What to you mean with they are in KS? Aren't they in Kansas City in the State Missouri. Previously they moved operation from Wyoming(State) to Missouri (State).

Edit:
It's really kind of confusing as Kansas City is in Missouri and in Kansas, their office seems to be on Kansas side but I can't find any record that their company is registered in Kansas.

Hi all,

during my research about BFL Labs I found the following document that states that BFL Labs was administratively dissolved or revoked on May 22, 2013. What does this mean if they still carry on business?
By the way, if anyone knows a good attorney that is specialized in customer protection law, that is already familiar with BFL, please send me a PM/Contact.

Here the link to the document from the Executive Deputy Secretary of State: http://www.sos.mo.gov/kbimaging/30905810.pdf

Thank you Kano. It's clear now, it was my bad that I assumed something wrong based on previous tests with a GPU and miss-interpretation of a short look of the api.c - File.

Hello Kano,

the comment wasn't so silly, the major objective was related to the identification of a device in cgminer, so it also counts if the ID's are the same after a restart of cgminer. Means for GPU's it would depend if the ATI Lib provides the GPU's in the same order. I will just assume the lib would provide the GPU's in the same order, at least as long there is no additional GPU added/removed.
Another issue I'm facing is the mapping of ID's provided from cgminer between different API command. For "DEV" and "DEVDETAILS" cgminer provides an ID, but once with a detail type (BAS,BFL,ICA,AVA,....) and once with a generic type (GPU,PGA,ASC,....). Are the ID generated for each group separately or are they related. As example, I run an instance of cgminer with 2 ICA, 2 AVA and 2 BAS devices. If the ID's are related, I would expect following result:

DEV command:
Name=PGA,ID=0
Name=PGA,ID=1
Name=ASC,ID=2
Name=ASC,ID=3
Name=ASC,ID=4
Name=ASC,ID=5

DEVDETAILS command:
Name=ICA,ID=0
Name=ICA,ID=1
Name=AVA,ID=2
Name=AVA,ID=3
Name=BAS,ID=4
Name=BAS,ID=5

By this it would be easy to generate a mapping between these devices, as the ID is program wide unique. But if the ID is just unique for each group, I would expect following result.

DEV command:
Name=PGA,ID=0
Name=PGA,ID=1
Name=ASC,ID=0
Name=ASC,ID=1
Name=ASC,ID=2
Name=ASC,ID=3

DEVDETAILS command:
Name=ICA,ID=0
Name=ICA,ID=1
Name=AVA,ID=0
Name=AVA,ID=1
Name=BAS,ID=0
Name=BAS,ID=1

In this case I could just assume that I have to rely on the order of the devices in the Json. Unfortunately I cant test the case (and also don't have the appropiate C++ skills to analyze the source), I hope you can help me and explain how cgminer is handling the ID's, so that I can do the right mapping.

Many thanks in advance!

Thank you for the clear answer!

Hello ck,
Hello Kano,

I've a question related to the identification of a device in cgminer and the a hardware device. As I'm currently about to develop a application that creates statistics for every device, it's essential to have a clear mapping between hardware device and the related device in cgminer for that. Previously I thought that the combination of the Device Type (GPU/BAS/AVA/....) and ID provided from cgminer could achieve that task, I had the hope it works as long the devices are connected to the same Port(USB/PCE...). Unfortunately I discovered that's not right. During the run of CGMiner I unplugged an Avalon from the USBPort and reconnected after a short time. After the reconnect the Id changed from AVA0 to AVA1. Now I'm questioning myself, how I can achieve the unique identification of a hardware device by reported data from CGMiner. I hope you can give me some advice!

Thany you very much in advance 

I'm very concerned and have not too much hope that any of the Minirigs will pay back. Our only chance would be a refund, maybe we should see how we can work together to get our money back?

You buy a new product from an manufacturer. As long it's not declared as used, you can expect that the manufacturer only checks the product for functionality, short term QC Test of single components and the assembled product. For long time tests the manufacturer has to take a sample from an batch or a prototype, that sample has to be tested under hard conditions. This will prove if that product/the design and the manufacturing process fulfills the quality standards. This samples will not be sold to any customer, the manufacturer will keep it. The product the customer gets is new, it was checked for functionality, but not used . You will have warranty for this product from the manufacturer. That means even if "QC" is passed, and the product get broken related to an problem during manufacturing, the manufacturer has to replace the product.

But let's take a look how the world would look like if companies would do their "QC" like BitSyncom. Your new car would come with 3000 miles on the meter, but it's still new and just tested. That car was used to transport the employees of the manufacturer to work and back home, for what the company should invest in gasoline just for testing, it would be a wast of resource. Some cars come with 40000 miles on the meter, they were used for the long term "QC". The navigation system has still the route from the employees home to their factory in memory. Your new computer will now be shipped with World of Warcraft pre-installed. That computer was carefully tested. Therefore the manufacturer hired some guys to farm gold in MMORPG's for weeks. These manufacturers really care about you and the environment. They want to deliver a carefully tested product and use resources in an efficient way to protect the environment.

