[HAVELOCK] PETAMINE - 1,150 TH/S HASH RATE (1GH/S per Unit)

[karol]

Dividend paid 
0.00050213 btc/share

No, it was not ?!
Why are you announcing it?
Checked adress on eligius - waitimg for payment 29 im queue
On peta adress las transaction is 14 btc from miming

[1714830740]

1714830740

[1714830740]

1714830740

[1714830740]

1714830740

[1714830740]

1714830740

[ujka]

Look at havelock.
Eligius stats not working right now.
CryptX didn't wait for Eligius to get out of fail-safe mode.

[howardb]

CryptX, any chance we can delay the dividend until we have the next payout from eligius? seems a little silly to crash the dividend at such an early stage just because of our place in the payout queue

Kind of begs the question as our hash rate goes up as to why we don't have our own pool?? Surely hash rate is high enough now to smooth out the luck factor enough.

[N[e]wBie]

I think 50/50 is very conservative for reinvestment, and since I believe in BTC long-term more so than short, I think >50 % reinvested would be wise, but I am on board with at least 50.

[howardb]

All else equal (ha there's a broad statement) if cryptx reinvests a larger % than the difficulty rise, petamine will have a seat at the grownups table.  By having enough $ to be a lead investor/customer for each next generation round of ASICs petamine can stay ahead of all the others buying the same chips.

+2

+3

+4

It's the supermarket effect, once a handful of players become dominent, suppliers are at their mercy.

[howardb]

I see Cryptx is deleting my posts, because I challenged what the profit relationship is between Cryptx and Petamine project. If thats not a HUGE red flag I don't know what is!

[cryptx]

Details about todays dividend payout:

72.54245172 BTC in total from mining:
- 40.50846763 as Dividend (0.00050213 BTC / share)
- 21.81225180 Reinvestment (brings total to 57.68291570 BTC)
- 10.22173228 Hosting Fee

[kenmomotaro]

All else equal (ha there's a broad statement) if cryptx reinvests a larger % than the difficulty rise, petamine will have a seat at the grownups table.  By having enough $ to be a lead investor/customer for each next generation round of ASICs petamine can stay ahead of all the others buying the same chips.

+2

+3

+4

It's the supermarket effect, once a handful of players become dominent, suppliers are at their mercy.

I agree the reinvestment % can be changed. But not now, at least not until they start the reinvestment deployment. Need to see how efficiency CryptX uses these money. If they are able to bring us cheap hash rate, then increase the reinvestment part would be great! Otherwise, I prefer let the money come back to their shareholders. So, let the time tells.

[Stego]

I assume the 15 + 20 desks have been set up. That's great !
What's next ? Can you give us an update cryptx ?

[Darkstone2]

All else equal (ha there's a broad statement) if cryptx reinvests a larger % than the difficulty rise, petamine will have a seat at the grownups table.  By having enough $ to be a lead investor/customer for each next generation round of ASICs petamine can stay ahead of all the others buying the same chips.

+2

That is some serious misquoting going on there...

Nay, it is you who is ignoring what others have posted.
They likely got the money for the PCBs the same place they got the money to pay for the deployment of an extra 500+ Terahashes of hardware. The havelock ipo happened when BTC/USD was a lot higher than the original ipo last year. My bet is that the funds came from that or, the folks behind cryptx have some deep pockets and decided to anty up to make up for the major delay in deployment, it helps us as well them because it puts us further ahead than we would have been.

They can't take money from the IPO. The contract states that the money is used for producing or deployment of hardware. Not the development of hardware. The word 'development' isn't even mentioned in the contract so i would assume that the development of hardware is an insignificant portion of petamine's expenses.

As for your attempted "question" about cryptx selling hardware to petamine at a markup thereby possibly hurting the petamine operation and profits. This is why I said that some people have no clue how a business is run. It is in their interest to get the most efficient and lowest priced hardware online so that the mine can get and stay ahead of difficulty.

Please explain how cryptx can make a profit on this operation unless A) they are shareholders themselves, B) overcharge hosting costs or C) overcharge hardware costs.

[anon29426]

I see Crypsomethileting my posts, because I challenged what the profit relationship is between Cryptx and Petamine project. If thats not a HUGE red flag I don't know what is!

