-

[||bit]

LabRat, why don't you scan the letters you received from authorities and show them to us (certain bits blacked out)?
Or post links here about those new laws which force you to change lrm's share/bond concept.

Apart from that, I just googled 'new jersey bitcoin law' ... it does not look amusing.

Maybe those will be posted on the same day the hardware photos are posted.

[1714499518]

1714499518

[||bit]

Can you give us projections for hashrate per bond over the next few months. 

58792 currently outstanding bonds. With an expected hashrate of:

25-30TH in the next week or so (318.915-382.703 MH/s per bond)
50-55TH in the next month (637.842-701.626 MH/s per bond)
205-215TH beginning of March (some of this could get sent a little early  ) (2.615-2.743 GH/s per bond)

These are estimates and are in no way binding if off by a small amount.  Certain factors could change these projections.

Can you also tell us what plans you have for an exchange?

I can't share this yet, but I have not forgotten about this.  It's being worked on and hopefully a solution can be worked out in the near future.

It comes in waves. It appears 50TH should have come online last month per the Jan 30th comment.

Why was there no update on this?

Where is that hardware?

[bittymitty]

Can you give us projections for hashrate per bond over the next few months. 

58792 currently outstanding bonds. With an expected hashrate of:

25-30TH in the next week or so (318.915-382.703 MH/s per bond)
50-55TH in the next month (637.842-701.626 MH/s per bond)
205-215TH beginning of March (some of this could get sent a little early  ) (2.615-2.743 GH/s per bond)

These are estimates and are in no way binding if off by a small amount.  Certain factors could change these projections.

Can you also tell us what plans you have for an exchange?

I can't share this yet, but I have not forgotten about this.  It's being worked on and hopefully a solution can be worked out in the near future.

It comes in waves. It appears 50TH should have come online last month per the Jan 30th comment.

Why was there no update on this?

Where is that hardware?

That 50 Th is BFL monarchs and is delayed at least 2 months currently no surprises there.

[||bit]

Can you give us projections for hashrate per bond over the next few months.  

58792 currently outstanding bonds. With an expected hashrate of:

25-30TH in the next week or so (318.915-382.703 MH/s per bond)
50-55TH in the next month (637.842-701.626 MH/s per bond)
205-215TH beginning of March (some of this could get sent a little early  ) (2.615-2.743 GH/s per bond)

These are estimates and are in no way binding if off by a small amount.  Certain factors could change these projections.

Can you also tell us what plans you have for an exchange?

I can't share this yet, but I have not forgotten about this.  It's being worked on and hopefully a solution can be worked out in the near future.

It comes in waves. It appears 50TH should have come online last month per the Jan 30th comment.

Why was there no update on this?

Where is that hardware?

That 50 Th is BFL monarchs and is delayed at least 2 months currently no surprises there.

Thanks. That makes sense. I guess from that we can calculate the number of Monarchs ordered:

25GH/0.6GH = ~40 BFL Monarchs..... x ~$3000 (at the time they were ordered) =  ~$120,000 tied up in Butterfly Labs.

[M31]

Which Americans can sue labrat, a big fraud?
I will email to bitfury and coinseed and tell them that what kind of fraud labrat is and what he has done with us.

You know this will accomplish nothing in reality, right, apart from venting some steam?
Think what lawyers cost and where that $$ will come from if LR has to deal with that at the moment.
He could just say fuck it and give us 100MH/bond which is his guaranteed minimum, but the way I see it he's actually trying to get some stuff figured out to help in the long run.
Yeah, it's true.  Hardware vendors fuck people over, even if you're a big buyer like LRM, and we are suffering that, but it's not his fault.
Why don't we sit back a little longer and see how he gets around the laws?  There's always options... No point burning bridges until all the facts are in. 
Remember: lawyers win, even if they lose.  Why contribute to that before reasoned consideration?

[||bit]

Which Americans can sue labrat, a big fraud?
I will email to bitfury and coinseed and tell them that what kind of fraud labrat is and what he has done with us.

You know this will accomplish nothing in reality, right, apart from venting some steam?
Think what lawyers cost and where that $$ will come from if LR has to deal with that at the moment.
He could just say fuck it and give us 100MH/bond which is his guaranteed minimum, but the way I see it he's actually trying to get some stuff figured out to help in the long run.
Yeah, it's true.  Hardware vendors fuck people over, even if you're a big buyer like LRM, and we are suffering that, but it's not his fault.
Why don't we sit back a little longer and see how he gets around the laws?  There's always options... No point burning bridges until all the facts are in.  
Remember: lawyers win, even if they lose.  Why contribute to that before reasoned consideration?

I agree that Labrat needs a bit more space to clear up his concerns. And a week more should suffice....

