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

[fonsie]

Since then it's been: Pay BTC5.0 for a miner. First month, mine BTC2.5 ..second month, mine BTC1.25 ..third month, mine BTC0.625 ...etc, etc. It's a trend that won't continue forever, sure, but until there's a plateau in hardware development we can probably expect to see a similar pattern for a while.

You forgot about where we sell the miner after three months

Id appreciate if you quoted correctly and not put someone else's words in my mouth.

That said, selling hardware doesnt change  anything at all. On average hardware depreciates just as fast as difficulty goes up.   To illustrate,  last august, cryptx first IPO was for 20TH, 10K shares at 0.65BTC per share. That means, ~325 BTC/TH. Right now,  Cryptx is valued at 4.7 BTC/TH and rockminer hardware is about to hit retail market at around 1.7-2.5 BTC/TH. Can you spot the pattern?

Whatever residual value you get for your used hardware, I dont see how you would expect to buy more hashrate with it.

Whose puppet are you?

Those rockminer toys do seem to be generating more heat than bitcoins...

[Puppet]

Those rockminer toys do seem to be generating more heat than bitcoins...

Dont like AM or rockminer? Look at bitmain. Last november  S1 antminers sold for 4.75 BTC (bids up to 6BTC), by mid january it had dropped to 2.2 BTC and last week it was 0.414 BTC.

BTW, if not AM, who do you think just added nearly 20PH to the network in the past week? Hint: it wasnt cryptx.

[Anotheranonlol]

last august, cryptx first IPO was for 20TH, 10K shares at 0.65BTC per share. That means, ~325 BTC/TH.

no it wasn't.. the figures were more like 54 BTC/TH with btc trading around $105
20TH was additional deployment as a bonus already prefunded by cryptx. with each share representing 10GH regardless
this was the time some famous icedrill and DMS pumpers where showing up to give it bobby big balls saying how nobody will get a penny, even some poor souls putting their money into labcoin instead.

No they've all gone awol, peta-hash is chugging along nicely

still waiting for you to take the 10btc bet by the way.

[Puppet]

still waiting for you to take the 10btc bet by the way.

LOL? I would love to, but everyone else chickened out. Are you game?

[Anotheranonlol]

still waiting for you to take the 10btc bet by the way.

LOL? I would love to, but everyone else chickened out. Are you game?

Yep, be sure you're clear on the conditions and then find a neutral trusted escrow.

[Puppet]

Yep, be sure you're clear on the conditions and then find a trusted escrow.

We'll make it a more formal contract, but essentially my conditions are
- 6 months from now crytpx share price + sum of all dividends < 0.0975 BTC IPO
- If cryptx is delisted and not relisted on a public exchange, I win (gigamining scenario)
- if cryptx is forced by authorities to refund IPO investors, be it in BTC or in fiat, I win regardless of the height of the settlement and the BTC/Euro exchange rate. (activemining scenario)

As for escrow, Id have to look in to it, but I would prefer a multisig transaction so that we can solve the outcome without arbiter, and only need the arbiter if we cant agree. More secure than sending 20BTC to whatever third party.

[Anotheranonlol]

Yep, be sure you're clear on the conditions and then find a trusted escrow.

We'll make it a more formal contract, but essentially my conditions are
- 6 months from now crytpx share price + sum of all dividends < 0.0975 BTC IPO
- If cryptx is delisted and not relisted on a public exchange, I win
- if cryptx is forced by authorities to refund IPO investors, be it in BTC or in fiat, I win regardless of the height of the settlement and the BTC/Euro exchange rate.

As for escrow, Id have to look in to it, but I would prefer a multisig transaction so that we can solve the outcome without arbiter, and only need the arbiter if we cant agree. More secure than sending 20BTC to whatever third party.

nope...

we've gone over this

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=310783.msg7143220#msg7143220
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=310783.msg7143670#msg7143670
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=310783.msg7150293#msg7150293


I'm betting you a neutral third party will be able to independently verify that me, as a random investor at IPO stage (the i stands for initial) WILL be able to see a positive ROI (ie: more than 100% of the amount I originally put in) in exactly 6 months
I'm not speaking for any other investors. You can't perpetually guarantee everyone will make money, can't cry out for asicminer bagholders who brought in at 4.5btc.

