https://angel.co/hashfast


I doubt that would have paid for much, as the full cost of the mask, paying for all the hardware (not including all the things gone wrong, which would only add more to their costs), etc probably closer to 10x that, not to mention their operating costs, salaries etc. So the chances of them not having spent all (or almost most) of the BTCs by now is extremely slim. Even assuming they do have some amount of BTC left, how are they going to allocate that to various customers as I am not sure it would even be legal for them to do so. Are batch 1 customers going to demand that they take from their later customers' funds to pay off their earlier ones?

If so, what batch 1 customers are effectively saying is that HF should scam later batch customers to pay them 1st and that they are knowingly participating and in fact advocating or encouraging a Ponzi scheme. That would make them and HF joint scammers and I am pretty sure the law doesn't allow that either. If I remember correctly, i have read somewhere that some of the early beneficiaries of Ponzi schemes (Madoff?) had to return refunds they had been paid so that they could be divided fairly to all investors

Cedivad - why don't u go check with your lawyer?