If this week pass without a positive result, I would suggest to talk with this law firm http://www.coindesk.com/us-law-firm-nesenoff-miltenberg-accepts-payment-in-bitcoin/. As far as I know it's possible in US that a group of people can start together a law suit. So customers could organize and these law firm could take up that case. They could be even personally interested in such a case as this would bring some publicity. Besides this it would be a signal for the whole industry to take care of customers and regulations. We even could pay the law firm with Bitcoins, so customers all over the wold can participate without big problems.

To get clear if people have rights that protects them from being exploited. There are laws and regulations to protect customers for good reason, people can stand in for their right and let companies know that they have to follow that rules made by the society. Well, if no one complains there will be no justice. The powerful will only change if they are forced to. My personal impression is that a lot of customers tried many ways to get in contact with BitSyncom to settle problems, however they don't seem really encouraged to give answers or to be honest. What choice does these customers have left?

A scammer tag wouldn't hurt them, you have to go after their cash and for this you would need to involve a legal entity. I'm really curious if their business practice are conform with US law. Selling products under wrong promises (ROI prediction), sending out products as samples even they aren't. Import products without needed certifications, let customers abroad pay in foreign currency to private bank accounts (chinese customers could pay in RMB to an chinese account). Using customer products for own profit before delivery,.... Is all that really legal in US? The list could be even more extended, could be worth to let an attorney look into this case, all this points looking suspicious to me.

Is there any update of an 4 module Avalon that is in shipping or already delivered, any statement of Bitsyncom why they are not able to deliver?

Ones bad behavior does not justify it for another one! For me its like a childish way to search for excuses like : " but ,but, but the other kids also drink beer on that day" -> So what, does it mean you have to?

 

That's right, but this offered refund smells fishy if they can't keep their word that they will deliver all Batch 3 machines during the next 2 weeks (one more week to go). They gave us 2 days to decide to refund, and it felt like " Hey you can get your money back, but think twice because we will send your machine out NOW(next two weeks)! That's the reason why we will not accept any refund after these two days". Sound for very similar to they statement with that they sold Batch 3 "Hey actually we don't want to sell any machines but we will do it for you as last chance to get a machine. The only condition is that you need to pay 4 times more, but hey don't be worry that's a fair price based on the ROI!". It's like putting a gun at your head and ask you to make a decision, it's clear that nobody was forced to order, but why people did? It's easy, they used peoples trust for being the first one started shipping asics, so people tend to believe their statements as they think these are the trustful capable guys. However, for me it looks like a very smart business strategy to get as rich as possible by the easiest way possible. People asking why they don't mined by them self, why they don't stopped delivering? Follow the money and you get the answers, they took money from Batch 1# to finance their operation, maybe it wasn't even enough to cover all cost to deliver all B1 machines. So what to do in that situation? Just open a new sales to refinance your operation, so they started to sell B2 and shipped B1 slowly. How to maximize profits? Just keep mining with the machines as long as possible. I'm quite sure that at the time after sales of B2, including their mining operation, they already had a good  profitable business, but that was not enough. Again how a company could increase the profits as much as possible? Just sell more with a higher price as long the lack of competition allows it, if and when you deliver is not  important, just collect as much cash as possible. So they started to sell B3 and their chips, at this point they got the most profit out of this business as possible. The great thing is that they don't  need to fear any legal action, so it's legit (BitSyncom is still a US company, not Chinese)! They used the trust gained by being the first ones to get as much cash as possible over the time. This shows me their real face, but cash rules, so they could be successful on the long term. History shows us that people that are able to sell things out of nothing, can become big companies (e.g. Bill Gates and his first deal with IBM, he sold something he didn't had, and was the first one that achieve a license based profit from software. Rockefeller made his first big deal with Vanderbilt about an amount of oil that he was not able to sell/produce at the time the deal was made). These people used strategies to get the best conditions for a deal, even they were clear that they are not able to fulfill it at that time. The big difference between these guys and BitSyncom is that they made deals with other companies and BitSyncom is using us as bakers. However let's see how this will end for us, Yifu is already a rich man.

Maybe, but I have to admit that as long Bitsyncom doesn't provide a compensation for the delay, I don't really care about the reason. The reason only matters if it is link with a positive effect on the ROI, I feel already like the cashcow of Bitsyncom, they justify they price about the ROI, but after they received the money they don't care anymore about the selling point. This is like delivering a spoiled product

It's a 4 module unit without PSU

Hmmm,

I have a #49xx number and it's still processing

It's 56BTC for one Blade . The picture shows only that you can combine up to 10 blades

The companies name is not avalon, it's BitSyncom LLC, the website is operated by this company and the company is registered in the US. In one of my post I wrote the companies registered address, just use the forum search function or google for company details. You can file a complain at https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/

I also consider to take a refund for my Batch 3 order, keep us updated how the refund request goes on. Will they refund the same amount of Bitcoins paid for the order?