{BFL} U.S. Court halts Bitcoin mining operation Butterfly Labs/Josh/Inaba - FTC

[nutildah]

I only have 1 word to say.

Op's name is LittleD, LMFAO, he has a little d!!

So... you are defending BFL why?

[1715013267]

1715013267

[1715013267]

1715013267

[1715013267]

1715013267

[Come-In-Behind]

I only have 1 word to say.

Op's name is LittleD, LMFAO, he has a little d!!

So... you are defending BFL why?

Defending them, of course not. I think they deserve to go to prison for the max. sentence.

I made that comment because, well, my name is "Come-In-Behind", and I felt a little immature, childish, humor, would live up to such a username (Look at Come-From-Above's name and posts for reference).

Also, I'm bored as hell.

[tuaris]

I hope the result of all this is the establishment of some laws that will

• Prevent hardware manufactures from also operating as miners, to prevent them from mining with consumer funds/equipment.
• Places controls on prices so that manufactures are not over charging for hardware.

The first point is very important.  It's a conflict of interest.  They sell 'used' hardware to customers who believe they are getting 'new, unused' items.  It also causes difficulty to rise sooner, thus requiring the customers to buy 'newer', 'faster' hardware more often.

[zorke]

I hope the result of all this is the establishment of some laws that will

• Prevent hardware manufactures from also operating as miners, to prevent them from mining with consumer funds/equipment.
• Places controls on prices so that manufactures are not over charging for hardware.

The first point is very important.  It's a conflict of interest.  They sell 'used' hardware to customers who believe they are getting 'new, unused' items.  It also causes difficulty to rise sooner, thus requiring the customers to buy 'newer', 'faster' hardware more often.

I strongly agree with your first point. I think that any bitcoin mined by hardware that is used for "testing" should be used to first pay for electricity the equipment uses, and then be distributed to the pre-order customers (after the "pre-order" phase is over there is no reason for any kind of delays in shipping) in proportion to how many machines were ordered (a customer who ordered 10 machines should get 10x the amount that someone who ordered 1 machine - assuming there is only one "model" being sold).

On your 2nd bullet, I strongly disagree we need laws for this. If a miner is being sold for too much money it will not be purchased by anyone.

[Icon]

Just an fyi, THERE IS NO REASON WHAT SO EVER FOR A COMPANY TO MINE REAL BTC! Not when there exists test net btc. I know the hardware needs testing, hence the testnet btc.. mines fake btc just as hard as the real.. sorta.

Icon

[headswim]

I hope the result of all this is the establishment of some laws that will

• Prevent hardware manufactures from also operating as miners, to prevent them from mining with consumer funds/equipment.
• Places controls on prices so that manufactures are not over charging for hardware.

The first point is very important.  It's a conflict of interest.  They sell 'used' hardware to customers who believe they are getting 'new, unused' items.  It also causes difficulty to rise sooner, thus requiring the customers to buy 'newer', 'faster' hardware more often.

Yes, because regulation by fiat is EXACTLY what BTC is about. Wait....

[zorke]

Just an fyi, THERE IS NO REASON WHAT SO EVER FOR A COMPANY TO MINE REAL BTC! Not when there exists test net btc. I know the hardware needs testing, hence the testnet btc.. mines fake btc just as hard as the real.. sorta.

Icon

This would increase expenses for them because mining on the test net would still require electricity but would generate no revenue. The test net is also not the best place to be testing new miners as the difficulty resets if a block is not found within (I believe it is) 30 minutes, which would likely have adverse affects on testing.

[Icon]

Well i didn't know the diff reset, i knew it would probably be lower for the fewer miners mining on it, but that being said the electricity should be covered by the company as part of R&D and not been taken from the miners, kinda like ordering a pizza and the driver shows up to hand you 3/4 pizza 1/4 was ate while delivering it to you

Icon

[jbreher]

I hope the result of all this is the establishment of some laws that will

• Prevent hardware manufactures from also operating as miners, to prevent them from mining with consumer funds/equipment.
• Places controls on prices so that manufactures are not over charging for hardware.

Noble goals. Absolutely despicable means of achieving them. The government has no legitimate business here.

Nobody who does not give a mining equipment manufacturer funds cannot be hurt by that company mining with their manufactured product before shipment.

The proper solution would be for people to be adults, and do some due diligence on a manufacturer before trusting them with funds.

