I'm looking for good offers.  I'm not much in a hurry, but I am willing to get rid of it if the right offer strikes.  I claimed this domain name with the idea of a cryptocurrency trade center, capitalizing on the key word "bit".  Could also be a market place that accepts btc and other cryptocurrencies.

tradebybit.com

Either way, sedo values this at only $500.  Perhaps someone else can recognize the potential of this domain name.  I'll try to check in often and respond to feedback.

Thanks.

unb.united-miners.com won't pay me my 171 UNB I mined.  I don't think it is legitimate.

We can tell that out of all the "BFL" threads, Josh is paying most attention to this one.  Obviously this brings revenue from the automated investing machines.  For people who are paying attention; this is your cue.

That was redundant, but unfortunately also is BFL's strategies.  It seems like now even Josh is starting to play himself as a victim.  Whether or no the has financial incentive to do so, he is a superstar.  Congratulations to him for at least superseding Hollywood, not that it is much of a compliment in terms of efficiency.

Nobody who is responsible can be scammed.  Nobody who is scammed, will want to admit they are scammed.  What BFL is doing is clever, interesting, and very much evil in the name of good.

FPGAs, yes.  Your second point is deceptive.  They aren't the only company that have shipped price competitive ASICS, and definitely not in a large quantity.  I know right now it seems like BFL is the only choice for a few...  But since I've invested, BFL has always been too good to be true.  Maybe they built up stock and released a bunch in a day or something like that, but they are not yet at all consistent in any other terms than dissatisfying people, but still keeping them hanging on, learning to let go of the original opportunity they've signed up for.  Maybe they'll become consistent in a good way at some point, but don't think the nightmare is over yet for a lot of people.  As time progresses there will still be yet even more dissatisfaction, until all that is left are investors who signed up, knowing that BFL was already delayed for months to a year.  Who, maybe after months to a year, will be biting their tongue.

I was signing up with BFL when I had a window into Avalon's ASICs batch 1.   There are many who fell into BFL because of it its prominent advertising and its "reliability" on having released FPGAs.  

"Getting things right the first time."  Hold on...

2 weeks

"Getting things right the second time."  Hold on...

2 weeks

"Getting things right."  Hold on...

2 weeks

"Getting things."

Ordered August 2012.  Didn't receive anything yet except an e-mail, promise that all sales are final.

Decent PR?  

Considering how much outcry there is, I would think you'd have everything you need to decide on whether or not if you want to invest with BFL.  I've personally been scammed by them.  So my answer is yes.  If they scam you or not, I guess that's between you and BFL.  Considering that 98% of the people who ordered last year have not received their order yet, it doesn't look favorable for anyone new to jump into the pit.

Actually, it does make them a scam.  Especially with a year backlog and (selective) forced refunds, as well as lost opportunities caused by smoke screening Avalon's real opportunity, with consistent lies showing it's pretty much transparent and intentional.  I wouldn't use another ASIC company's policies to justify how charge-backs are made.  I do like the invoice point that becoin brings up.  BFL made every effort to appear like they were supporting the BTC network as well as its currency.  Also you didn't touch my point about BFL using people's preorder money to work on R&D.  BFL reps used to deny this point.  But it's pretty obvious by now.  LOL.

It's a PONZI scheme.  They are probably even mining with customers machines to stay afloat.  It's logical considering what they have allowed so far.

It's disgusting that there is a race between the different models.

This could sell a book, but still, not from prison.  The shame of this institution...

It makes sense that SLoK is Sonny K, seeing how involved he is without actually being capable of benefiting from his endeavors of "defending BFL".

I think what really happened, is that BFL spent months making devices, and decided to "test them" for months, on the live network, because it was more convenient than programming a dummy system.  Awesome.  And then one day they realized, well, we got to look like we are actually doing some kind of business.  So Josh gets this brilliant idea, right?  Shipping 300 units, in one day.  Well no shit.

Also, it is my understanding that if you buy something from outside of your country, and you pay "x".  You receive "x" back if you are warranted a refund.  BFL was the one to flaunt that it accepts BTC, as if it were supporting the network or something.  

I thought the point was that BFL claimed capacity to deliver.  $, BTC, or any other form of payment should not be "cashed out" to be "spent", else the thing turns into a ponzi scheme and they can't pay everyone.

They are appealing to customers that don't exist yet at the expense of everyone else, using stupid excuses, (often the same excuse over and over), to "justify" the delay of shipment, with assertive self-righteous standing that they aren't responsible for your delay in satisfaction.  Do you guys remember when BFL were going into detail about how they were going to "future-proof" their asics?  What does that mean standing next to the notion that "BTC is gambling, our stuff could be garbage tomorrow, no refunds"?

