Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 80 results by UKBob
His dumps are not attracting enough buyers so he has reduced the price of Rimbit to a fraction of its original price 1m for $600.
Previously 1m would have cost you $10,000
A dreadful way to treat all the original supporters who have been with him for over 2 years. He is obviously needing cash!
Previously 1m would have cost you $10,000
A dreadful way to treat all the original supporters who have been with him for over 2 years. He is obviously needing cash!
The high ref commision they have implemented makes it quite suspicious. Why to invest in things which you can get around half for free if you refer others. Sound more like pyramid scheme.
The Dev lost his main income stream via the IGG campaign - this looks like a last desperate effort to fill his wallet. I think he may be responsible for the huge dumps of the last few weeks to get some extra cash too.
It was 25% but no one was interested so it was increased to 50%. As far as I am aware only one of the mods has gone for it.
Rimbit lost all its top community members when it became apparent that the Dev, Mark Karlsson, was engaging in inappropriate practises. It looks like he cannot account for the $200,000 -$250,000 he raised through several sources. Now IGG has closed this looks to me to be a last desperate attempt to keep an income stream flowing into his wallet. I hope I am wrong as Rimbit is a currency with high potential but it needs new people to take it forward now.
Rimbit lost all its top community members when it became apparent that the Dev, Mark Karlsson, was engaging in inappropriate practises. It looks like he cannot account for the $200,000 -$250,000 he raised through several sources. Now IGG has closed this looks to me to be a last desperate attempt to keep an income stream flowing into his wallet. I hope I am wrong as Rimbit is a currency with high potential but it needs new people to take it forward now.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/inevitable
see .. PREMINE [current]
see ... ICO [future] >>>>>>>> looking at you ETH, XRP, DASH
i really gave a long hard look at rimbit ... very polite long term community ... but that premine ... took 2 years for the inevitable
ps ... it might be the first ICO ... i recall buzz years back
... yeah usecryptos ... such long ago was it 
see .. PREMINE [current]
see ... ICO [future] >>>>>>>> looking at you ETH, XRP, DASH
i really gave a long hard look at rimbit ... very polite long term community ... but that premine ... took 2 years for the inevitable
ps ... it might be the first ICO ... i recall buzz years back
... yeah usecryptos ... such long ago was it I know what you mean, but I still believe that Rimbit can be rescued and made a success of if the right people are in charge (and I am not meaning that I should be handed the power!). Mark Karlsson really disappointed me with all his sock puppets accounts. It could all have been solved so easily if he had not gone down that route so blatantly. He was creating sock puppets that all sounded alike and used the same words and spelling and grammar mistakes. An apology and laugh it off could have worked but he went after one of the senior mods and banned him because the other mod used a sock puppet! The hypocrisy is amazing.
Has this guy responded to these allegations?
His initial response was to accuse almost all of the regular members of the community of phoning his home and making death threats.
His secondary response was to ban most of us from the forum - hence the setting up of the .dk version.
His next response was to come up with the affiliate program so he can rush through some more money before it all crashes down finally.
Strangely he has not admitted any of the more serious offences, nor has he denied them but he has openly admitted to going through the Private Messages of a lot of members to see what is in them.
I don't trust someone who runs a website with spelling mistakes and bad grammar. It makes me wonder if the individual(s) behind it will care enough to avoid other, more serious mistakes.
Yes, they do put me off, I do make allowance for not being native English speakers but it still niggles.
I do not know this member or have any connection with his site but on this thread http://www.rimbit.com/threads/long-time-member.6184/ new member lamrich introduced us to what seems to me on the face of it, a brilliant way to change coins with Rimbit. His site is http://lamrich.com/
How can I tell if it is a scam or genuine? Other than wasting my money!!!
How can I tell if it is a scam or genuine? Other than wasting my money!!!
The dot com is the forum home, so this new page will be a gentler introduction to Rimbit, more obvious to see what rimbit is all about. The forum is great, a friendly place, but it is a bit of a deep end as far as finding out about rimbit for newbies.
I see from over on the rimbit.com forum (see link http://www.rimbit.com/threads/decreasing-the-amount-of-rimbit-in-circulation.5996/#post-13149) that they are going to burn the excess coins that were created. Some 392,380,976 RBT were initially made and it seems to be far too much.
Apart from the obvious, what do you think is a reasonable number of coins to have? (The obvious being zero from all those who are not into it!) I am not just thinking of Rimbit here but any coin - what is too many and what is too few?
good concept but no matter what you do, its doomed.Apart from the obvious, what do you think is a reasonable number of coins to have? (The obvious being zero from all those who are not into it!) I am not just thinking of Rimbit here but any coin - what is too many and what is too few?
ther are shitcoins that are doing much better like https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=719019.0 and they have 111 pages of commenting.
your coin has what??? 2 pages after how many years?
