It's trolling to keep calling a nearly successful company a scam, when there is zero evidence of criminal intent or actions.
Two answers for this line only, dear resident troller:1) If you know HF, a company that didn't create a single dollar worth of value but rather destroyed it all the way along, to be a "successful", you must have a really different definition of "successful company", where successful includes scamming, and scamming includes hiding value from creditors. I can agree with you on that.
2) About the "zero evidence", let me quote your friends over at ATM:
I genuinely see ActM as a failed business and not a scam.
1) You accidentally forgot to include the modifier "nearly" in front of "successful." HF's technology rocks, but the BTC price/difficulty spike and a couple of missteps doomed the company by draining their coffers. The lawyers did the rest, by scaring off potential investment and frittering the remains away in court. No scam, just plain old bad luck and unrecoverable errors.
2) ActM never made a chip, much less the fastest one in the world. As Chairman Emeritus of the ActM board, I warned them not to try and compete with HF and CT. They didn't listen. We are going to find out if ActM was a scam via the results of the MO Security regulator's investigation. HF never sold securities, and are not under investigation. zumzero is a nutter, and I have no idea why you'd bring his lunacy into a potentially rational discussion.
Speaking of "zero evidence" Quote
"Guilty Until Proven Innocent"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwjMbs39Nm8
I thought this was America people!
Uhh, yeah, guilty until proven innocent huh?
That's how we workin huh? Okay
...
Uh-huh, okay, I see how we playin
...
Tell me, what you, want from me
Y'all, cats, can't touch me
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwjMbs39Nm8
I thought this was America people!
Uhh, yeah, guilty until proven innocent huh?
That's how we workin huh? Okay
...
Uh-huh, okay, I see how we playin
...
Tell me, what you, want from me
Y'all, cats, can't touch me