By the way, what do you mean that the hardware vendor was causing problems for Labrat? I don't think that was a communicated issue. At least not with Bitfury. LR hasn't said anything about Bitfury - which is one of the communication issues at hand. As far as I've heard, only BFL is known to have an issue - and that seems to be known because BFL communicated it recently.

[M31]

Yep... I felt like it was almost a given with BFL but I was even willing to give them a second chance and thought monarchs were the way to go.  We should have had our hardware from them in Jan, no?
I think BF and KNC are about the only ones out there who haven't had massive delays.  Can't count how many others have had 'technical issues' that have lost people precious time mining.
It's getting to be what I expect these days!

... and yes, let's give him some time to figure things out with the lawyers.  This attack mode really solves nothing IMHO.

[Ashitank]

There has been 0 transparency about what & how LRM manages our investment , where all the money goes e.t.c  even if LRM finds a solution this cannot continue like this , Lab_rat is required to provide detailed accounting reports about what was spent where & how much of it right from the begging , this is a big fucking black hole sucking investors money , PERIOD !

[bittymitty]

The bonds are now worthless.  What exactly are you expecting to happen, for Lab Rat to honour the agreement for his worthless company?

He is basically in protect rat mode and will do anything to keep this charade going.

We heard about that he didn't take any payments and that he was working so hard.

But we cant be told that he is breaching the law or that he might have to change the structure.

I will be waiting for Lab Rat to prove us wrong, if not then we have nothing to lose from legal recourse.

[BKM]

OK Folks..... here is the bottom line regarding taking preemptive legal action against LRM..... the downside is more than the upside.

You take this in front of a Judge and he only will give one shit about anything and that is USD. ANY discussion about bitcoin will go out the window because the legal jurisprudence does not contemplate bitcoin whatsoever. Its dollars in and dollars out. If you manage to get a judgement against LRM and an order for enforcement which leads to liquidation then that is what you get: liquidated value. For any of you that understand what this means - good. For those that don't - think auction fire sale for all those TH/s. It won't be pretty. And, this is only if the court finds that the bonds are equivalent or convertible to a security which permits a share of the assets.

So, cool your shit and let Zach continue to try and sort this out. Clearly he is not the best communicator, but if you were to look at the thread of communication you may find, as I have, that he is has been consistent to this point. Zach has stated that he is being forced into this circumstance by changing or evolving laws. So lets see what this really means. No, we have not yet had the evidence, but I am willing, for my enlightened self interest, to wait to see the evidence before I throw everything under the bus by dragging it into court.

But hey, don't let me stop you if you really are going to engage a lawyer and file an action..... but if you are blowing smoke up our asses - stop. It is counterproductive to your own best interest. At least speak to a competent lawyer and learn your options and your costs before you mimic the tone of the rest of Bitcointalk here.

Also, a last point about Zach personally..... when I invested in LRM at the beginning it was a direct result of a level of trust that I developed through observation of his actions as a mod on the BFL forums and after he quit when LRM was announced. I still believe he remains sincere in his desire and actions to preserve the interests of the investors to the greatest extent the law will allow. I may well be proven wrong but I am prepared, for the sake of the upside, to wait and see.

[Lab_Rat]

Crypto may be the land of instant gratification... the real world still operates 9-5 M-F.

Thank you!!!

To anyone dictating how fast my lawyers will work, that's just not going to happen.  I don't even dictate how fast they work.  Reading hundreds of pages of legal mumbo jumbo takes time.

[Lab_Rat]

I am taking advice of many folks and stopping answering any questions.  I'll poke my head in at least once a day or two to say "Still here" and that is all.  The next time you receive anything of substance it will be a full report on the subject which will take time to produce.  There are 94 pages of NJ Laws that pertain to this matter, let alone the federal laws.  Contained in this report will be all legal matter as well as a pheonixed contract.  If you don't like it, sue LRM.  But I must warn you, that you will lose, and cost yourself money twice because the money used to fight the legal battles will be that of the company's.  This is the last thing any of us want, but it seems to be a trend in Bitcoin lately to sue over everything.

I'm looking out for my interests, as well as those of the company and all those involved.  To those of you who have known me going on 2 years now, you know I'm not some evil thief.  I'm doing what's necessary and I believe that the end result will be something everyone can live with.

[bittymitty]

and its gone.

[countduckula]

You're the clear example of someone not an evil nor thief who screwed up all those who trusted in you if you end up changing the terms to the ones you showed, regardless of those who want to sue or beat you with an ugly stick.

