ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[Mabsark]

Dude, it's called "innocent until proven guilty".  Your acting like an entitled asshole and it's reflecting badly on AM obviously.

Tell that to all the victims of the PB mining ponzi and all the other bitcoin ponzis, I'm sure that will get them their money back. This isn't a court of law and there is no "innocent until proven guilty" when dealing with bitcoin services, they should all be treated as scams until they provide some evidence of legitimacy.

As for calling out these ponzis reflecting badly on AM, that's complete nonsense and AMHash sales prove that.

[1714215880]

1714215880

[MichaelBliss]

Dude, it's called "innocent until proven guilty".  Your acting like an entitled asshole and it's reflecting badly on AM obviously.

As for calling out these ponzis reflecting badly on AM, that's complete nonsense and AMHash sales prove that.

Issue is with calling out / demanding evidence from legit companies, not the ponzis.  I do see your point, I totally disagree that they should get negative trust until they prove themselves to you.   Though I see the need for warning people.  Haha start Mabsark's Ratings Guide to Ponzi's maybe...

[Blazed]

Dude, it's called "innocent until proven guilty".  Your acting like an entitled asshole and it's reflecting badly on AM obviously.

As for calling out these ponzis reflecting badly on AM, that's complete nonsense and AMHash sales prove that.

Issue is with calling out / demanding evidence from legit companies, not the ponzis.  I do see your point, I totally disagree that they should get negative trust until they prove themselves to you.   Though I see the need for warning people.  Haha start Mabsark's Ratings Guide to Ponzi's maybe...

I am sure these guys having default trust will not last long...Theymos already knows of the problems. Canary seems to hand out lvl 2 trust like it is going out of style and that should be fixed soon. I myself have some lvl 2 trust, but earned it..I would never negrate without proof since it carries a lot more weight. If you have no proof simple leave a neutral warning since it shows up and let others decide off of that.

[Mabsark]

I am sure these guys having default trust will not last long...Theymos already knows of the problems. Canary seems to hand out lvl 2 trust like it is going out of style and that should be fixed soon. I myself have some lvl 2 trust, but earned it..I would never negrate without proof since it carries a lot more weight. If you have no proof simple leave a neutral warning since it shows up and let others decide off of that.

I've never been on Default Trust. I was on Canary's list (no idea why) but I'm not now. There's a discussion going on about it over here by the way, and most people agree with the feedback I've left.

Uh. What's up with divs ? One time payment and then silence again ?

That wasn't a proper dividend, it was just for accountancy.

[raskul]

I am sure these guys having default trust will not last long...Theymos already knows of the problems. Canary seems to hand out lvl 2 trust like it is going out of style and that should be fixed soon. I myself have some lvl 2 trust, but earned it..I would never negrate without proof since it carries a lot more weight. If you have no proof simple leave a neutral warning since it shows up and let others decide off of that.

I've never been on Default Trust. I was on Canary's list (no idea why) but I'm not now. There's a discussion going on about it over here by the way, and most people agree with the feedback I've left.

Uh. What's up with divs ? One time payment and then silence again ?

That wasn't a proper dividend, it was just for accountancy. That was the change from the next round of investment with your money.

FTFY^
 

[EternalWingsofGod]

This company's rating has been updated in the Manufacturer Trustworthiness thread.

[This message won't be monitored, discuss any concerns in the thread.]

Reading the changelog in my opinion it makes sense on the communication front since we have been working on getting communications improved for the better part of the year without much progress by some measures so a downgrade made sense.
But it is more than 1 (since there is communication and 0 would be the absense of it 1 seems a tad low)
The prisma was an issue but the way it was handled was good so seems like a fair decrease for now.
It did make me look at all the competitors quite a few.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=888260.msg9868520#msg9868520

The 6-chip board works.

Good stuff haven't checked in a while.

[malaimult]

Dude, it's called "innocent until proven guilty".  Your acting like an entitled asshole and it's reflecting badly on AM obviously.

As for calling out these ponzis reflecting badly on AM, that's complete nonsense and AMHash sales prove that.

Issue is with calling out / demanding evidence from legit companies, not the ponzis.  I do see your point, I totally disagree that they should get negative trust until they prove themselves to you.   Though I see the need for warning people.  Haha start Mabsark's Ratings Guide to Ponzi's maybe...

I am sure these guys having default trust will not last long...Theymos already knows of the problems. Canary seems to hand out lvl 2 trust like it is going out of style and that should be fixed soon. I myself have some lvl 2 trust, but earned it..I would never negrate without proof since it carries a lot more weight. If you have no proof simple leave a neutral warning since it shows up and let others decide off of that.

Right. I would be willing to bet that Canary is going to be removed from level 1 default trust in the near future if he keeps up his behavior. This whole fiasco makes me weary of potentially investing in AM hash and would even make me willing to bet that they will end up scamming in the future

[malaimult]

Well they seem to be bashing their competition via proxies that are all on default trust (and wearing their signature). IMO this is a serious cause for concern

Can you please give more detail on this (examples, links, etc.)? Thanks.