They deleted my post calling you an asshole. so seriously shut the fuck up. Or come with somthing substantial.. oh wait thats never going to happen

[rdyoung]

I see Crypsomethileting my posts, because I challenged what the profit relationship is between Cryptx and Petamine project. If thats not a HUGE red flag I don't know what is!

They deleted my post calling you an asshole. so seriously shut the fuck up. Or come with somthing substantial.. oh wait thats never going to happen

They also deleted my dueling post.
I know it was technically off topic, but I thought it was pretty witty and sarcastic.
I put darkstone? on my ignore list and will likely add the others as well. I suggest you do the same.

[dhenson]

I would advise against ignoring those with differing opinions than yours. Especially on bitcoin security threads.

If I've learned anything from the Labcoin fiasco (where I lost 200+ btc), it's that I can't let cognitive dissidence cloud the perception of the validity my investments.  There were an increasing number of what turned out to be valuable dissenting opinions that I simply ignored (and encouraged others to ignore).  This more than any other is what I regret most about my time on this forum. Not because of the lost btc, but the fact that my vocal ignorance most assuredly caused others to lose money as well.

Though sometimes tiring and repetitive, dissenting opinion is valuable and should be considered.

That being said, you need to understand that there are competitor trolls on these forums that spread FUD on every thread but their own.  They generally dedicate an entire account to each thread so that they can keep their arguments straight.  You can easily spot them by looking at their post history... if this is the only thread they have ever posted in then you can be pretty sure it's simply a competitor.

At this point I haven't made my mind up on Darkstone2.  He seems singularly committed to espousing the negative aspects of PETA while being completely immune to the possibility of success.  At this point I'm just trying to ascertain his motivation.

[rdyoung]

I would advise against ignoring those with differing opinions than yours. Especially on bitcoin security threads.

If I've learned anything from the Labcoin fiasco (where I lost 200+ btc), it's that I can't let cognitive dissidence cloud the perception of the validity my investments.  There were an increasing number of what turned out to be valuable dissenting opinions that I simply ignored (and encouraged others to ignore).  This more than any other is what I regret most about my time on this forum. Not because of the lost btc, but the fact that my vocal ignorance most assuredly caused others to lose money as well.

Though sometimes tiring and repetitive, dissenting opinion is valuable and should be considered.

That being said, you need to understand that there are competitor trolls on these forums that spread FUD on every thread but their own.  They generally dedicate an entire account to each thread so that they can keep their arguments straight.  You can easily spot them by looking at their post history... if this is the only thread they have ever posted in then you can be pretty sure it's simply a competitor.

At this point I haven't made my mind up on Darkstone2.  He seems singularly committed to espousing the negative aspects of PETA while being completely immune to the possibility of success.  At this point I'm just trying to ascertain his motivation.

I agree, but with the 2 here that I have let myself get drawn into "battles" with, neither seems to acknowledge the responses by those offering the other side of the argument.
I know how FUD and pump and dump crap works. There are only a few threads I monitor here, and likely as soon as petamine is @ or past the 700th mark and the dividends are drowning me, I will likely fall away from this thread.


I put darkstone on ignore because I am wasting time reading and responding to his posts, and that might be his goal, somehow he gets off on time we waste scrolling past his huge copy/pasta just to post 2 or 3 lines of BS.
As I have posted before as well, those that I would deem troll clearly have no clue how businesses work. If they did, they wouldn't be asking the questions they are, or at the very least they would be wording them differently.
IE, Cryptx: Can you clarify where the funds came from for the jump to 700th and the development of PCBs.

To me that information is not make or break for me, in fact I don't really care.
The fact that we can see their hashing on eligius and they gave us the reinvestment address is enough for me.
I don't personally care what funds were moved where and when to pay who for the design of pcbs or whether cryptx is "selling" electricity and hardware to petamine at some unknown profit margin.

My bet is that cryptx is using the purchasing power of the petamine to acquire hardware for their own mining, they could be building a private mine = or > the petamine and as long as I am getting paid what they say they will pay in dividends I don't care one way or the other.

[Elvis Trout]

All else equal (ha there's a broad statement) if cryptx reinvests a larger % than the difficulty rise, petamine will have a seat at the grownups table.  By having enough $ to be a lead investor/customer for each next generation round of ASICs petamine can stay ahead of all the others buying the same chips.