Because i don't need to read 1 single page of any law in any country, if you can do contracts as you claim for 100 mh each, and triple them just because it suits you to comply laws, nothing stops you to add more contracts or double/triple/whatever you want and assign them to the contract owners in case of adding new hardware to keep the reward balanced. You dont change the speed, you dont change the reward yourself, the network does on what returns from those 100mh. you can just create 1 trillion contracts unasigned to give to everyone, if you need more, just do the same you did to triple them and create 200 trillions more.

You want another stupid idea, make our contracts for max 1 TH per, and make a very conservative plan that takes ages to complete to get to enough th to give us all the 59k contracts 1 th/each and note that you will pay us in full 1/59000 part of whats mined, that will buy you years, they cant forbide you to plan ahead, they cant prohibit growing, and we allow you to pay accordingly and manage the funds to achieve your goal of 1 teracrap.

Want another? we do 25 th now at 59000 contracts? create another 25th mine with 59000 contracts? or what stops you to make another for 50th and 59000?

More? 25 th at 59000 contracts, when the 50th from BFL arrive, triple again the available contracts, it will be the same crap, 75th for 177k contracts, thats exactly what you did now.

Seriously, that's a lot of solutions, you just took the easy and less problematic and the most expensive for all, someday you gotta admit you're doing things wrong, several, regardless on how cute, nice, decent or even clean, we make mistakes, you did and we pay.

[CumpsD]

You're the clear example of someone not an evil nor thief who screwed up all those who trusted in you if you end up changing the terms to the ones you showed, regardless of those who want to sue or beat you with an ugly stick.

Because i don't need to read 1 single page of any law in any country, if you can do contracts as you claim for 100 mh each, and triple them just because it suits you to comply laws, nothing stops you to add more contracts or double/triple/whatever you want and assign them to the contract owners in case of adding new hardware to keep the reward balanced. You dont change the speed, you dont change the reward yourself, the network does on what returns from those 100mh. you can just create 1 trillion contracts unasigned to give to everyone, if you need more, just do the same you did to triple them and create 200 trillions more.

You want another stupid idea, make our contracts for max 1 TH per, and make a very conservative plan that takes ages to complete to get to enough th to give us all the 59k contracts 1 th/each and note that you will pay us in full 1/59000 part of whats mined, that will buy you years, they cant forbide you to plan ahead, they cant prohibit growing, and we allow you to pay accordingly and manage the funds to achieve your goal of 1 teracrap.

Want another? we do 25 th now at 59000 contracts? create another 25th mine with 59000 contracts? or what stops you to make another for 50th and 59000?

More? 25 th at 59000 contracts, when the 50th from BFL arrive, triple again the available contracts, it will be the same crap, 75th for 177k contracts, thats exactly what you did now.

Seriously, that's a lot of solutions, you just took the easy and less problematic and the most expensive for all, someday you gotta admit you're doing things wrong, several, regardless on how cute, nice, decent or even clean, we make mistakes, you did and we pay.

+1

[||bit]

Crypto may be the land of instant gratification... the real world still operates 9-5 M-F.

Thank you!!!

To anyone dictating how fast my lawyers will work, that's just not going to happen.  I don't even dictate how fast they work.  Reading hundreds of pages of legal mumbo jumbo takes time.

Labrat.

Nobody is really trying to dictate how fast your lawyers work. It seems like you are disconnected from what people are reading from you. And in fairness, that could easily be happening the other way around where people are not reading you correctly. But resolving how people read you is more in your control than you seem to know.

You simply need to try to answer critical questions - even if only in your theoretical ideal - and just communicate more. Speak plainly. We are not the enemy!! (unless you view us that way).

But some of what you wrote in the past couple days comes off as raw defensive & legal posturing. And this is a really bad sign - and you may simply not realize it. However, if you were to instead speak as if you were going to do everything to keep the spirit of the agreement going - even if that means liquidating to avoid hurting people - then you will gain much much more respect. People don't sue people they respect.

The forum could be a lot calmer. And you could have more respect from investors. It's your choice.

[daemonfox]

You're the clear example of someone not an evil nor thief who screwed up all those who trusted in you if you end up changing the terms to the ones you showed, regardless of those who want to sue or beat you with an ugly stick.

Because i don't need to read 1 single page of any law in any country, if you can do contracts as you claim for 100 mh each, and triple them just because it suits you to comply laws, nothing stops you to add more contracts or double/triple/whatever you want and assign them to the contract owners in case of adding new hardware to keep the reward balanced. You dont change the speed, you dont change the reward yourself, the network does on what returns from those 100mh. you can just create 1 trillion contracts unasigned to give to everyone, if you need more, just do the same you did to triple them and create 200 trillions more.

You want another stupid idea, make our contracts for max 1 TH per, and make a very conservative plan that takes ages to complete to get to enough th to give us all the 59k contracts 1 th/each and note that you will pay us in full 1/59000 part of whats mined, that will buy you years, they cant forbide you to plan ahead, they cant prohibit growing, and we allow you to pay accordingly and manage the funds to achieve your goal of 1 teracrap.

