First BFL ASIC!

[Micon]

It says enough when all you have is ad hominem and no logical arguments.

here is a logical argument:   who took the picture that is accepted as the "hashrate" for this device?

should a BFL employee taking the pic be considered valid evidence of a hashrate?

[1713498810]

1713498810

[1713498810]

1713498810

[1713498810]

1713498810

[Luke-Jr]

It says enough when all you have is ad hominem and no logical arguments.

here is a logical argument:   who took the picture that is accepted as the "hashrate" for this device?

Josh did, nobody's trying to hide or deny that.

should a BFL employee taking the pic be considered valid evidence of a hashrate?

I don't see why not. I mean, as far as hashrate is concerned I could have just as easily taken a picture of my own screen.

[Minor Miner]

can someone put a bet up on a competing betting site giving a fair over/under amount or something for a fair future date predicting the demise of this joke of a fair betting site?    I would NEVER gamble on it.    in vegas, it would be empty right now and even the cocktail waitresses would be leaving knowing it was doomed.

[Dalkore]

BTW, I started out that semi-long post I made a few minutes ago with the intention of presenting arguments for both sides.
I was surprised that I couldn't come up with any good arguments for the post-April betters... but it is what it is.

Try reading the title of the bet and see if you may figure any "intent" of what people might be actually betting on.  When I do that, it talks about a product "shipping".  

[KGambler]

can someone put a bet up on a competing betting site giving a fair over/under amount or something for a fair future date predicting the demise of this joke of a fair betting site?    I would NEVER gamble on it.    in vegas, it would be empty right now and even the cocktail waitresses would be leaving knowing it was doomed.

What they did really makes you wonder if they had some kind of stake in the outcome.  Neither the decision nor the manner in which they announced it makes any sense.  Shouldn't they at least EXPLAIN how they came to this decision?

[Phinnaeus Gage]

<all times stated below are CST>

Luke posted OP on April 01, 2013, 12:36:32 AM.

Top image in OP taken on March 31, 2013   11:53:12PM.

Bottom image in OP taken on March 31, 2013   11:40:49PM.

@Luke: How did you receive the message from Josh that images were available depicting your unit?

[Micon]

It says enough when all you have is ad hominem and no logical arguments.

here is a logical argument:   who took the picture that is accepted as the "hashrate" for this device?

Josh did, nobody's trying to hide or deny that.

should a BFL employee taking the pic be considered valid evidence of a hashrate?

I don't see why not. I mean, as far as hashrate is concerned I could have just as easily taken a picture of my own screen.

since we are ignoring the title of this bet, we must throw out the shipping.  so we know the device sits in BFL's offices and Josh Zerlan took the picture.  LukeJr is claiming to be the owner of this device.  

So now let's look at the only part of the statement in question:

For this statement to be false, both of the two following conditions must be met:

• Before April 1st 2013, at least one BFL customer with a bitcointalk.org forum account established prior to the bet's opening date shall post detailed and credible photos of the device on the forum, including photos of it operating, and report its hashrate. This customer cannot be a BFL employee.

• The device must achieve at least 75% of its advertised hashrate.

-- A BFL employee took a picture of it operating
-- a "credible photo" cannot be taken by a BFL employee.  It is against all common sense.
-- LukeJr can be considered a BFL Employee.  He is doing work for them in exchange for compensation.

[Luke-Jr]

BTW, I started out that semi-long post I made a few minutes ago with the intention of presenting arguments for both sides.
I was surprised that I couldn't come up with any good arguments for the post-April betters... but it is what it is.

Try reading the title of the bet and see if you may figure any "intent" of what people might be actually betting on.  When I do that, it talks about a product "shipping".

The title seems to suggest an intent of referring to the product being with customers - that's usually what "shipping" refers to.
If the title were on its own, I would agree completely with the post-April position.
However, the details specifically elaborate on the definition of the bet, and that definition seems to have been met.

[mezzomix]

Little Single was advertised as 30 Gh/s. 75% of 30 is 22.5.

Yes, the little single was advertised with 30Gh/s. But if you are one of the first customers, there was no little single at this point in time.

Well, we will see if BFL shipping the products. Within this month we should see several reports of delivered SC products. My assumption is that we will not see lots of shipped BFL SCs this month!

Next thing we will have to watch closely is, if BFL is paying their 1000BTC charity donation.

If they do not deliver this month or if they do not pay the charity donation they clearly deserve the scammer tag.

[tbd]

When was the Little Single announced?  Was it before or after the bet opening date of Sept. 23, 2012?

It appears that the device is working well (http://eligius.st/~wizkid057/newstats/userstats.php/1CdcYVP4T4hjHwt353pEnGHrigeDLvuvZL).  Is Luke going to kindly transfer the BTC he's earning to the individual who had the first order?  Only until that individual gets their device, of course.  They are, after all, shipping now.  So it shouldn't be long.

