HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s

[miaviator]

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

I haven't received anything.

Me as well.

No refund in the mail, no shipment, no answer.

Nothing.
Posted from Bitcointa.lk - #RV3QwqULud9IYexL

So it's likely just that hashfast is trying to sell more vaporware to raise capital and pay some legal bills?

At least they got up the balls to post to the forums again.

[miaviator]

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

Sold out?

While I am sad for the new bag holders, I'm happy because that means you'll be paying the refunds you owe people and shipping the months delayed products.

Right?

HashFast was open and honest about the reasons for our delay.  The delay was for technical reasons, not "fraud" as you falsely claim.

We've provided refunds too all Batch 1 customers who asked.  Most choose to be patient and have received their hardware.

As per US law, mail order refunds are in US dollars.  Please do not maintain the unreasonable expectation that we're going to break that law.

Because your machine was always priced US dollars, divesting yourself of the delusion you are owed an approximate 800% windfall (based on post-purchase appreciation of a temporary exchange medium provided as a convenience) may also be a good idea.

I guess your lawyer only wanted to take your money, because there's little to no chance he's never heard of 31 US Code Section 5103:

31 U.S. Code § 5103 - Legal tender

United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues

You refused your machine and you refused a full refund.  So you get nothing.  Nice legal maneuvering there buddy!  

You forgot a batch 1 customer then dipshit.

I haven't received anything.

[cedivad]

If you want to read what HF deleted you just have to follow the right link...
https://bitcointa.lk/threads/hashfast-announces-specs-for-new-asic-up-to-800gh-s.271636/page-21

407 posts on bitcointa.lk
234 posts on bitcointalk.org

...
Posted from Bitcointa.lk - #GUqTSNoWIbccIdky

[miaviator]

If you want to read what HF deleted you just have to follow the right link...
https://bitcointa.lk/threads/hashfast-announces-specs-for-new-asic-up-to-800gh-s.271636/page-21

407 posts on bitcointa.lk
234 posts on bitcointalk.org

...
Posted from Bitcointa.lk - #GUqTSNoWIbccIdky

NICE!

I think I'll get a firefox or chorme extension or script made up to just reinsert my deleted posts.  I mean it really is messed up to say you refunded or sent hardware to everyone?

[Micky25]

I just reported HashLast_CL and his ridiculous moderated and now closed 800GH thread to the mods.

Please delete this thread and ban user HashFast_CL. Thread self moderated + closed = obsolete + spam

[perezoso]

I just reported HashLast_CL and his ridiculous moderated and now closed 800GH thread to the mods.

Please delete this thread and ban user HashFast_CL. Thread self moderated + closed = obsolete + spam

He's go the mentality of maladjusted 13 year old.  But I think he announced he was going to lock it whenever he saw Cedivad online.  He deleted a post of mine in about 5 seconds.  What a sad case.

What's scary is that if HasfFart_CL really is fairly senior in the company, and I suspect that might be true, then this dude's sad fighting with everyone, despite the overwhelming bad ratings and criticism, suggest that Hashfast is getting really desperate for sales to prop the company up.

[cedivad]

I just reported HashLast_CL and his ridiculous moderated and now closed 800GH thread to the mods.

Please delete this thread and ban user HashFast_CL. Thread self moderated + closed = obsolete + spam

That was genius! Gonna repost it to the "non self moderated thread..." (it was the 10th deletion in a row!)

[cedivad]

What's scary is that if HasfFart_CL really is fairly senior in the company, and I suspect that might be true, then this dude's sad fighting with everyone, despite the overwhelming bad ratings and criticism, suggest that Hashfast is getting really desperate for sales to prop the company up.

Sure, they have the technology to build bitcoin printing machines but they can't build them because they lack the FIAT.

Can't wait for the answers to Morici's lawsuit. CLAIM 2, FRAUD.
Posted from Bitcointa.lk - #zemIRXXQt7sg3L55

[Micky25]

just for the record, nice trust rating.

[klondike_bar]

This was actually deleted - and I think it was a totally valid post that did not throw insults or break the self-moderated rules HF made

Bad analogy.  HashFast ASICs are not made out of sized Bitcoins.  Bitcoins payed to HashFast were instantly changed into USD by BitPay.

I, and many other people, did not pay you via Bitpay.

That's nice, but the principles are the same.  Your coins were changed to fiat in order to build your machine, which was priced in USD. If Bitcoin went to $1.00 you would demand USD and scoff at BTC parity.  If Bitcoin went to $1,000,000 it would be even more obvious you expect a pony named windfall to soothe your buyer's remorse.

Please ask cedivad to stop reposting deleted messages.  He's already made a hater thread (and site!) to preserve his precious hatings; no need to keep spamming them here.

^in which case you would return in BTC? You had a clear agreement (that was further backed by your own staff members' posts and email responses) that refunds would be done in the currency paid.

