GAW ZenCloud ZenPool Hashlet - does it really exist? ALWAYS MAKE MONEY :-)

[DARKANGEL6415]

Regardless, one can reasonably assume it is not what they say in their ads, it is what they leave up to you to discover and/or blindly accept after the fact, yes? If so, that's a sign of a real honest company right there - not.

It appears while just about every other cloud mining business is reducing fees (some multi-times in the previous 3 weeks) and earning customers' more revenue based on real world numbers, this single self-proclaimed industry changer has done nothing to reduce fees and/or resolve the pitiful "virtual" pool performances vs. high costs associated with investing in them. Oh well, at least they have their mythical coin that will be worth its weight in gold if/when released.

- BUYER BEWARE -

Yes. This is the problem I'm having with them at the moment. They are basing the fees on dollar value ($0.08/mh scrypt), yet as BTC is gainging in value to the dollar, we are not seeing the fees dropping.
It does not make sense, as BTC has gained 30% on the dollar, fees should have gone down the same 30%.

This wont happen i like to compare GAW to the oil/gasoline industry. The price of crude oil is down like 50% from last year "example " but the price of gasoline at store is only down 10%. People always say it lags behind takes 4-5 quarters for price to drop as it is digested or some crap like that. But if the price of oil went up %10 next week you can bet the waiting of 4-5 quarters goes out the window and the price of gasoline at store goes up instant.

[1714898030]

1714898030

[1714898030]

1714898030

[1714898030]

1714898030

[DARKANGEL6415]

What do I consider virtual in regards to mining and/or pools?
As someone with an actual hardware based mining farm that I can physically look at (inspect), control, and tinker with, anything that does not at the very least meet one of these traits is "virtual" in my classification - remote or not. Likewise, one of the many TOS resvisions made by GAW/Zen has finally admitted what many suspected regarding their own classification of their "Hashlet" miners being "digital" in nature, which can also be included in the "virtual" classification if you're in to semantics.

The funny part.

Following this:
Cryptocurency is virtual
Cloud mining is virtual
Radio waves are virtual
Digital pictures and documents are virtual
The internet is virtual

Does virtual mean worse?

NOW " darkangel11 " you better be on your best behavior i dont want people to only see words and not numbers OR the fact im senior member and you noobie. I am just saying please dont cause drama for those who dont read full name and think its me. 

[mutha]

Crypto currency is based on decentralized block chains and there is nothing decentralized about monopolizing a block chain by one entity? That breaches the basic bottom line of the definition of crypto currency, No matter how you try to define it. I dont know what GAWS/ZEN trying to do, but one thing for sure calling it a crypto coin is very misleading.

I think you missed something.

https://hashtalk.org/topic/17657

I didnt miss anything... only thing I am getting out of this is "IF"

If this would be applied to HashCoin

If is far from definitive and is uncertain... For instance IF you won the lottery you would be rich
but the probabilities of that happening are far from certain.

[alienesb]

This thread is almost worthless now with all the fake legal posturing. Give it a rest or take it elsewhere.

[KC6TTR]

What do I consider virtual in regards to mining and/or pools?
As someone with an actual hardware based mining farm that I can physically look at (inspect), control, and tinker with, anything that does not at the very least meet one of these traits is "virtual" in my classification - remote or not. Likewise, one of the many TOS resvisions made by GAW/Zen has finally admitted what many suspected regarding their own classification of their "Hashlet" miners being "digital" in nature, which can also be included in the "virtual" classification if you're in to semantics.

The funny part.

Following this:
Cryptocurency is virtual
Cloud mining is virtual
Radio waves are virtual
Digital pictures and documents are virtual
The internet is virtual

Does virtual mean worse?

Even better... try staying focused on what I was trying to explain and keep it WITHIN that context. Likewise, not switching between your real/bogus accounts may help.

If you can't reasonably understand the differences between real physical mining and make-believe processes that emulate mining, then there is little else to say. I tried...  

Scott-

[mutha]

LOL you made me laugh... RU SERIOUS???

Crypto currency is based on decentralized block chains and there is nothing decentralized about monopolizing a block chain by one entity? That breaches the basic bottom line of the definition of crypto currency, No matter how you try to define it. I dont know what GAWS/ZEN trying to do, but one thing for sure calling it a crypto coin is very misleading.

