First BFL ASIC!

[Micon]

I call for a full boycott of betsofbitco.in

I will personally send the first coin to run an advertising campaign against them.  This is total bullshit.  Bettors have been cheated by a bitcoin site.

I fucking hate this shit.  It cheapens the entire space.

someone tally the users that said it was false vs. true.  Even the guys that I have BFL bets with claimed BFL lost!

[1714092369]

1714092369

[1714092369]

1714092369

[1714092369]

1714092369

[tbd]

We have carefully examined both sides of the argument. First of all, on our site title is definitely part of the agreement. We do not count the current status as BFL "shipping" the products, therefore other bets are still open. On the other hand the conditions in the description are met. Unfortunately the statement description, as it is written, can be interpreted as complementary conditions to shipping for more clear evidence or the definition of shipping. As much as we would like to settle the bet on one side (as we would earn a significant commission) we do not think that the situation is unambiguous under these circumstances which would be very hard to foresee at the time of statement initiation. As we have been doing before, we will continue to call a draw if there is a such an ambiguity. All the bets will be refunded without any commission.

You realize that every contentious bet is going to be "ambiguous" now, right?  Any time someone is on the wrong side, they're going to claim that the rules weren't clear and try and get a refund.

[Vagnavs]

 BFL = BUNCH OF F*CKING LIARS

 Has there ever been a company as bad as BFL?  Maybe that mystery shopping scam..  Also does BFL run enough ads?

[coinpeculiator]

The bet clearly states it is about the three original devices, 4.5GH/s 60GH/s and 1500GH/s as were the offerings from last year, this device is not one of those and therefore BFL haven't delivered.

[hanti]

Code:

One of your bets at Bets of Bitcoin has been decided as a draw and refunded. Details are below:
Statement: Butterfly Labs will not ship ASIC-based Bitforce SC products before April 2013
Link: http://betsofbitco.in/item?id=701
Your side: Agree
Your bet amount: 0.25

Bets of Bitcoin
http://betsofbitco.in

bye betsofbitco.in

[Bogart]

I had quite a bit of coin riding on this bet, and I feel like Bets of Bitcoin is trying to cheat me out of what I won fair and square.

Aside from all of the other reasons, the pictures clearly were not posted before April.  The bet outcome should be "true".

[FreshJR]

We have carefully examined both sides of the argument. First of all, on our site title is definitely part of the agreement. We do not count the current status as BFL "shipping" the products, therefore other bets are still open. On the other hand the conditions in the description are met. Unfortunately the statement description, as it is written, can be interpreted as complementary conditions to shipping for more clear evidence or the definition of shipping. As much as we would like to settle the bet on one side (as we would earn a significant commission) we do not think that the situation is unambiguous under these circumstances which would be very hard to foresee at the time of statement initiation. As we have been doing before, we will continue to call a draw if there is a such an ambiguity. All the bets will be refunded without any commission.

Haha, bye bye.

How is the title true?
How is 25/40 > 75% true?
How is anything else I pointed out in the first statement true?

How are both listed statements true if one is false?

[FreshJR]

The bet clearly states it is about the three original devices, 4.5GH/s 60GH/s and 1500GH/s as were the offerings from last year, this device is not one of those and therefore BFL haven't delivered.

Even 40 Gh/s in the yahoo article does not meet 75%

[tbd]

It is very clear that the conditions are not met --

This bet concerns the 3 Butterfly Labs Bitforce SC products announced here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=87934.msg966886#msg966886

That message refers to a press release here:
http://news.yahoo.com/butterfly-labs-announces-next-generation-asic-lineup-054626776.html

Containing:
"2)    BitForce SC Single: a standalone unit providing roughly 40 GH/s, priced at $1,299"

The second condition of the bet:
• The device must achieve at least 75% of its advertised hashrate.


40 * .75 = 30.  That rate was not met.

[Luke-Jr]

Do I need to apologize to all the "BFL will ship" betters for not taking my device with me when I flew home? From my persepctive, claiming BFL has not shipped is clearly nitpicking a technicality.