In a normal situation, you would be right. it was priced in USD and thus a refund based in USD would be logical, using immediate BTC/USD rate.  HOWEVER, hashfast and its staff repeatedly claimed that full refunds in BTC would be given. Evidence of this can be found on nearly every page of this thread.

cevidad keeps posting because you delete his information - why do you think he is soo upset? Hashfast clearly scammed most of its 'customers' and now is failing to fulfill its original agreement/obligations (refunds in BTC or shipping the MPP since you were months late)

[/quote]

[cedivad]

"buyer's remorse" is a term that John S. used with me at BTC Amsterdam (end of September).
Makes me wonder...
Posted from Bitcointa.lk - #BFtEtzqY9WyaNqDw

[Micky25]

windfall

a new favourite word you got, don't you? What exactly is your task here? Repeating the same cackle again and again? Windfall every second word? Why not just quit this forum? What are your expectations?
You seemingly have a non-stop windfall - out of your trousers.

[yxt]

... to ask cedivad to stop spamming us with re-posts?  Your own rules say edit-warring moderated threads is not acceptable...

you scammed much people here and now complaining about they spamming your thread because you go silence and nobody know
when/if you ship something
seriously?


Is in the US the possibility of a class action,
that ends the way that scamfast had to cede the "asic patents" to the body of creditors?

[cedivad]

Is in the US the possibility of a class action,
that ends the way that scamfast had to cede the "asic patents" to the body of creditors?

Unfortunately that's covered:

http://hashfast.org/Terms_of_Sale/25_August_2013

(e) NEITHER BUYER NOR HASHFAST SHALL BE ENTITLED TO JOIN OR CONSOLIDATE CLAIMS BY OR AGAINST OTHER BUYERS, OR ARBITRATE OR OTHERWISE PARTICIPATE IN ANY CLAIM AS A CLASS REPRESENTATIVE, CLASS MEMBER OR IN A PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL CAPACITY.

Posted from Bitcointa.lk - #E5X3F74hLgPj6Cih

[yxt]

they can wrote much.
Who says that this point or the complete terms and conditions at all are valid.

[cedivad]

Pete Morici for example is suing them in court, instead of going with AAA/JAMS. That's a breach of the contract.
It really depends on the strategy you are following. (Morici states that the contract was sent to him one week after his purchase; by email).
Posted from Bitcointa.lk - #PrO8XVnUfBUyTgW7

[ninjarobot]

HashFast's behavior has been completely unacceptable by any measure. The fact that they seem to be getting away with it irks me to no end.

The bottom line is that money is power.
A pre-order is you giving that power to a counterparty based on trust, promises and a sales contract.
The counterparty can decide to default on their contract/promises and proceed to use that power against you.
HF has been doing exactly that by hiring Strategic Counsel Corp. and Zuber Lawler & Del Duca.

[gmaxwell]

Pete Morici for example is suing them in court, instead of going with AAA/JAMS. That's a breach of the contract.
It really depends on the strategy you are following. (Morici states that the contract was sent to him one week after his purchase; by email).
Posted from Bitcointa.lk - #PrO8XVnUfBUyTgW7

It was also sent to me in email after my first purchase too, after a couple days delay. If they sent it to him at the same time they sent it to him it would have been a long time after his purchase. But I accepted the agreement and later— after HF had continued to say they were on-time for a few more weeks— made another purchase.  I could probably also make Morici's argument— that October 20th was the only relevant date— for my first purchase... but I'm really trying to give hashfast every bit of slack: Business is hard. But being screwed over even after giving them the benefit of doubt on ambiguity about which terms were actually in effect stinks.

Sadly, if HF is run as incompetently as they appear to be there likely will be nothing to recover. Getting a larger fraction of what they owe me at the expense of causing a complete loss for people making purchases now (under newer, even crapper terms) doesn't really strike me as the right thing to do, at least personally. I don't fault other people for forcing hashfash to comply with the agreement though. The fault rests exclusively on hashfast if they drafted a contract of adhesion that they couldn't live up to themselves.

[gmaxwell]

The bottom line is that money is power.

Well, hey, some of us still have money here, and their 90%-100% losses on HF so far haven't left them broke.  Is there some slot where I can insert money and receive justice? I too am unhappy with them getting away with the fraud— even more so than my financial loss. I'm willing to double down on my losses if I was reasonably confident that the result would be them not getting away with it, because I'm very concerned with the long term effects on the mining ecosystem if its possible for hardware vendors to freely get away with fraud. What I don't have an abundance of is time.

I was thinking of perhaps funding some bounties for things like most effective community action to prevent others from getting defrauded by hashfast, but I'm not sure I have time to administer it— and esp. in terms of figuring how how to convince people that I'm being serious when I say that I really don't want anything illegal done.

[cedivad]

Just out of curiosity, you stated in the other thread that your deadline was the 31 of January. Batch 1 deadline was the 31 of December, so you are batch 2, right?
In the case of Morici, HashFast had another ToS live in their website, not the one that they retroactively imposed to batch 1 customers.

A few people in this thread ordered with the first, non recognized version (see: http://hashfast.org/Terms_of_Sale/8_August_2013 and the ToS was later unilaterally changed to: http://hashfast.org/Terms_of_Sale/25_August_2013).

Useless to note, HashFast is denying this detail.
Posted from Bitcointa.lk - #YxVBdgqoqqJ26awz