It is not my coin per se, but one I have invested in for sure. Rimbit has many comments spread over many threads, but that is irrelevant. I am interested in knowing how many is enough and not too many or too few. Any ideas?
I see from over on the rimbit.com forum (see link http://www.rimbit.com/threads/decreasing-the-amount-of-rimbit-in-circulation.5996/#post-13149) that they are going to burn the excess coins that were created. Some 392,380,976 RBT were initially made and it seems to be far too much.
Apart from the obvious, what do you think is a reasonable number of coins to have? (The obvious being zero from all those who are not into it!) I am not just thinking of Rimbit here but any coin - what is too many and what is too few?
Apart from the obvious, what do you think is a reasonable number of coins to have? (The obvious being zero from all those who are not into it!) I am not just thinking of Rimbit here but any coin - what is too many and what is too few?
i'm not defending, specially because i dont think this is a good idea(mine sh*tcoins). but how would that help him with his dead coins?
rimbit price isn't good right now and i dont see a massive adoption of this idea, so, i dont see the dead coin being pumped because rimbit is accepting it.
and like i said, that might bring a little dump to rimbit, so that would be even worse to him.
rimbit price isn't good right now and i dont see a massive adoption of this idea, so, i dont see the dead coin being pumped because rimbit is accepting it.
and like i said, that might bring a little dump to rimbit, so that would be even worse to him.
It is a risky strategy and you are right, it could bring a dump or two to rimbit. It is a gamble and as with these things it could be worthwhile or not. It gives owners of other coins a chance to get out of something that is dead or dying and into something that gives them a chance to make some money. Yes they may well dump and that is the risk rimbit is taking. However, they may just get to like rimbit, the forum and its members and see it as a long term and thereby creating a win-win for both parties.
Hopefully if enough people can buy into rimbit the price will move upwards and everyone involved will be happy.
Re: [ANN][EST 2014] Rimbit - We removed mining so its just the community and coin
The miners work for us? Seriously?
Of course. Why do you think we pay them?
I just had visions
Maybe take a break from the forum until you come down.
of the animals in George Orwells Animal Farm talking about the pigs. It does not matter what else you say, I will find it hard to take it seriously now!
It's OK if you are unable to respond to my post with anything other than personal attacks. I get it.
You are clearly trolling, so good on you - it was fun!
The miners can do as they like with almost total impunity. There are so few of them controlling so much mining, that if they wanted to they could easily manipulate the btc price and there is nothing we can do about it.
Re: [ANN][EST 2014] Rimbit - We removed mining so its just the community and coin
ASIC chips can never keep up with the logarithmic increase in power required to solve the algorithms.
Do you realise that mining difficulty is a result of increased hashrate and not the other way around? Miners don't have to keep up with the difficulty, the difficulty keeps up with the miners. The only reason the power required increases is because the hashrate increases. When we run up against the physical limit and Moore's Law stops applying there won't be new generations of ASICs, so the hashrate will stop increasing exponentially, and so the difficulty will stop increasing exponentially. You have the whole causality of the situation backwards.
So why have the number of miners fallen from hundreds of people like Bob in a backroom with a PC to a few huge companies (in China) with farms of machinery?
Mining is a competitive business. Only the most efficient miners will survive. If Bob is paying twice as much per kilowatt as the Chinese miner then how can he hope to remain in business? There are no "participation prizes" in the real world. Only the fittest survive.
Because the hashrate has gone up so much. But why has the hashrate gone up so much? .... Chicken or egg which is first?
The hashrate has gone up due to improvements in mining hardware. From CPU to GPU to FPGA to the various generations of ASICs, each faster and more efficient than the last. Difficulty tracks hashrate. Hashrate doesn't track difficulty. Your chicken and egg analogy doesn't apply, since if anything higher difficulty has an inverse effect on the hashrate as uncompetitive miners drop out when they stop being profitable.
To be honest, it does not matter,
I only bothered correcting the point because that guy made the same error many many times in this thread and elsewhere. He thinks that the difficulty goes up on its own and that miners have to keep up, when in fact it's the other way around. If it doesn't matter to you, why comment on it?
only that Bitcoin is reliant on a few (almost getting centralised) Chinese farms. We, the community, have little input, in fact zero.
The miners work for us, the economic majority. We are not reliant on them. If they misbehave we can fire them by changing the proof of work algorithm.
The miners work for us? Seriously? I just had visions of the animals in George Orwells Animal Farm talking about the pigs. It does not matter what else you say, I will find it hard to take it seriously now!