Some people would argue that it sin't decentralized.
http://eprint.iacr.org/2013/829.pdf
The whole bitcoin foundation is a step towards centralization.

Yes it is on a limited basis and there is a reason for that not related to BTC but is related to the blockchain.

It is hard to believe people are buying this GAWS "innovation" considering  

This news is just out.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102178309

How does it work? Meet the blockchain

The central insight behind bitcoin is its innovative blockchain—a decentralized ledger that records every verified transaction. As it stands, proponents say it is the most secure record-keeping technology ever devised; each piece of information is stored on an immutable time-stamped list, which is then replicated on other serves across the globe.

This chain lives in its entirety on hundreds of machines around the world—which helps ensure protection from corruption, technological or otherwise.

That is only one aspect of the "decentralized" block chain regarding crypto currency.

The part you are thinking about is "centralization" is this... for the Block Chain other uses? genome decoding, sequencing and protein folding? http://www.genome.gov/sequencingcosts , Not to mention astrophysic applications as space exploration continues.

The ASIC Miner number crunching (hashing) on the block chain is no different and many times the "block chain" is diverted/barrowed/rented to these and you t are being paid in BTC/Crypto credits. (IE it looks like you are mining)....
that is real innovation virtual or any other way. I suspect this is what many of the cloud miners are doing at a profit and paying in minimal Crypto payments/credits. Of course much of this is still being experimented with, so it may not be happening on a wide scale yet......... but it will eventually if proven up.

Now time for my wild speculation, For instance could the government be using that $28,000,000 worth of BTC seized from Silk Road 1 to conduct this experiment payments? It would be a perfect "Virtual" mining cover.

(sigh) alright I am digressing, seriously as a company that started off manufacturing ASIC miners, you would think they would at least know the business sector they are in and how all the follow on revenue and opportunities work on the block chain and uses for their "equipment, it simply does not make sense... to be peddling another crypto currency when there are already 500 or more out there. Sorry doesnt make any sense at all, decentralized or not.

[NuShrike]

Zencloud is rotting a bit. Graphs for miners (Dashboard) don't even try to work anymore.

[geegaw]

What do I consider virtual in regards to mining and/or pools?
As someone with an actual hardware based mining farm that I can physically look at (inspect), control, and tinker with, anything that does not at the very least meet one of these traits is "virtual" in my classification - remote or not. Likewise, one of the many TOS resvisions made by GAW/Zen has finally admitted what many suspected regarding their own classification of their "Hashlet" miners being "digital" in nature, which can also be included in the "virtual" classification if you're in to semantics.

The funny part.

Following this:
Cryptocurency is virtual
Cloud mining is virtual
Radio waves are virtual
Digital pictures and documents are virtual
The internet is virtual

Does virtual mean worse?

Even better... try staying focused on what I was trying to explain and keep it WITHIN that context. Likewise, not switching between your real/bogus accounts may help.

If you can't reasonably understand the differences between real physical mining and make-believe processes that emulate mining, then there is little else to say. I tried...  

Scott-

This !

The whole thing might very well be a charade. A ruse. The favorite saying  smoke and mirrors.

There are no miners, there are no mining pools, there is nothing.

Nothing but an investment vehicle from Cantor Fitz that yields x amount per month.

Homero collected up a gang of smart numbers people, calculated that if he had 10 million dollards, stuck it in this investment vehicle at Cantor Fitz, it would ueled y amount per month.

Take that surety wrap it up nice and pretty in the brand new GEE WHIZ GAW latest  trend of today, crypto currency mining and sell it off. It sure looks like you are buying something, it looks like it is mining something. But all you have done is given this trickster your hard earned money, when you could just as well knock on the front door of Cantor Fitz and invest in what the back end is generating and pretending to be crypto currency mining returns.

Maybe not. An individual with the princely sum of 10 dollars obviously cannot walk right in.

Our Lord and Savior Homero, got his game on. Collect up 100,000 losers with nary ten dollars to their name, gift wrap a scenario that presents itself as the latest trend today, take the total sum collected and invest it in Cantor Fitz today. Aportion the return to each and everyone in such a way that they believe they are making a return.

