 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 [106] 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 ... 277 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!