+2

That is some serious misquoting going on there...

Nay, it is you who is ignoring what others have posted.
They likely got the money for the PCBs the same place they got the money to pay for the deployment of an extra 500+ Terahashes of hardware. The havelock ipo happened when BTC/USD was a lot higher than the original ipo last year. My bet is that the funds came from that or, the folks behind cryptx have some deep pockets and decided to anty up to make up for the major delay in deployment, it helps us as well them because it puts us further ahead than we would have been.

They can't take money from the IPO. The contract states that the money is used for producing or deployment of hardware. Not the development of hardware. The word 'development' isn't even mentioned in the contract so i would assume that the development of hardware is an insignificant portion of petamine's expenses.

As for your attempted "question" about cryptx selling hardware to petamine at a markup thereby possibly hurting the petamine operation and profits. This is why I said that some people have no clue how a business is run. It is in their interest to get the most efficient and lowest priced hardware online so that the mine can get and stay ahead of difficulty.

Please explain how cryptx can make a profit on this operation unless A) they are shareholders themselves, B) overcharge hosting costs or C) overcharge hardware costs.

What?!?!?! You think Cryptx is just a charity to help aspiring bit investors? You are naive.

[qwertyqwerty]

Please explain how cryptx can make a profit on this operation unless A) they are shareholders themselves, B) overcharge hosting costs or C) overcharge hardware costs.

all of the above already applies, yet it's still entirely possible for all shareholders turn a profit and means they have direct incentive to care for progression of PETA project rather than a private competing mine

[rdyoung]

Please explain how cryptx can make a profit on this operation unless A) they are shareholders themselves, B) overcharge hosting costs or C) overcharge hardware costs.

all of the above already applies, yet it's still entirely possible for all shareholders turn a profit and means they have direct incentive to care for progression of PETA project rather than a private competing mine

Again, this is where the lack of knowledge comes in. For someone who knows how businesses operate you can answer your own questions with ease and likely be close to the truth.

Businesses setup parent/subsidiary relationships all the time, and they sell or rent equipment or services to/from each other.
In cryptx/petamines case, its feasible for cryptx to sell the hardware to petamine at a small markup. As I have posted before, cryptx has incentive to not overcharge petamine per ghs because they will limit the amount of growth and therefore profit that can happen.

Is there something inherently evil or wrong with cryptx making a profit off of petamine?
If cryptx is able to manufacture mining hardware for say 3$/ghs and sells it to petamine for 4$/ghs is that wrong? Am I missing something where its wrong for companies to make money?
As long as they keep the $/GHS low enough that the mine stays profitable and preferably growing, what is the problem here?

[qwertyqwerty]

Please explain how cryptx can make a profit on this operation unless A) they are shareholders themselves, B) overcharge hosting costs or C) overcharge hardware costs.

all of the above already applies, yet it's still entirely possible for all shareholders turn a profit and means they have direct incentive to care for progression of PETA project rather than a private competing mine

Again, this is where the lack of knowledge comes in. For someone who knows how businesses operate you can answer your own questions with ease and likely be close to the truth.

Businesses setup parent/subsidiary relationships all the time, and they sell or rent equipment or services to/from each other.
In cryptx/petamines case, its feasible for cryptx to sell the hardware to petamine at a small markup. As I have posted before, cryptx has incentive to not overcharge petamine per ghs because they will limit the amount of growth and therefore profit that can happen.

Is there something inherently evil or wrong with cryptx making a profit off of petamine?
If cryptx is able to manufacture mining hardware for say 3$/ghs and sells it to petamine for 4$/ghs is that wrong? Am I missing something where its wrong for companies to make money?
As long as they keep the $/GHS low enough that the mine stays profitable and preferably growing, what is the problem here?

nobody is saying it's wrong. just saying; cryptx owns shares in peta (meaning they earn dividends in correlation to peta success and have interest to drive the price up if they would like to sell), as well as being able to charge hosting/management fees, meaning they are continously compensated for the mines operation, as well as being able to profit off making own hardware and sell to peta operation, and as well as being able to profit of being shareholder in an asic manafacturer (for instance they own shares in cointerra) so they also profit from simply ordering hardware, let alone building it, have a feeback loop. what's wrong about that? I'm glad to see a transparent path for cryptx to profit along with shareholder because if it wasn't there the incentive to maintain a successful operation for the public is a lot lower

[rdyoung]

Please explain how cryptx can make a profit on this operation unless A) they are shareholders themselves, B) overcharge hosting costs or C) overcharge hardware costs.

all of the above already applies, yet it's still entirely possible for all shareholders turn a profit and means they have direct incentive to care for progression of PETA project rather than a private competing mine

Again, this is where the lack of knowledge comes in. For someone who knows how businesses operate you can answer your own questions with ease and likely be close to the truth.