Diabolical I say !

[eightcylinders]

Regarding the debate on whether GAW is "virtual" and whether than matters .. I think the central problem with GAW's "hashlet" is getting a buried in semantics.

Look at it from an investment perspective and the problem is clear.

How much would you pay for "1 share" of a hugely successful private equity fund?  Lets say I told you of a fund that earned 500% per share last year.  Wouldn't you still want to know:  (1) how large the fund is (how many $$ invested, how much in bank account), (2) how many shares there are, and (3) what the fund is doing with its money?  This is essential - you have to understand the cap table before you can value that "1 share"... Maybe last year they had one lucky investment out of 30 failures.. maybe last year they had 1000 shares and 100 million in investment capital, bit this year they have 10,000 shares and the same invested capital... Can you see how that might make a HUGE difference?

Hashlets present exactly the same problems, and GAW is refusing to disclose ANY of the "cap table" for its "hashlets":

Consider just the Prime and Zen hashlets on Zenpool:

(1) How many mhs have been issued and sold?  How many can be issued and sold?  Is there a limit on whether GAW can issue and sell more? Are there hashlets out there that have been issued but not sold yet (kink of like treasury stock, just waiting to sell)? 

(2) For each mhs of "hashlet" power, how much mhs is dedicated to the prime or zen hashlet purchased?  Same for ghs if SHA256 miners are dedicated?  Is it 1/1?  1/2?  1/1000000?   Note that even if GAW is renting out mhs/ghs there should still be dedicated hash in a fixed ratio.

(3) For each mhs of "hashlet" power, what other "funds" exist that are dedicated to those "hashlets" for coin ICOs and non-hashing purposes?  How much of this "fund" is allocated to each hashlet?

(4) What guaranty exists that GAW won't change the above at its whim to satisfy new investors, or support sales of new hashlets, or fund the hashcoin ICO, etc. (even if it did eventually disclose numbers)?

Without some solid numbers and at least promises on the above points, investing in hashlets is like throwing coins into a puddle and hoping your wish will come true.  I think that is what Scott means by "virtual" ...

[wdl1908]

This !

The whole thing might very well be a charade. A ruse. The favorite saying  smoke and mirrors.

There are no miners, there are no mining pools, there is nothing.

Nothing but an investment vehicle from Cantor Fitz that yields x amount per month.

Homero collected up a gang of smart numbers people, calculated that if he had 10 million dollards, stuck it in this investment vehicle at Cantor Fitz, it would ueled y amount per month.

Take that surety wrap it up nice and pretty in the brand new GEE WHIZ GAW latest  trend of today, crypto currency mining and sell it off. It sure looks like you are buying something, it looks like it is mining something. But all you have done is given this trickster your hard earned money, when you could just as well knock on the front door of Cantor Fitz and invest in what the back end is generating and pretending to be crypto currency mining returns.

Maybe not. An individual with the princely sum of 10 dollars obviously cannot walk right in.

Our Lord and Savior Homero, got his game on. Collect up 100,000 losers with nary ten dollars to their name, gift wrap a scenario that presents itself as the latest trend today, take the total sum collected and invest it in Cantor Fitz today. Aportion the return to each and everyone in such a way that they believe they are making a return.

Diabolical I say !

Nice story. Now why would bitmain confirm a purchase of 5PH?

[geegaw]

This !

The whole thing might very well be a charade. A ruse. The favorite saying  smoke and mirrors.

There are no miners, there are no mining pools, there is nothing.

Nothing but an investment vehicle from Cantor Fitz that yields x amount per month.

Homero collected up a gang of smart numbers people, calculated that if he had 10 million dollards, stuck it in this investment vehicle at Cantor Fitz, it would ueled y amount per month.

Take that surety wrap it up nice and pretty in the brand new GEE WHIZ GAW latest  trend of today, crypto currency mining and sell it off. It sure looks like you are buying something, it looks like it is mining something. But all you have done is given this trickster your hard earned money, when you could just as well knock on the front door of Cantor Fitz and invest in what the back end is generating and pretending to be crypto currency mining returns.

Maybe not. An individual with the princely sum of 10 dollars obviously cannot walk right in.