No you don't win if for some odd reason cryptx decided to turn to colored coins or trade via direct shares, because it doesn't mean there isn't a market value. as long as there's a provable market value there's market value.. I don't see any reason for any sort of refunds but as far as btc denominated gains go. if there is a gain, it's valid. the investment was profitable and I've won, if there's a loss, it's not valid  investments not profitable and you've won. should be easy right? otherwise what exactly are you arguing about? potentially some investors might not make money?

the crazy clauses make it sound like you don't actually want to put down 10btc to bet so you've intentionally made them obtuse.

How is this so tricky? It's a really simple bet for someone who is so sure no investors will ever see a positive ROI.

I am obviously confident that I will, so my money is where my mouth is. money is waiting to go into your multisig purse.
Why don't you take the opportunity to add insult to injury by taking 10btc away from me?

[Puppet]

I'm betting you a neutral third party will be able to independently verify that me, as a random investor at IPO stage (the i stands for initial) WILL be able to see a positive ROI (ie: more than 100% of the amount I originally put in) in exactly 6 months

Yes, that part Im fine with. However,

No you don't win if for some odd reason cryptx decided to turn to colored coins or trade via direct shares, because it doesn't mean there isn't a market value. as long as there's a provable market value

The reason wouldnt be odd, I have stated why I expect one or both of these things (delisting and/or forced IPO reimbursement) to happen. It has happened before and it will almost certainly happen to cryptx.  I do *not* know if it will take more or less than 6 months, nor do I know if this will cause shareholders to profit or cryptx to go bankrupt;  but Im not betting against my own prediction that cryptx will at some point be forced to delist its securities and comply with regulations.

Is that the profit you are betting on, or at least unwilling to bet against? Why is this provision a problem for you if you are adamant that cryptx is not breaking any regulations?

How is this so tricky? It's a really simple bet for someone who is so sure no investors will ever see a positive ROI.

I am sure that if cryptx remains listed, shareholders will not profit. I am not sure at all if that will be the case if/when authorities step in. Had BTC price collapsed instead of skyrocketed, VMC/Activeminer shareholders would have profited very nicely from the  settlement forced upon it. Again, is that why are betting on cryptx?

[Anotheranonlol]

I'm betting you a neutral third party will be able to independently verify that me, as a random investor at IPO stage (the i stands for initial) WILL be able to see a positive ROI (ie: more than 100% of the amount I originally put in) in exactly 6 months

Yes, that part Im fine with. However,

No you don't win if for some odd reason cryptx decided to turn to colored coins or trade via direct shares, because it doesn't mean there isn't a market value. as long as there's a provable market value

The reason wouldnt be odd, I have stated why I expect one or both of these things (delisting and/or forced IPO reimbursement) to happen. It has happened before and it will almost certainly happen to cryptx.  I do *not* know if it will take more or less than 6 months, nor do I know if this will cause shareholders to profit or cryptx to go bankrupt;  but Im not betting against my own prediction that cryptx will at some point be forced to delist its securities and comply with regulations.

Is that the profit you are betting on, or at least unwilling to bet against? Why is this provision a problem for you if you are adamant that cryptx is not breaking any regulations?

How is this so tricky? It's a really simple bet for someone who is so sure no investors will ever see a positive ROI.

I am sure that if cryptx remains listed, shareholders will not profit. I am not sure at all if that will be the case if/when authorities step in. Had BTC price collapsed instead of skyrocketed, VMC/Activeminer shareholders would have profited very nicely from the  settlement forced upon it. Again, is that why are betting on cryptx?