Want another? we do 25 th now at 59000 contracts? create another 25th mine with 59000 contracts? or what stops you to make another for 50th and 59000?

More? 25 th at 59000 contracts, when the 50th from BFL arrive, triple again the available contracts, it will be the same crap, 75th for 177k contracts, thats exactly what you did now.

Seriously, that's a lot of solutions, you just took the easy and less problematic and the most expensive for all, someday you gotta admit you're doing things wrong, several, regardless on how cute, nice, decent or even clean, we make mistakes, you did and we pay.

+1

You are both jumping the gun here... and although I am as unhappy as all with the knowledge we have right this second... please refrain from spewing that nearly incomprehensible garbage above until we have all the facts.

Zach can't tell you what the end solution is because legally he MUST NOT until his lawyers have put to rest any chance that THIS pending change might still violate the law.

Hindsight may be 20/20... but assuring that the future of LRM is not spoiled completely by Uncle Sam fining the shit out of the operation because of some obscure wording in a law never meant to be used on a form of ANYTHING like crypto takes time and money... and as it has been said before... this is the BLEEDING edge... things like this must be found and handled as they come up... no one has set a 100% fool proof precedent in such an undertaking so no one should expect this to be a 100% problem free operation.

Shit happens... let it get dealt with. If it does not and folds... you still have the same recourse as you do right now.

[countduckula]

First, he posted the end solution, this is what unchained this reaction.

Second, if he can do a mine with 25th speed with 59000 contracts, he can have 2 identical.

If he can triple the contracts right now to match speed with number of contracts, he can split them tomorrow for the same reason.

Dont try to tell me how to act, say or behave, he already fucked this proyect and his credibility, no one will put 1 satoshi on him if he continues this path, regardless if the problem is the goverment or his limitations to comunicate or act.

[||bit]

I am taking advice of many folks and stopping answering any questions.  I'll poke my head in at least once a day or two to say "Still here" and that is all.  The next time you receive anything of substance it will be a full report on the subject which will take time to produce.  There are 94 pages of NJ Laws that pertain to this matter, let alone the federal laws.  Contained in this report will be all legal matter as well as a pheonixed contract.  If you don't like it, sue LRM.  But I must warn you, that you will lose, and cost yourself money twice because the money used to fight the legal battles will be that of the company's.  This is the last thing any of us want, but it seems to be a trend in Bitcoin lately to sue over everything.

I'm looking out for my interests, as well as those of the company and all those involved.  To those of you who have known me going on 2 years now, you know I'm not some evil thief.  I'm doing what's necessary and I believe that the end result will be something everyone can live with.

I'd bet there are many many more folks that would be advising you to answer any of the simple questions.

For that matter. How could they advise you of that if you haven't actually answered any of the most obvious questions that have people all tensed up?

BTW: What is a "pheonixed contract"?

The trend in bitcoin isn't that people are suing for everything, the trend is some people are outright scamming and some are very poorly managing other people's investments.

If you wanted to defuse half of the tension in this thread (if not more)... you could just say this:
"Just like the 3 for 1 issue. I will proportionately add more bonds to accounts as the whole company hashrate grows. And if I figure out a a better way, then that will be implemented. But the spirit of the original agreement will be honored as closely as possible." (or something along those lines - just trying to communicate is respectable, imo)

Your priority should be this Zack.
1. Investors
2. You
3. The company

Not:
1. You
2. The company
3. Investors

[||bit]

Zach can't tell you what the end solution is because legally he MUST NOT until his lawyers have put to rest any chance that THIS pending change might still violate the law.

I know you were responding to someone else. And on what you wrote here, I agree with what you are driving at. Labrat can only do what he can only do within the law.

However, he could at least answer some hardware questions or express his intentions better. Especially, if his intentions are seeking to honor the spirit of the original agreement. It doesn't have to be expressed in the sense that "this is how the end solution will be", but it can be "this is the KIND of end solution I want to find. And I will fight to find if such a solution is possible". .... That is not an end solution, but it is a commitment to fight or work for a kind of end solution (if it's possible). This would resonate well with people, especially if it's seeking to honor the spirit of the agreement. That really wouldn't be hard to ask. In the meantime, however, people have to read in between the lines and observe his very defensive posturing.

I really don't want to be unfair to Labrat's intentions or misrepresent him. If I ever did, then I was wrong. But the importance of investors questions & concerns should not be so easily dismissed. And I find it ironic that he said he was advised to stop answering questions, when he really didn't answer any questions. Correct me if I'm wrong, because I'm willing to be corrected on that.