Our Lord and Savior Homero, got his game on. Collect up 100,000 losers with nary ten dollars to their name, gift wrap a scenario that presents itself as the latest trend today, take the total sum collected and invest it in Cantor Fitz today. Aportion the return to each and everyone in such a way that they believe they are making a return.

Diabolical I say !

Nice story. Now why would bitmain confirm a purchase of 5PH?

Because what I wrote weeks ago was deleted.

They bought bulk wholesale rate hashing power from them. Nothing more nothing less. And why not. If you have surplus funds and can achieve that. Re-sell the hashing power at +10 % .

It's all about the numbers. As ugly as Homero looks, he's got some cunning cooking upstairs in his brain. I will grant him that.

Quote
LOL @ this nonsense !  All that was bought was hashing power in bulk at a whole sale price which is then retailed out to the little followers of this. No 5000 miners are leaving for anywhere any time soon.

3PHS+ hashing power is generated by 3200 units of AntMinerS2


https://www.hashnest.com/

More smoke and mirrors before the house of cards collapse  Sad

[bitcoinnoisseur]

Regarding the debate on whether GAW is "virtual" and whether than matters .. I think the central problem with GAW's "hashlet" is getting a buried in semantics.

Look at it from an investment perspective and the problem is clear.

How much would you pay for "1 share" of a hugely successful private equity fund?  Lets say I told you of a fund that earned 500% per share last year.  Wouldn't you still want to know:  (1) how large the fund is (how many $$ invested, how much in bank account), (2) how many shares there are, and (3) what the fund is doing with its money?  This is essential - you have to understand the cap table before you can value that "1 share"... Maybe last year they had one lucky investment out of 30 failures.. maybe last year they had 1000 shares and 100 million in investment capital, bit this year they have 10,000 shares and the same invested capital... Can you see how that might make a HUGE difference?

Hashlets present exactly the same problems, and GAW is refusing to disclose ANY of the "cap table" for its "hashlets":

Consider just the Prime and Zen hashlets on Zenpool:

(1) How many mhs have been issued and sold?  How many can be issued and sold?  Is there a limit on whether GAW can issue and sell more? Are there hashlets out there that have been issued but not sold yet (kink of like treasury stock, just waiting to sell)?  

(2) For each mhs of "hashlet" power, how much mhs is dedicated to the prime or zen hashlet purchased?  Same for ghs if SHA256 miners are dedicated?  Is it 1/1?  1/2?  1/1000000?   Note that even if GAW is renting out mhs/ghs there should still be dedicated hash in a fixed ratio.

(3) For each mhs of "hashlet" power, what other "funds" exist that are dedicated to those "hashlets" for coin ICOs and non-hashing purposes?  How much of this "fund" is allocated to each hashlet?

(4) What guaranty exists that GAW won't change the above at its whim to satisfy new investors, or support sales of new hashlets, or fund the hashcoin ICO, etc. (even if it did eventually disclose numbers)?

Without some solid numbers and at least promises on the above points, investing in hashlets is like throwing coins into a puddle and hoping your wish will come true.  I think that is what Scott means by "virtual" ...

Well said. Those are some of the exact questions I was asking myself and on HT when my hardware miners were turned into "The world’s first Digital Cloud Miners". Those questions got me banned from 4 different accounts in succession. Whoever is still invested in GAW and whoever is just starting to invest in GAW, are in my mind the most uneducated, uninformed, unrealistic and greedy people in the crypto-currency world, bar none.

[DiCE1904]

Called again today, the 4th day of my account being locked.

Got the runaround again. One of their security guys locked my account for an unknown reason to phone support. I guess there was a screenshot of "why" but was unable to be seen by the phone support. The security guy has either ignored phone supports notes on his desk or hes just burning time.