Are "BFL won't ship" betters going to claim that I am to blame for accepting a device I was expecting to receive last year, after I had been waiting over 10 months for my order? This is absurd.

I do see that since my device was prior to the first batch, which has not shipped, it might be debatable. But on the other hand, it's certainly not a clear-cut result either, because the terms specifically said non-employee; considering that it was known in advance that third-party software developers would receive their units prior to the first batch, the specifying of non-employee IMO clearly includes myself or any of the other pre-batch 1 units that had been paid for.
Edit: Also note that Avalon also established a precedent for delivering non-mainstream units to meet deadlines.

It's true that the Little Single was not part of the original product lineup, and that I had to change one of my Single orders into two Little Singles (I have at least one of each product ordered for variety of testing), but this IMO is also a technicality and not really relevant.

The claim that my device is not what other customers will receive may be true - but I see it akin to the (very common) practice of other hardware manufs to revise boards without changing the model number. This is clearly a Little Single, even if most customers will be receiving a later revision of the Little Single.

To conclude, I think calling it a draw is within the perrogative of the judge, but I still believe pre-April is the honest winner.

[coinpeculiator]

Bets of bitcoin looks pretty bad to me right now. They should ensure all the bets on their site meet a standard where it is clear there will be no ambiguity over the time, the meaning of shipping and reading the terms for which devices needed to be delivered, they have failed in this undertaking.

[Zotia]

I'm so pissed at betsofbitco.in right now.


They owe me THOUSANDS of dollars from that bet.

[tbd]

It's true that the Little Single was not part of the original product lineup, and that I had to change one of my Single orders into two Little Singles (I have at least one of each product ordered for variety of testing), but this IMO is also a technicality and not really relevant.

To conclude, I think calling it a draw is within the perrogative of the judge, but I still believe pre-April is the honest winner.

Actually, that "technicality" is entirely relevant -- this bet does not apply to the "Little Single" at all as it is not mentioned in the press release.  The bet only concerns the 3 Butterfly Labs BitForce SC products announced in the press release.  BFL could have shipped out 1000 of these "Little Singles" six months ago and still would have lost the bet.

Are you being compensated by BFL in any way for your development efforts or making these statements?

[Luke-Jr]

It's true that the Little Single was not part of the original product lineup, and that I had to change one of my Single orders into two Little Singles (I have at least one of each product ordered for variety of testing), but this IMO is also a technicality and not really relevant.

Actually, that "technicality" is entirely relevant -- this bet does not apply to the "Little Single" at all as it is not mentioned in the press release.  The bet only concerns the 3 Butterfly Labs BitForce SC products announced in the press release.  BFL could have shipped out 1000 of these "Little Singles" six months ago and still would have lost the bet.

Well, I'll leave that up to the judge to decide, but I disagree.

Are you being compensated by BFL in any way for your development efforts or making these statements?

I am making these statements of my own accord. BFL has not even suggested I make them, nor mentioned any bets to me other than Josh's seppuku thing.

[Nemesis]

Lame gamblers.


Calling it draw is the best decision. Dumb ass still try to argue...." oh noes.... its about the 'original' products......" Dumb ass there is no 60ghs single anymore.

Human nature at its best!

[Syke]

Are you being compensated by BFL in any way for your development efforts or making these statements?

Yes, BFL is moving his order to the front of the line. Having the first hashing device will provide quite a nice profit for him.

[tbd]

Lame gamblers.


Calling it draw is the best decision. Dumb ass still try to argue...." oh noes.... its about the 'original' products......" Dumb ass there is no 60ghs single anymore.

Human nature at its best!

Are you addressing me with your puerile comments?  I have no money in this, but I think it's a travesty that the Bitcoin world is so rife with corruption and scams.  There's a lot of attention right now, and I think that it's going to taint Bitcoin and make it more difficult to get wider acceptance.