I think he's talking about a bunch of users (including Mr Teal, Puppet, Raskul and I) asking some cloud mining ponzis to provide evidence of legitimacy and me leaving negative feedback because they flat-out refused. I've told those "services" I'd remove it if they provide such evidence. Unsurprisingly, they haven't provided any evidence.

That is correct. My issue with that is that the lack of evidence of legitimacy is not evidence of a scam. The fact that you are advertising and invested in competing services is a major concern for me and makes it appear that you are attempting to increase the value of your investments.  

i did learn a small lesson with this event. While I was so blinkered by the sheer volume of ponzis going on, I let it cloud my real judgement and Mabsark and I both did leave incorrect feedback on a recent new cloud mining operation. It turned out that particular operation is indeed legit and I, for one should have been more thoughtful in how I approached the subject.
I agree that lack of evidence of legitimacy is not evidence of a scam, and i'm being more cautious in my approach, in the future.

apologies for going OT but I felt the need to address this, as my name was mentioned.

I don't think that people should take risks with companies that may potentially end up scamming, but it is not fair to say that these companies will scam. Potential investors should proceed with caution with both AM hash and others

[jimmothy]

Right. I would be willing to bet that Canary is going to be removed from level 1 default trust in the near future if he keeps up his behavior. This whole fiasco makes me weary of potentially investing in AM hash and would even make me willing to bet that they will end up scamming in the future

Let me get this straight, you think AM is going to scam people in the future because of the actions of people who are not even part of the company?

And you think that lack of evidence of legitimacy is not evidence of a scam, yet you're willing to bet a company with transparency and proof of legitimacy is a scam?

Seems to me you don't have actual concerns, but more of a personal axe to grind.

[Dexter770221]

Competition:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=902305.0

And AM didn't even bother to announce Prisma 2.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=902269.0

[101111]

So Dogie is now employed by Bitmain and is quick to spruik them vs prismas https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=902269.msg9914111#msg9914111 which are clearly a far superior product. One of the few credible voices gone; at least he was open about it.

[Puppet]

which are clearly a far superior product.

What makes you say that? S5 does 0.5J/GH at the wall, underclockable to ~0.2J. Prisma 2.0 is nowhere near.
I also think that not having a history of catching fire is a plus to many people.

[Blazed]

So Dogie is now employed by Bitmain and is quick to spruik them vs prismas https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=902269.msg9914111#msg9914111 which are clearly a far superior product. One of the few credible voices gone; at least he was open about it.

Superior? Really the Prisma 1.0 was an amazing experience I must say! Not sure what was my favorite part..the non working unit or lack of replies. I will have to get to you on that part while I think about it.

[Blazed]

which are clearly a far superior product.

What makes you say that? S5 does 0.5J/GH at the wall, underclockable to ~0.2J. Prisma 2.0 is nowhere near.
I also think that not having a history of catching fire is a plus to many people.

lol yes this...I think many have lost a lot of faith in AM gear at this point..

[Dexter770221]

S5 is a new product. Also in a string design... Who knows, maybe there will be similiar issues with poping packages and fires...

[Blazed]

S5 is a new product. Also in a string design... Who knows, maybe there will be similiar issues with poping packages and fires...

If so you better believe they will be working with us day 1 an issue happens. Also Bitmain has released a lot more gear than AM has...they are more experienced.

[Dexter770221]

S5 is a new product. Also in a string design... Who knows, maybe there will be similiar issues with poping packages and fires...

If so you better believe they will be working with us day 1 an issue happens. Also Bitmain has released a lot more gear than AM has...they are more experienced.

Lot more you say?
USB Block Erupter, Block Erupter, something mini (don't remember what was that), Tube, Prisma, Prisma 2.0 - six what I can remember. Maybe someone will add to this list.
Antminer: S1, S2, S3, S3+, S4, S5 - six...

EDIT: And propably those blades that was going to submerge cooling facilities where different than normal Block Erupters.

[cloverme]

S5 is a new product. Also in a string design... Who knows, maybe there will be similiar issues with poping packages and fires...

I've had really good luck with bitmain hardware over time, only had one bad unit and no fires. If the S5 lives up to the claims, it might be a nice unit to have.

[101111]

Ok, 'far superior' was stretching it a bit. Let's see how the S5s actually perform seeing as they haven't shipped yet.

[xhomerx10]

S5 is a new product. Also in a string design... Who knows, maybe there will be similiar issues with poping packages and fires...

If so you better believe they will be working with us day 1 an issue happens. Also Bitmain has released a lot more gear than AM has...they are more experienced.

 Bitmain has a slightly better PR department:

Dear loyal customers,

The decision has been taken not to continue production of the Antminer L1

In response, all customers will be able to choose one of three options:...

 Wait what?! A pre-order from a company that claims not to deal in pre-orders?

We created a Legend in the bitcoin community: no pre-orders, on time shipping, even pre-shipping. We are earning more and more trust from our worldwide customers.

 Yeah you better believe.