Seriously, you maybe hashing right now...  But what you paid for was an experience to be had last year.  If that had happened, you would not be here trying to defend BFL, as well as yourself for settling for "kind of shitty".  You'd be out on the country side sharing the gospel of btc, with your fancy sportcar, meanwhile plunging money into stocks for infinite power engines.

Just saying...  A lot has changed, and the original product sold was not the product delivered, and for 98% that isn't even the case yet.

Also, if you pay from another country, and your warranted a refund, the money you get back, is your own currency, and for the same amount.

Yeah, that's how you interpret the bottom line.  But if you were measuring the bottom line based on gold, then no.  I'm not questioning that you are getting ahead in terms of $.  I'm questioning the integrity of the process.  If I traded someone 5 flawless diamonds for a machine that they personally valued at $55 million, but they never gave me the machine.  I'd be entitled to my 5 flawless diamonds back, right?  But if the value of diamonds decreased while waiting on the machine, and then the person said never-mind, and gave the diamonds back, I possibly have a lost opportunity-based lawsuit.

Darkmule has an excellent point, because it can be calculated that BFL were in it for the money and not BTC.  However, they were intentionally deceptive in appearing like they were fully supporting the BTC network, and they have said contradicting things:  from one being that they are going to secure the value of your investment, to then saying that BTC is a gamble; no liability!  So the grey area allows for many victims to be exploited.

BFL clearly stated that they accepted BTC as a form of payment.  Barter laws would sanctify this point.  After a certain amount of time of nondelivery, people have the right to demand a refund, and if the value of BTC was falling with no hopes of ever bouncing back, customers would have to settle for the BTC that they spent to be returned.  If you have your device, and know that you will not make the BTC back on it that you spent, then it is not "profit" in terms of BTC.  You cannot just switch $ with BTC so freely just because we are all aware of exchange rates.  I get that you are trying to be optimistic though.

bcp19 comes out here and says things like "Since BFL *is* shipping, they aren't a scam".  Right, like just as long as you are getting a percentage that you were promised, it's not a ponzi scheme.  "Since BFL is shipping to a few people, they aren't scamming everybody as much as originally thought." -  That's the best logical conclusion.

Furthermore, I need to address this: "Technically they were investors as it was known at the time that BFL did not have this technology in hand and would be creating, testing and perfecting it."

Technically the chips were on the final phase of production, and they are shipping the ASICs in October 2012.  So you believe what you want.  Where they optimistic.  Yes.  Did they lie?  Also yes.

If you spent 200 BTC on a miner, and still don't have your machine, I highly doubt that you'll be making your BTC back in the next couple years, if ever, in light of the increasing difficulty.  People lost out in terms of opportunity, sure, but BFL is obligated to return what was paid for not delivering as well.

Further more, BFL's choice to refund people who paid BTC in $ instead of BTC was criminal, and anyone associated with the company deserves a scammer tag for that alone.

I don't know what you are on about SgtSpike.

So my singles were stolen by Bruno, and resold as firewood!?

How do I know this is true and you aren't just using smoke and mirrors Josh?

You are still wrong man.  That's assuming that people get their devices and are able to mine back the BTC that they used to pay for it.  At this point, you have a recovery of %0.5 recovery a day, and dropping.  Dropping exponentially.  In 15 more days, it'll probably be closer to  %0.1 and then 15 days after that %0.05.  In 200 days you still will be at something like %45.764742155 recovery, earning %0.000005 BTC a day.  Get it?  The earlier you got in on BFL (paying with BTC), the more screwed you get coming out.  Definitely more so than cash spenders.  Avalon was the way to go.  Actually, anything BTC related that wasn't a scam was the way to go.  Obviously.

I was refuting the notion that "nobody paid with BTC".  It's an absurd notion.  

Regardless how you measure the bottom line, the promises made versus what was delivered have both heaven and hell between them.  People who paid with BTC lost an immediate opportunity, but I'm sure they won't mind waiting an exponential to infinite amount of time to mine their 200 BTC back, in sight the ever increasing difficulty.  Considering, too, that there is a direct correlation between BTC and $ in this transaction, the fluctuations in trade values have to be included in the calculations as well.

This is wrong.  Bitpay allows the merchant to chose the conversion after the fact ($ or BTC, or both).  If the BTC was converted entirely to $ then it was, in fact, by BFL's election; nobody else's.  (aka BFL is entirely liable for this decision)  I know that sounds like lawyer speak, whomever, but what it really means is simply, BFL chose to convert the BTC to $ and thus lose the value on their own.  Everyone who spent BTC for devices, paid BTC for devices.  There isn't any way around it after the fact.  None of your terms, as illegal that they might already be, touches this point.

Lukejrk - Sorry for the misidentification, but you are still an asshat to suggest that because enron existed, people get raped, etc, such is life.  Fix it or gtfo.