If peta were to be delisted and decide to faciliate trades in an open auction thread, or counterparty, or some other variation AND sum of dividends and shares still worked out to come to a positive ROI, why would you automatically win?

where shares are traded should not account into things. it's a bet only on whether an original investor could see a btc denominated profit. in exactly 6 months. in this specific terms it's either been a good investment or a bad one.

as long as a neutral adjudicator can come to the conclusion that these shares can be sold on market at X price and sum of that and dividends is more than originally input you'd lose, otherwise you'd win. (discounting funny business like anotheranonlol2 coming along right on time to buy shares off exchange for 0.0976btc)

Besides If peta were to be delisted and/or cryptx were to go bankrupt or havelock went dark, you'd be more likely to win purely based on the actual premise of the bet- the fact shares would have lost some or all of their value. The provision is a problem because it's got no relevance to the bet. You can make a separate bet if you want to put money on havelock closing down (I'd say no on delisting and slightly less no but still no on havelock closure in exactly 6 months) just for posterity sake

anyway, all of these posts have gone down on record, cached on btt mirror too, so regardless who actually bothers to put the money down can come back and do the whole quoting, told you so thing..

 

[Puppet]

If cryptx were to be delisted and decide to faciliate trades in an open auction thread, or counterparty, or some other variation AND sum of dividends and shares still worked out to come to a positive ROI, why would you automatically win?

Fair enough, if cryptx gets delisted but can still be traded freely, and there is a reasonable and objective mechanism to determine their market value (ie not "I got a bid on IRC for 1 share"), I have no problem with the bet running its course. However, if it goes gigamining style, direct shares, no longer tradable, there is no objective way to determine its value. In principle Id be okay to add up all future dividends and a final buyback price,  but it could take years before we have these numbers, and Im not willing to bet on such a long term. But I cant see a reason for cryptx to do this, other than because of what Ive been saying, that cryptx is breaking security regulations and can not publicly offer these securities. Can you see any other reason? If not, why would you worry about it?

where shares are traded should not account into things. it's a bet only on whether an original investor could see a btc denominated profit. in exactly 6 months. in this specific terms it's either been a good investment or a bad one.

Define "original investor" for me. You mean the one's that bought at 0.05 BTC on havelock ? Or  on btct.co at 0.65 BTC before the split ? Or the ones that bought in privately before it went on btctc? If so, no dice, those investors have been handed freebies at the expense of later ones. I very much doubt that will put them in the black 6 months from now, but Im not betting on that, I dont even have an idea how much dividends they received on btct.co to date. Im betting against anyone who got in at 0.095 or anyone getting in at todays market price. The fact you claim you are not selling means you expect to achieve a profit above todays value, so why not use that?

Besides If peta were to be delisted and/or cryptx were to go bankrupt or havelock went dark, you'd be more likely to win purely based on the actual premise of the bet- the fact shares would have lost some or all of their value. The provision is a problem because it's got no relevance to the bet. You can make a separate bet if you want to put money on havelock closing down.

If havelock closed down, shares wouldnt be worthless, I would assume they would be relisted on another exchange. If your fear is that this might happen exactly when our bet expires, Im more than willing to put in some provision that allows time for a relisting elsewhere. And Im not betting on havelock being forced shut. I would however be willing to bet on the issuer being closed down, but not in a timeframe Im willing to lock in funds.

[NotLambchop]

...The fact you claim you are not selling means you expect to achieve a profit above todays value, so why not use that?
...

To be fair, today's value isn't .095, it's .075

[Anotheranonlol]

If cryptx were to be delisted and decide to faciliate trades in an open auction thread, or counterparty, or some other variation AND sum of dividends and shares still worked out to come to a positive ROI, why would you automatically win?

Fair enough, if cryptx gets delisted but can still be traded freely, and there is a reasonable and objective mechanism to determine their market value (ie not "I got a bid on IRC for 1 share"), I have no problem with the bet running its course. However, if it goes gigamining style, direct shares, no longer tradable, there is no objective way to determine its value. In principle Id be okay to add up all future dividends and a final buyback price,  but it could take years before we have these numbers, and Im not willing to bet on such a long term. But I cant see a reason for cryptx to do this, other than because of what Ive been saying, that cryptx is breaking security regulations and can not publicly offer these securities. Can you see any other reason? If not, why would you worry about it?

where shares are traded should not account into things. it's a bet only on whether an original investor could see a btc denominated profit. in exactly 6 months. in this specific terms it's either been a good investment or a bad one.