Businesses setup parent/subsidiary relationships all the time, and they sell or rent equipment or services to/from each other.
In cryptx/petamines case, its feasible for cryptx to sell the hardware to petamine at a small markup. As I have posted before, cryptx has incentive to not overcharge petamine per ghs because they will limit the amount of growth and therefore profit that can happen.

Is there something inherently evil or wrong with cryptx making a profit off of petamine?
If cryptx is able to manufacture mining hardware for say 3$/ghs and sells it to petamine for 4$/ghs is that wrong? Am I missing something where its wrong for companies to make money?
As long as they keep the $/GHS low enough that the mine stays profitable and preferably growing, what is the problem here?

nobody is saying it's wrong. just saying; cryptx owns shares in peta (meaning they earn dividends in correlation to peta success and have interest to drive the price up if they would like to sell), as well as being able to charge hosting/management fees, meaning they are continously compensated for the mines operation, as well as being able to profit off making own hardware and sell to peta operation, and as well as being able to profit of being shareholder in an asic manafacturer (for instance they own shares in cointerra) so they also profit from simply ordering hardware, let alone building it, have a feeback loop. what's wrong about that? I'm glad to see a transparent path for cryptx to profit along with shareholder because if it wasn't there the incentive to maintain a successful operation for the public is a lot lower

I know it looked like it, but my comment was not aimed at you. I was expanding on what you said.
The way it was quoted was a bit off.

And, you made my point again. If cryptx is selling GHS to petamine its in their interest to keep the price low so that the mine stays profitable and can continue to buy hardware, IE your positive feedback loop.

I can't make heads or tails of some the people in this thread. On 1 hand they are basically saying thats its wrong for cryptx to profit off peta, and then they are saying that its not a charity.
I can provide a better argument when someone knows what their side is.

[Elvis Trout]

Please explain how cryptx can make a profit on this operation unless A) they are shareholders themselves, B) overcharge hosting costs or C) overcharge hardware costs.

all of the above already applies, yet it's still entirely possible for all shareholders turn a profit and means they have direct incentive to care for progression of PETA project rather than a private competing mine

Again, this is where the lack of knowledge comes in. For someone who knows how businesses operate you can answer your own questions with ease and likely be close to the truth.

Businesses setup parent/subsidiary relationships all the time, and they sell or rent equipment or services to/from each other.
In cryptx/petamines case, its feasible for cryptx to sell the hardware to petamine at a small markup. As I have posted before, cryptx has incentive to not overcharge petamine per ghs because they will limit the amount of growth and therefore profit that can happen.

Is there something inherently evil or wrong with cryptx making a profit off of petamine?
If cryptx is able to manufacture mining hardware for say 3$/ghs and sells it to petamine for 4$/ghs is that wrong? Am I missing something where its wrong for companies to make money?
As long as they keep the $/GHS low enough that the mine stays profitable and preferably growing, what is the problem here?

nobody is saying it's wrong. just saying; cryptx owns shares in peta (meaning they earn dividends in correlation to peta success and have interest to drive the price up if they would like to sell), as well as being able to charge hosting/management fees, meaning they are continously compensated for the mines operation, as well as being able to profit off making own hardware and sell to peta operation, and as well as being able to profit of being shareholder in an asic manafacturer (for instance they own shares in cointerra) so they also profit from simply ordering hardware, let alone building it, have a feeback loop. what's wrong about that? I'm glad to see a transparent path for cryptx to profit along with shareholder because if it wasn't there the incentive to maintain a successful operation for the public is a lot lower

Cryptx do not own shares in Peta.

However the rest of what you say is true. The bigger and better Petamine becomes the more they will earn in hosting fees and whatever else. I hope they do well out of this project as they put a lot of work in and ultimately our successes are linked.