[sly5am]

I hope the result of all this is the establishment of some laws that will

• Prevent hardware manufactures from also operating as miners, to prevent them from mining with consumer funds/equipment.
• Places controls on prices so that manufactures are not over charging for hardware.

Noble goals. Absolutely despicable means of achieving them. The government has no legitimate business here.

Nobody who does not give a mining equipment manufacturer funds cannot be hurt by that company mining with their manufactured product before shipment.

The proper solution would be for people to be adults, and do some due diligence on a manufacturer before trusting them with funds.

Double take... WHAT???

You obviously have no clue about bitcoin miner manufacturers.. LOL

Or your a shill for BFL.

[jbreher]

I hope the result of all this is the establishment of some laws that will

• Prevent hardware manufactures from also operating as miners, to prevent them from mining with consumer funds/equipment.
• Places controls on prices so that manufactures are not over charging for hardware.

Noble goals. Absolutely despicable means of achieving them. The government has no legitimate business here.

Nobody who does not give a mining equipment manufacturer funds cannot be hurt by that company mining with their manufactured product before shipment.

The proper solution would be for people to be adults, and do some due diligence on a manufacturer before trusting them with funds.

Double take... WHAT???

You obviously have no clue about bitcoin miner manufacturers.. LOL

Or your a shill for BFL.

Yes, I have a clue or three about miner manufacturers. And I am not a shill for BFL. (Would someone that is a shill for BFL have no clue about miner manufacturers? How would that work?)

You are advocating that the state step in and mandate behaviors in an area where consumers have the capability of making perfectly usable decision on their own. You are advocating the statist solution.

Price controls? Really? Do you fondly long for the simple wistful days you spent under the diktat of the USSR?

[Rum152]

I hope the result of all this is the establishment of some laws that will

• Prevent hardware manufactures from also operating as miners, to prevent them from mining with consumer funds/equipment.
• Places controls on prices so that manufactures are not over charging for hardware.

Noble goals. Absolutely despicable means of achieving them. The government has no legitimate business here.

Nobody who does not give a mining equipment manufacturer funds cannot be hurt by that company mining with their manufactured product before shipment.

The proper solution would be for people to be adults, and do some due diligence on a manufacturer before trusting them with funds.

Very large companies have a huge advantage over people who are buying miners on a "retail" level. The customers do not have any power against the manufacturers when they decide to delay shipment even when they promised an earlier shipping date.

The network as a whole suffers when a manufacturer mines with customer equipment as the difficulty is higher as a result (the manufacturer is able to produce more miners with zero risk to themselves). This also reduces overall confidence in bitcoin

[jbreher]

Very large companies have a huge advantage over people who are buying miners on a "retail" level. The customers do not have any power against the manufacturers when they decide to delay shipment even when they promised an earlier shipping date.

Yes, the customers have the power to be non-customers of businesses that engage in crappy business practices. Whining to mommy government almost always makes problems worse, not better.

The network as a whole suffers when a manufacturer mines with customer equipment as the difficulty is higher as a result (the manufacturer is able to produce more miners with zero risk to themselves). This also reduces overall confidence in bitcoin

The _network_ is not harmed in the slightest. Greater difficulty is good for the network - it reflects additional hashing power that a new entrant would need to acquire in order to 51% the network. This is reflected in additional confidence, not less.

Sure, it's bad for individual miners. Too bad. I guess those miners should have done their due diligence before throwing their money at empty promises.

It's not as if anyone ordering within the last two years or so did not have ample evidence that BFL was not going to meet their target ship dates.

Let's keep our eye on the ball here. My comments are solely directed against the idea that government should:
- make new laws preventing manufacturers from mining
- make new laws for price controls

How the hell would that even work in a global industry? Ludicrous!

[Puppet]

These are the idiots representing BFL and Josh... Ha! Josh is about to get scammed by real professionals scammers HAHAHAH!



http://www.spencerfane.com/

Dude.. first of all, spencerfane acts as the receiver for the court, not as BFL's attorneys. Secondly that picture is not of the people actually involved, but turns out to be of 3 new spencerfane partners. That lawfirm has over 100 lawyers.

[Tzupy]

Interesting article at Arstechnica:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/09/feds-butterfly-labs-mined-bitcoins-on-customers-boxes-before-shipping/