Define "original investor" for me. You mean the one's that bought at 0.05 BTC on havelock ? Or  on btct.co at 0.65 BTC before the split ? Or the ones that bought in privately before it went on btctc? If so, no dice, those investors have been handed freebies at the expense of later ones. I very much doubt that will put them in the black 6 months from now, but Im not betting on that, I dont even have an idea how much dividends they received on btct.co to date. Im betting against anyone who got in at 0.095 or anyone getting in at todays market price. The fact you claim you are not selling means you expect to achieve a profit above todays value, so why not use that?

Besides If peta were to be delisted and/or cryptx were to go bankrupt or havelock went dark, you'd be more likely to win purely based on the actual premise of the bet- the fact shares would have lost some or all of their value. The provision is a problem because it's got no relevance to the bet. You can make a separate bet if you want to put money on havelock closing down.

If havelock closed down, shares wouldnt be worthless, I would assume they would be relisted on another exchange. If your fear is that this might happen exactly when our bet expires, Im more than willing to put in some provision that allows time for a relisting elsewhere. And Im not betting on havelock being forced shut. I would however be willing to bet on the issuer being closed down, but not in a timeframe Im willing to lock in funds.

Point 1- no I can't see another reason. It goes without saying it would have to be determined reasonably and objectively. I'd also not be willing to do gigamining style because headache, that's fair enough.

Point 2- define original

adjective
1.
present or existing from the beginning; first or earliest.

So BTCT.co investors were indeed the earliest, the first, and existed since the beginning- unlike havelock buyers.
so we go by that price,  (but obviously factoring in 10:1 split) . There weren't private investors prior to btct listing.
if it's no dice there then who are you preaching to? just the ones who brought above 0.0975? why not have a word with anyone who brought AM above 1btc? nobody there is getting 100% of their money back in 6 months, and they'd have to be dumb to bet on it.

Point 3 - if havelock closed down, you would expect a negative knock on effect for all securities, it's well documented in the past I'm sure you already know so no need for references.

if cryptx was delisted, it would have to be for the reason you stated, and therefore again, you'd expect prices to tumble- it's also been documented in the past.  How much is neobeeq worth these days? on both of these cases it's good for you, even if they don't become worthless.

Basically the specific question for you is: do you think will I personally will be in a position to gain more or less than 100% of my original investment in exactly 6 months? (less= bad investment more=good investment) and are you willing to bet on it.

Because I am already betting on that by investing, and willing to bet you that my bet will be successful. If you're not willing to bet on that my bet won't be succesfull, I know that any of your posts about how horrendous of an investment this is must be aimed towards saving someone else, and can just skip over them rather than trying to refute them

[NotLambchop]

...
Because I am already betting on that by investing, and willing to bet you that my bet will be successful. If you're not willing to bet on that my bet won't be succesfull, I know that any of your posts about how horrendous of an investment this is must be aimed towards saving someone else, and can just skip over them rather than trying to refute them

1.  If you are a BTCT investor, than there is no need to wait--your investment was a success if you cash out now (hopefully you're a small investor, and there won't be too much slippage).  But only if you cash out now.

If you don't, you are effectively making a second bet, that being: "((the sum total of the future dividends) and (future cash-out price of your "holdings" is going to be) > (than today's cash-out price)."

If you don't want to take the second bet, it's irrational to hold.

[Puppet]

[
Point 2- define original

adjective
1.
present or existing from the beginning; first or earliest.

So BTCT.co investors were indeed the earliest, the first, and existed since the beginning- unlike havelock buyers.
so we go by that price,  (but obviously factoring in 10:1 split) . There weren't private investors prior to btct listing.
if it's no dice there then who are you preaching to? just the ones who brought above 0.0975? why not have a word with anyone who brought AM above 1btc? nobody there is getting 100% of their money back in 6 months, and they'd have to be dumb to bet on it.