[Minor Miner]

BTW, I started out that semi-long post I made a few minutes ago with the intention of presenting arguments for both sides.
I was surprised that I couldn't come up with any good arguments for the post-April betters... but it is what it is.

Try reading the title of the bet and see if you may figure any "intent" of what people might be actually betting on.  When I do that, it talks about a product "shipping".

The title seems to suggest an intent of referring to the product being with customers - that's usually what "shipping" refers to.
If the title were on its own, I would agree completely with the post-April position.
However, the details specifically elaborate on the definition of the bet, and that definition seems to have been met.

You seem to have a lot of credibility in this community.   A lot of people seem to admire you.   You should probably just stop defending your actions, because it does not seem credible that you believe what you are saying (so it might be best to say nothing).   If you have seen that POS operating two weeks ago, you know it is not in "shipping" form.   Yes, you will get whatever they can ship FIRST and will make a good sum from the lower difficulty until the others ship.   I would be happy with the payoff and just stop answering people for your actions.   You are not going to change anyone's opinion.

[Luke-Jr]

Little Single was advertised as 30 Gh/s. 75% of 30 is 22.5.

Yes, the little single was advertised with 30Gh/s. But if you are one of the first customers, there was no little single at this point in time.

You are correct, but as I already stated, in the interest of having diversity of my mining devices (for testing BFGMiner against all possible devices), I changed one of my Singles to a pair of Little Singles.

[mezzomix]

They are, after all, shipping now.  So it shouldn't be long.

Are you really sure they are shipping now? I'm one of the early customers (day 3) and I bet I will not see my BFL product this month!

[Minor Miner]

Little Single was advertised as 30 Gh/s. 75% of 30 is 22.5.

Yes, the little single was advertised with 30Gh/s. But if you are one of the first customers, there was no little single at this point in time.

You are correct, but as I already stated, in the interest of having diversity of my mining devices (for testing BFGMiner against all possible devices), I changed one of my Singles to a pair of Little Singles.

You best watch out for the EPA because you cannot spread this much BS around and ensure them it will not get into the ground water.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Bob has bigger problems! I just read some of the current bets, and all of them have issues. Here's an example:

US will involve in another war by August 2016

The US congress will have authorized military engagements someplace in the world by August 8, 2016
(continuation of war in Afganistan or Iraq will not count towards this statement)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war_by_the_United_States

[mezzomix]

You are correct, but as I already stated, in the interest of having diversity of my mining devices (for testing BFGMiner against all possible devices), I changed one of my Singles to a pair of Little Singles.

BFL allowed to change Jalapeno orders into Little single (and maybe single) orders, but I never heard that they changed single orders into little singles. Do you have a link to this policy - maybe a lot of people want to change their singles into little singles?

[Dalkore]

BTW, I started out that semi-long post I made a few minutes ago with the intention of presenting arguments for both sides.
I was surprised that I couldn't come up with any good arguments for the post-April betters... but it is what it is.

Try reading the title of the bet and see if you may figure any "intent" of what people might be actually betting on.  When I do that, it talks about a product "shipping".

The title seems to suggest an intent of referring to the product being with customers - that's usually what "shipping" refers to.
If the title were on its own, I would agree completely with the post-April position.
However, the details specifically elaborate on the definition of the bet, and that definition seems to have been met.

I would tend to agree with this defintion:

Shipping - The process of transporting an item, usually through the mail. Shipping is a very basic, common way of getting an item from one place to another, or from one person to another.

Also, you are not with your unit.  Also, you are not a customer, you are clearly a independent contractor or consultant, even if you ordered a unit.  Being that the bet laid out conditions about non-BFL employees, you can make the argument that you would not count either.   Now if you were at home and it arrived, that would be another story, but you were at their facility and left the unit there.  

[Minor Miner]

They are, after all, shipping now.  So it shouldn't be long.

Are you really sure they are shipping now? I'm one of the early customers (day 3) and I bet I will not see my BFL product this month!

How early?   Josh said they can ship 500 a day, no, then he confirmed 300 a day.   surely you have received the unit they shipped by now just like Luke?

[tbd]

They are, after all, shipping now.  So it shouldn't be long.

Are you really sure they are shipping now? I'm one of the early customers (day 3) and I bet I will not see my BFL product this month!

Luke-Jr says they're shipping, and Luke-Jr says he doesn't lie.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

They are, after all, shipping now.  So it shouldn't be long.

Are you really sure they are shipping now? I'm one of the early customers (day 3) and I bet I will not see my BFL product this month!

How early?   Josh said they can ship 500 a day, no, then he confirmed 300 a day.   surely you have received the unit they shipped by now just like Luke?

You missed the memo! BFL is mimicing Avalon. First to a dev. Second to TBF, hand-delivered. Next dozens to China.