Posted in the hashtalk forum with my issue and Josh moved it but didnt answer or fix the issue.
https://hashtalk.org/topic/17884/account-locked-for-3-days-what-is-going-on

 

[bitcoinnoisseur]

Other questions I had that obviously never got answered were: How is it possible that I have a 55MH hashlet mining the same pool as a 50MH hashlet and the 55MH hashlet earns less BTC and simultaneously incurs a higher maintenance fee. I was fed all this mumbo jumbo about variance by users at HT like Daffy and Redacted. They even suggested that my 54.7MH Zens(converted from a 54.7 GAW War Machine) were pegged to the exact GAW War Machine I had purchased. I can't even explain how absurd that is. I agreed there was variance in a hardware miners performance but that hashlets weren't hardware miners and all variance should be absorbed by the entire hashlet pool and payouts and fees paid and incurred fairly. Then I was told I didn't buy any mining shares and I could invest in some other company if that's what I wanted but GAW was a mining company and everyone was in it for all the quirks in hardware mining. Absolutely none of this makes sense and doesn't ever answer my question. IF I owned shares then physical hardware mining variance would be absorbed by everyone. IF I didn't and I owned hashlets pegged to specific hardware miners that do create variance then it is impossible to pay out less and incur higher maintenance fees as maintenance fees are based on hashrate only. Higher maintenance fees means higher hashrate. Higher hashrate equals higher payout. Lower maintenance fees means lower hashrate. Lower hashrate equals lower payouts. So what exactly did I own when I owned hashlets???

[knowhow]

all being said  we have more 10 days to see what hascoin will become

[darkangel11]

What do I consider virtual in regards to mining and/or pools?
As someone with an actual hardware based mining farm that I can physically look at (inspect), control, and tinker with, anything that does not at the very least meet one of these traits is "virtual" in my classification - remote or not. Likewise, one of the many TOS resvisions made by GAW/Zen has finally admitted what many suspected regarding their own classification of their "Hashlet" miners being "digital" in nature, which can also be included in the "virtual" classification if you're in to semantics.

The funny part.

Following this:
Cryptocurency is virtual
Cloud mining is virtual
Radio waves are virtual
Digital pictures and documents are virtual
The internet is virtual

Does virtual mean worse?

Even better... try staying focused on what I was trying to explain and keep it WITHIN that context. Likewise, not switching between your real/bogus accounts may help.

If you can't reasonably understand the differences between real physical mining and make-believe processes that emulate mining, then there is little else to say. I tried...  

Scott-

It's hard to focus when someone gives pseudo intellectual talks about digital and virtual being the same thing  
This was my first and last post here so you can safely go back to your virtual world of real and unreal accounts and ambiguous contexts.

[suchmoon]

This thread is depressing.....

https://hashtalk.org/topic/17901/gaw-adds-25-000-customers-in-one-week/3

And how does he know they're new to the industry?

Presumably anybody who's not new wouldn't fall for it

Seriously though, I'm a bit confused by this number. If there are 25000 customers then what did they buy? New hashlets are not sold anymore, so they must have bought from existing customers on the Market, so is there really a net gain other than the 10% Market fee?

Or is the 25000 the number of "customers" who took the free Genesis? That's not really something to brag about is it?

[bitcoinnoisseur]

What do I consider virtual in regards to mining and/or pools?
As someone with an actual hardware based mining farm that I can physically look at (inspect), control, and tinker with, anything that does not at the very least meet one of these traits is "virtual" in my classification - remote or not. Likewise, one of the many TOS resvisions made by GAW/Zen has finally admitted what many suspected regarding their own classification of their "Hashlet" miners being "digital" in nature, which can also be included in the "virtual" classification if you're in to semantics.

The funny part.

Following this:
Cryptocurency is virtual
Cloud mining is virtual
Radio waves are virtual
Digital pictures and documents are virtual
The internet is virtual

Does virtual mean worse?

Even better... try staying focused on what I was trying to explain and keep it WITHIN that context. Likewise, not switching between your real/bogus accounts may help.

If you can't reasonably understand the differences between real physical mining and make-believe processes that emulate mining, then there is little else to say. I tried...  

Scott-

It's hard to focus when someone gives pseudo intellectual talks about digital and virtual being the same thing  
This was my first and last post here so you can safely go back to your virtual world of real and unreal accounts and ambiguous contexts.

Thank you for agreeing to never post here again. Everyone here is better off as a result.

[elrugrim]

Honestly, if everyone stopped posting here, except for a once a week update?    We would all be better off.

[bitcoinnoisseur]

Honestly, if everyone stopped posting here, except for a once a week update?    We would all be better off.

That was actually of less use then what he said. Congratulations.