Im telling people today they are idiots for buying in at IPO price or for not cashing out, I dont have a time machine to go back to august of last year and tell them then; or make the bet; nor did I claim that back then. My time machine also doesnt allow me to go back and tell AM investors to cash out at 1BTC, but  I am not calling anyone an idiot for buying AM shares, didnt say it back it then, not saying it  today at todays market  price. AM current price seems reasonable to me,  it may or may not pan out, I have no idea since I cant just get a very good estimate on the ROI by estimating difficulty . And that makes it completely different from cryptx. Grade school math shows its virtually impossible cryptx will achieve a positive ROI at todays price,  unless difficulty growth would spectacularly grind to halt. Hint, not happening yet:
Estimated Next Difficulty:   13,400,877,470 (+13.99%)
https://bitcoinwisdom.com/bitcoin/difficulty

Anyway  I dont understand your reasoning, you are unwilling to bet based on todays price, yet claim you are not selling your shares so you are already betting based on today's price.. So which is it, you think you will profit in 6 months  compared to today's situation or you wont? Or are you just hoping for some irrational bump to get out in the coming weeks?

[Anotheranonlol]

...
Because I am already betting on that by investing, and willing to bet you that my bet will be successful. If you're not willing to bet on that my bet won't be succesfull, I know that any of your posts about how horrendous of an investment this is must be aimed towards saving someone else, and can just skip over them rather than trying to refute them

1.  If you are a BTCT investor, than there is no need to wait--your investment was a success if you cash out now (hopefully you're a small investor, and there won't be too much slippage).  But only if you cash out now.

If you don't, you are effectively making a second bet, that being: "((the sum total of the future dividends) and (future cash-out price of your "holdings" is going to be) > (than today's cash-out price)."

If you don't want to take the second bet, it's irrational to hold.

1) Correct, which is why the terms weren't stated as being anytime prior to 6 months, otherwise I'd take the 10btc off his hands right now

2) Also correct, but that's the bet I'm making with myself by holding. The bet I'd be making with a 3rd party would go something like this "((the sum total of the future dividends) and (cash-out price of your "holdings" in exactly 6 months is going to be) > (than today's cash-out price)." to do it anytime before or anytime after would make no sense for him.

It's true that in exactly 6 months it might be possible to earn less than today, or tomorrow or last week from combined value of shares and accumulated dividends. making holding a bad investment over selling (reverse is also true where selling at 122% gain for instance over waiting for 144% gain would of been a bad move ) but we don't need to factor any of that in. as long as positive ROI is reached from buying and sitting on your ass till the date specified, in general the project cannot be claimed to have been a bad investment (again not talking about everyone just a specific case)  

[Anotheranonlol]

Im telling people today they are idiots for buying in at IPO price or for not cashing out, I dont have a time machine to go back to august of last year and tell them then; or make the bet; nor did I claim that back then. My time machine also doesnt allow me to go back and tell AM investors to cash out at 1BTC, but  I am not calling anyone an idiot for buying AM shares, didnt say it back it then, not saying it  today at todays market  price. AM current price seems reasonable to me,  it may or may not pan out, I have no idea since I cant just get a very good estimate on the ROI by estimating difficulty . And that makes it completely different from cryptx. Grade school math shows its virtually impossible cryptx will achieve a positive ROI at todays price,  unless difficulty growth would spectacularly grind to halt. Hint, not happening yet:
Estimated Next Difficulty:   13,400,877,470 (+13.99%)
https://bitcoinwisdom.com/bitcoin/difficulty

Anyway  I dont understand your reasoning, you are unwilling to bet based on todays price, yet claim you are not selling your shares so you are already betting based on today's price.. So which is it, you think you will profit in 6 months  compared to today's situation or you wont? Or are you just hoping for some irrational bump to get out in the coming weeks?

Not looking for exit, passed some nice ones a while back that could of been taken if that was the case.

perhaps you really would have been better warning AM investors who brought at 4.5btc, they need a bit of comforting after 2200+% losses more so than buyers here. I'm sure you would of been around at peta IPO and called it a bad investment like icebreaker, deprived et al. would of looked foolish for a while.
easier to wait for a decline and try the swooping vulture approach. broken clocks and all that.