In any case, I think that the text of the bet should be what people go on.  It's pretty clear.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Seriously, 6 4 new pages since the last time I was here? Now I got to read to see what the uproar is about, for I'm sure it's an uproar of some nature. I'm going to guess that Josh joined the fray, and Kano and Luke are at it, and the bet ain't resolved yet. Let's see how close I am with this guesstimation.

EDIT: See strikethroughs. It was the bet aspect and resolved, but...

[Miner99er]

"Do I need to apologize to all the "BFL will ship" betters for not taking my device with me when I flew home?"

Nope, you should apologize for taking it in the cornhole from BFL.


"From my persepctive, claiming BFL has not shipped is clearly nitpicking a technicality."

And from our perspective, you've enjoyed it, and that's clearly not a technicality.


"Are "BFL won't ship" betters going to claim that I am to blame for accepting a device I was expecting to receive last year, after I had been waiting over 10 months for my order? This is absurd."

What's absurd is we're all waiting for over 10 months now and this is what we get. A half functioning over heating device that obviously doesn't perform as they stated it would.



"I do see that since my device was prior to the first batch, which has not shipped, it might be debatable. But on the other hand, it's certainly not a clear-cut result either, because the terms specifically said non-employee; considering that it was known in advance that third-party software developers would receive their units prior to the first batch, the specifying of non-employee IMO clearly includes myself or any of the other pre-batch 1 units that had been paid for.
Edit: Also note that Avalon also established a precedent for delivering non-mainstream units to meet deadlines."

If it's prior to the first batch, then they aren't shipping; Not debatable. 1/3rd to developers, 1/3rd to random people, 1/3rd to FCFS on the list? So should I have you start mining to my address and the other 20k preorders that are awaiting now? Cause it seems like I could do SHA256 Hashes on an ABACUS faster than I'd ever get one on a BFL device at this point. Who gives a shit if you're an employee or not. You're doing work for them on your shitty mining software (BTW, CGminer is used by everyone I know... so why don't you stop coding so this is less of a point.) Also, forget what Avalon has done in the past except for this one small moot point... they shipped a product.


"It's true that the Little Single was not part of the original product lineup, and that I had to change one of my Single orders into two Little Singles (I have at least one of each product ordered for variety of testing), but this IMO is also a technicality and not really relevant."

Everything said here is not relevant, least we can agree there.


"The claim that my device is not what other customers will receive may be true - but I see it akin to the (very common) practice of other hardware manufs to revise boards without changing the model number. This is clearly a Little Single, even if most customers will be receiving a later revision of the Little Single."

SO, lets see we're STILL NOT FUCKING SHIPPING!!!!!


"To conclude, I think calling it a draw is within the perrogative of the judge, but I still believe pre-April is the honest winner."

To conclude, Luke-jr is a douche-bag who tried to manipulate a wager, package a preshipping unit as the real deal, NEVER TOOK POSSESSION of it in the first place, lost all credibility on this forum (at least by me), and is still trying to defend his position. Really, you should really think about obtaining a priest position in the catholic community near you, at least then everyone would know you're a slimeball before you got a chance to open your mouth.

[DataPlumber]

Are you being compensated by BFL in any way for your development efforts or making these statements?

In a COMPLETELY UNRELATED note, I had a conversation with some co-workers about the WiFi password where I work (which is intended to be kept Private and Only For Business Use Only).  I had been sending that password to the Developers group, because I thought they should have it, should they need to test a mobile device.

Well, what happened is: they gave it out to other co-workers, who gave it out to other co-workers... and our wi-fi was Flooded.

So, I had to stop sending them the password.  Why?  Because they were untrustworthy?  Loose lips sink ships?

No, it's because for the most part we're all friends where I work, and friends won't withhold the wi-fi password from friends.  Because friends will help friends with the best of intentions, even if it invokes a certain well-known common tragedy.

Which is an anecdote, to be clear, that is Completely Off Topic and should probably be deleted just before I post it.