Re: [ANN][EST 2014] Rimbit - We removed mining so its just the community and coin
So why have the number of miners fallen from hundreds of people like Bob in a backroom with a PC to a few huge companies (in China) with farms of machinery? Because the hashrate has gone up so much. But why has the hashrate gone up so much? .... Chicken or egg which is first? To be honest, it does not matter, only that Bitcoin is reliant on a few (almost getting centralised) Chinese farms. We, the community, have little input, in fact zero.
First of all that's not true, the hash rate has gone up because the amount of miners has gone up, because with each generations PCs/ASICs get better. I don't think the number of miners has decreased, yes the chinese may be a big % of the miners but with this price grow i can say for sure without looking at charts that many have turned their miners back on. You just changing the words so it always looks in your favor.
I dare to say that it's logical that if something becomes productive then many will start aiming for it, thats the only reason because Bob cannot mine with his PC anymore, yet if Bob used to mine with his PC and now is bitching it's just greed since he already has a huge amount of coins.
Quote
So how much money does ordinary Bob in his back room need to "invest" in suitable PCs and electricity to mine bitcoins?
Do you personally know of any miners that have turned their machines back on? I am not sure how you can be sure otherwise if you have no charts!
Finally, bitcoin mining was productive, that is why so many were into it. It is only productive for massive farms - that is why they are now existing.
Do you personally know of any miners that have turned their machines back on? I am not sure how you can be sure otherwise if you have no charts!
Finally, bitcoin mining was productive, that is why so many were into it. It is only productive for massive farms - that is why they are now existing.
First of all, "gucked" up the quote a bit.
Second, i think its logic that if a bitcoin costs 300 USD and its BARELY profitable then if price doubles it should give you a huge edge assuming no one else turns their miners on.
Third, bitcoin is profitable for anyone depending of their cost of electricity, if you have good hands you can get it even cheaper. Chinese have really cheap electricity thanks to nuclear power for example.
Forth, personaly in the crypto world is something strange but just an example of altcoin price and altcoin miners sweeping from coin to coin.
Edit: ps: i don't see why it should be profitable only for massive farms, its also the fault of the ASIC creators, i think we need more companies that make them, and even more legit.
I cant be bothered with long posts and so gucked the quote.
So can an ordinary person buy the kit and mine bitcoins? I think not, because the kit needed is too expensive. That is why these farms have grown as it is the only way anyone can mine. Whether the BTC is $300 or $600 is irrelevant if you cannot afford to buy into the mining. I agree with the 4th point, people are not mining BTC but any and all other crypto coins. It is the only way to make money and hopefully get some payback on the kit they have that cost a fortune!
Re: [ANN][EST 2014] Rimbit - We removed mining so its just the community and coin
So why have the number of miners fallen from hundreds of people like Bob in a backroom with a PC to a few huge companies (in China) with farms of machinery? Because the hashrate has gone up so much. But why has the hashrate gone up so much? .... Chicken or egg which is first? To be honest, it does not matter, only that Bitcoin is reliant on a few (almost getting centralised) Chinese farms. We, the community, have little input, in fact zero.
First of all that's not true, the hash rate has gone up because the amount of miners has gone up, because with each generations PCs/ASICs get better. I don't think the number of miners has decreased, yes the chinese may be a big % of the miners but with this price grow i can say for sure without looking at charts that many have turned their miners back on. You just changing the words so it always looks in your favor.
I dare to say that it's logical that if something becomes productive then many will start aiming for it, thats the only reason because Bob cannot mine with his PC anymore, yet if Bob used to mine with his PC and now is bitching it's just greed since he already has a huge amount of coins.
[/quote]
So how much money does ordinary Bob in his back room need to "invest" in suitable PCs and electricity to mine bitcoins?
Do you personally know of any miners that have turned their machines back on? I am not sure how you can be sure otherwise if you have no charts!
Finally, bitcoin mining was productive, that is why so many were into it. It is only productive for massive farms - that is why they are now existing.
Re: [ANN][EST 2014] Rimbit - We removed mining so its just the community and coin
ASIC chips can never keep up with the logarithmic increase in power required to solve the algorithms.
Do you realise that mining difficulty is a result of increased hashrate and not the other way around? Miners don't have to keep up with the difficulty, the difficulty keeps up with the miners. The only reason the power required increases is because the hashrate increases. When we run up against the physical limit and Moore's Law stops applying there won't be new generations of ASICs, so the hashrate will stop increasing exponentially, and so the difficulty will stop increasing exponentially. You have the whole causality of the situation backwards.
So why have the number of miners fallen from hundreds of people like Bob in a backroom with a PC to a few huge companies (in China) with farms of machinery? Because the hashrate has gone up so much. But why has the hashrate gone up so much? .... Chicken or egg which is first? To be honest, it does not matter, only that Bitcoin is reliant on a few (almost getting centralised) Chinese farms. We, the community, have little input, in fact zero.