You are right about that. Thanks for a reasoned reply Crumbs

Reasoned?  Activeminer's 28nm chip is being developed by easic, we know that, it is on easic's website. easic isnt a small bunch of amateurs, there is absolutely no reason to believe they wont pull this off easily. As for the CEO's capabilities, Ken may or may not be a marketing guru, but at least his websites work and when BTCT closed not only did he manage an orderly migration to bitfunder in next to no time, he said they had foreseen the closure of both exchanges and had already developed  their own trading platform that would operate from Belize if the need arised. Now thats what I like to see in a CEO: foresight and bold actions.

Now compare that to the labcoin boosters who bet their money on a very inefficient 130nm chip thats supposedly developed for free in a university by a student no one's ever heard off,  is being deployed by a company who's CEO  does internet sales of mobile phones, but doesnt have a public website. A chip they claim 2TH of which is deployed since a few weeks, but of which no pictures, no video, no nothing has been shown. The only "evidence" is that they are sometimes mining at ~800GH at a pool, but most people suspect that is obtained with avalons and bitfury's that Theswede is known to have bought.

Oh and they have a future  65nm product under development; the only guy working on it is only working on its IO periphery, he doesnt know who will do the rest, and claims he himself is probably not capable of designing the core, is not aware of the 130nm chip, has no clue of a timeline for the 65nm one  other than that he expects his part of the design to be ready this year.

Yeah. By all means, sell your Active miner shares and buy some labcoin.

activeminer may or may not succeed, but Im quite confident its a very serious attempt with fairly good odds.

good play on the activemining confidence by the way, happy to take some lessons from you  

[IPO Magic]

...as long as positive ROI is reached from buying and sitting on your ass till the date specified, in general the project cannot be claimed to have been a bad investment (again not talking about everyone just a specific case)  

So the bet you wish to make is basically "over the next 6 months, I won't lose more than I have made up to now."  Overall, the project included an influx of second IPO money, with shares selling at a premium over the first.  For the project to be deemed a success, you should include those shares in your calculations.  Otherwise, you are simply profiting from the n00bs =)

Edit:  If we ignore things like (second IPO money), most ponzi schemes could be considered "successful projects."

[Anotheranonlol]

So the bet you wish to make is basically "over the next 6 months, I won't lose more than I have made up to now."  Overall, the project included an influx of second IPO money, with shares selling at a premium over the first.  For the project to be deemed a success, you should include those shares in your calculations.  Otherwise, you are simply profiting from the n00bs.

So? you know how markets work. how do you propose profit in perpuity for all involved. in 6 month period no less?
there's a guy who buys bitcoin at $450 last month, someone who brought at $650 2 weeks ago, and someone who brought at $580 today.
Now if we were setting a bet about positive ROI at a fixed date (today) there's only one winner on that strict condition. Doesn't mean there will only be one winner.
you can say anyone beside the $650 guy made a bad investment, which would be true only in that timeframe. the trio might well all make more than 100% in longer timespan but it's not important, if you are arguing that anyone buying throughout the month will lose money you are saying the $450 guy can't make more than 100% which has already been proven false. in this case, I'm the $450 guy trying to  work out what subset of investors he's addressing

[IPO Magic]

I'm not disagreeing with you, just pointing out that the bet you're proposing is much less interesting than I have assumed.  While I assumed the bet was meant to justify buying (or at least holding) PETA @ current price, the one you're suggesting does no such thing.

But as far as you're concerned, the project is a success--your shares are worth more than you paid for them, and you've collected some divs.  If you cashed out now, you would make a profit.  I don't think anyone is debating that.  The wisdom of holding, though...

[Anotheranonlol]

But as far as you're concerned, the project is a success--your shares are worth more than you paid for them, and you've collected some divs.  If you cashed out now, you would make a profit.  I don't think anyone is debating that.  The wisdom of holding, though...

Not quite that simple. Otherwise there's no incentive to bet. the bet is whether in exactly 6 months that will still ring true.