Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 130 results by ChefBorjan
Re: [HAVELOCK] PETAMINE - NEW IPO, NEW HARDWARE, 1,500 TH/S HASH RATE
Congrats for the full IPO sell out!!!
+10 for "Cryptx should own shares as well" thing.
From the http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/news/cryptx-petamine-ipo/2014/05/23
"The CryptX PetaMine data-center is located in Belgium and is completely powered by wind and solar energy, thus making it both energy efficient and environmentally friendly. "
But he told us that his powerplant is enough to power only 1% of PETA. I'm confused. Can you buy certified clean energy in Belgium?
Anyway, good one. I'm sorry I jumped on Scryptx. I could have almost doubled my share/btc value. Shit happens.
+10 for "Cryptx should own shares as well" thing.
From the http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/news/cryptx-petamine-ipo/2014/05/23
"The CryptX PetaMine data-center is located in Belgium and is completely powered by wind and solar energy, thus making it both energy efficient and environmentally friendly. "
But he told us that his powerplant is enough to power only 1% of PETA. I'm confused. Can you buy certified clean energy in Belgium?
Anyway, good one. I'm sorry I jumped on Scryptx. I could have almost doubled my share/btc value. Shit happens.
He never said it. He said, 1-6% of total energy produced by the plant goes to PETA and PETA is 100% powered from the solar plant.
Except... he didn't.
spend only 1% of your solar powerplant capacity
"We have a 350,000 Watt solar facility at site, which is owned by another company of us. To give you all an idea what this means:
In Belgium a 350kW installation has a yearly revenue of about 300,000 Kwh. The PetaMine consumes about 500 kw or 1285 kw after IPO (500*1 + 1000*0.785), this means between 4,380,000kwh and 11,256,600kwh each year. This is without any growth!
So our own electricity is only between 6.8% and ?? 1,1% of all electricity needed. What do you think such an installation costs?"
I think you don't understand...the electricity produced from the 350k solar plant is only about 1-6% of all electricity used by the PetaMine.
Are you serious? He's chosen to keep his mining address private. Whats the big deal?
You think he's photoshopped the whole thing? Jesus. Get a grip.
you have some eligius stats now ? 
I do but eligius stats haven't been updating for the past 6ish hours.
This is for the prospector rated at 512GH/s - so it looks over-spec on the pool to me, pretty pleased about that!
And yet, your thread is out of date. VinceSamos has received his unit (has been at least a day or two now).
If you are going to try and keep some sort of 'log' to show how crappy Ken is, at least make the effort to keep it updated.
Re: [VMC] Unofficial Virtual Mining Corporation Discussion
Update [April 30 2014]
The refund check (Now cancelled)Sent in Feb turned up today.
postmark confirms it was sent in Feb and the check number confirms with what ken said it was on pm. So I can't blame him for this delay. The replacement check should arrive soon.
If ken could have just communicated this postage it would have avoided a whole rigmarole for the past 2 months.
In any case I unreservedly apologise to ken in light of this check arriving when all the evidence was pointing to a scam.
There is hope for ken after all... When I get my money
The refund check (Now cancelled)Sent in Feb turned up today.
postmark confirms it was sent in Feb and the check number confirms with what ken said it was on pm. So I can't blame him for this delay. The replacement check should arrive soon.
If ken could have just communicated this postage it would have avoided a whole rigmarole for the past 2 months.
In any case I unreservedly apologise to ken in light of this check arriving when all the evidence was pointing to a scam.
There is hope for ken after all... When I get my money
You are going to have a whole bunch of posts to edit....
@Magzy We are starting today to issue refunds including your check today.
Edit: @Magzy In getting your check ready, we found in our records that we have already issued our check number 123 on 2/17/14 to you. That check has not cleared our bank, so we are put a stop payment on that check and re-issuing another check to you.
I'm picturing magzy going back to double check, and finding the cheque stuck underneath his shoe rack or something..
Re: [Active Mining] The UNofficial Active Mining Discussion Thread [UNmoderated]
Why is there being no action taken to recover the alleged $250,000 + lost to MT GOX?
This is the class action lawsuit filed.
Here is the suit contact the court.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/209823896/Greene-v-MtGox (http://www.scribd.com/doc/209823896/Greene-v-MtGox)
Unless the Gox $250k was another lie?
and asking for it in court would be a felony?
This is the class action lawsuit filed.
Here is the suit contact the court.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/209823896/Greene-v-MtGox (http://www.scribd.com/doc/209823896/Greene-v-MtGox)
Unless the Gox $250k was another lie?
and asking for it in court would be a felony?
If you knew anything about law, in particular class action suites you would know that if the suit is won then the court would direct MtGox to send all the class members the information needed to recover their funds.
Yep I stand corrected. You're correct.
Magzy.
I will post this here. Your recent post in the official thread stated that the recent announcement had caused you to sell 'all your shares'.
Yesterday, you had mentioned that you were now a shareholder in ActM, indeed you made a fairly lengthly post detailing the sums and why you thought ActM is a great buy.
You also mentioned that you purchased these shares on Cryptotrade.
So it is curious to note that after looking at the recent trades on Cryptotrade that there has only been one sell order today, for a single share at 0.00061.
The above doesn't seem to add up. Perhaps ActM was such a great buy you only decided to purchase a single share?
Strange, isn't it?
I'm finally tempted to pull the trigger and purchase my first miner. I wanted to start small, but I realised buying a pure SHA2 hasher means I am going to get left behind pretty quickly. For that reason, something that can do scrypt makes more sense. Does that thinking make sense, and if so, do grid seeds still make sense? Some people above say yes, some people say no. I think thats the same for all mining equipment though no?
Re: [ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated]
'It shall be unlawful for any person.....To make any untrue statement of a material fact...'
Well done. Now you can show us where Ken made an untrue statement.
To make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, or....
That is the full sentence.
Re: [ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated]
Forget about what a lawyer has told you. Quote me some regulation. Preferably SEC regulation. The judge will examine this not your lawyers view. The lawyer presents the case it's the judge who decides if the regulations have been breached. Quote some details or test cases or go home.
Sigh. I give up. I'll just forget entirely what the professionals tell me shall I.
Yes you should. Or you should consider their advice for what it is. That's how lawyers make a very fine living. For every court case there is a side that loses. Yet each side has a lawyer on it telling you you will win.
Show us the SEC regulation. Here is where you start:
http://www.sec.gov/about/laws/secrulesregs.htm
I am killing time so will try and look. Its hard to know where to start though.
Gut feeling however agrees that you cannot merely say 'products shipped' when everyone is expecting miners to ship. I don't think we even knew about other product types did we? It seem intentionally vague/misleading to say that to investors. Had share trading been active, it would have caused an instant price spike.
As an aside:
http://investor.gov/investing-basics/avoiding-fraud/types-fraud/internet-social-media-fraud#online-bulletin-boards-and-chat-rooms
Re: [ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated]
Just catching up on this thread, this is a new low if people (and Ken) are attacking ffssixtynine. It is really disappointing.
Since the beginning he's been one of the most helpful and level headed here. Whenever he had concerns or disagreements, he's talked about them in the right way. Whether you disagree with him or not, the majority of you could learn from him on how to conduct yourselves.
(I'm firing up my wallet to send you some BTC as a thanks for trying to do the right thing throughout all of this, I genuinely appreciate it)
Since the beginning he's been one of the most helpful and level headed here. Whenever he had concerns or disagreements, he's talked about them in the right way. Whether you disagree with him or not, the majority of you could learn from him on how to conduct yourselves.
(I'm firing up my wallet to send you some BTC as a thanks for trying to do the right thing throughout all of this, I genuinely appreciate it)
Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
Hi all, sorry if this is a basic question but I'm having a few problems.
I can't see any extra details (for example in Bitcoin QT you get the transaction ID) to confirm whats happened. Seems odd that so many blocks have passed and nothing. Could it be that my fee was too low?
Thanks.
EDIT: Gone through now... must have been the fees I guess?
I can't see any extra details (for example in Bitcoin QT you get the transaction ID) to confirm whats happened. Seems odd that so many blocks have passed and nothing. Could it be that my fee was too low?
Thanks.
EDIT: Gone through now... must have been the fees I guess?