Pages:
Author

Topic: [ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread - page 14. (Read 479317 times)

legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1015

And even after slashing prices the competition is still going to be ahead.

Sigh.

Remember, there is room for a number of players in this space - no single company has a monopoly on profit. ActM has a great partnership in eASIC which gives mainstream, "real world" credibility to this operation.

There is still quite a bit of time on the clock and as far as publically-traded mining operations go, ActM still stands the best chance of delivering.
 

The trouble is I keep hearing how all the private companies (Hashfast, Cointerra, Bitfury, are all super funded super companies with super chips. Its actually making me a bit depressed)
N_S
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100

And even after slashing prices the competition is still going to be ahead.

Sigh.

Remember, there is room for a number of players in this space - no single company has a monopoly on profit. ActM has a great partnership in eASIC which gives mainstream, "real world" credibility to this operation.

There is still quite a bit of time on the clock and as far as publically-traded mining operations go, ActM still stands the best chance of delivering.
 
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
come on guys, crumbs has the cutest icon and those Tinkerbell pictures, he posted,  are cute too.
Ummm.. maybe this part of hes recovery therapy after that goatse happening?

Now, who in advisory board can write up a short, smart, caring and while also believable press release about price cuts and make sure it's posted on very BTC news site? Anyone?

I told Ken yesterday over the phone that this needs to happen ASAP.  From what I gathered, the Advisory board was pretty much in the dark on the price cut (not really a smart move on Ken's behalf).  Nonetheless, what's done is done, and there's no changing it, unless he decides to lower the prices even further.  Still, we need to be getting some publicity from the reduced prices.

What do you mean by "what's done is done" ?
Most normal people do not read this fucked up thread. So, this is still news. No excuses.

Meaning that Ken took it upon himself to do a price decrease, without notifying any board members, and thus missing out on a fantastic PR opportunity. Still, reduced prices are good news, and we can only hope that if Ken has something else to announce in the coming weeks (wink), that he'll handle it with a little more grace. Really hoping that he'll have a credible PR team by then.
legendary
Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000
Nighty Night Don't Let The Trolls Bite Nom Nom Nom
alot going on in the mining securities world at the moment
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1015

And even after slashing prices the competition is still going to be ahead.

Sigh.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
https://karatcoin.co
come on guys, crumbs has the cutest icon and those Tinkerbell pictures, he posted,  are cute too.
Ummm.. maybe this part of hes recovery therapy after that goatse happening?

Now, who in advisory board can write up a short, smart, caring and while also believable press release about price cuts and make sure it's posted on very BTC news site? Anyone?

I told Ken yesterday over the phone that this needs to happen ASAP.  From what I gathered, the Advisory board was pretty much in the dark on the price cut (not really a smart move on Ken's behalf).  Nonetheless, what's done is done, and there's no changing it, unless he decides to lower the prices even further.  Still, we need to be getting some publicity from the reduced prices.

What do you mean by "what's done is done" ?
Most normal people do not read this fucked up thread. So, this is still news. No excuses.

We have received some attention here: http://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinStocks/comments/1mc1mw/vmcactivemining_drastically_cut_prices_of_the/
hero member
Activity: 487
Merit: 500
Are You Shpongled?
Do we only own Active Mining? Is VMC fully owned by Ken?
We own "AMC" (mining) and "VMC" (hardware) under the "ActiveMining" virtual identity, but we don't have voting rights. Ken gets to do whatever he wants.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1015
Do we only own Active Mining? Is VMC fully owned by Ken?
legendary
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
Quality Printing Services by Federal Reserve Bank
come on guys, crumbs has the cutest icon and those Tinkerbell pictures, he posted,  are cute too.
Ummm.. maybe this part of hes recovery therapy after that goatse happening?

Now, who in advisory board can write up a short, smart, caring and while also believable press release about price cuts and make sure it's posted on very BTC news site? Anyone?

I told Ken yesterday over the phone that this needs to happen ASAP.  From what I gathered, the Advisory board was pretty much in the dark on the price cut (not really a smart move on Ken's behalf).  Nonetheless, what's done is done, and there's no changing it, unless he decides to lower the prices even further.  Still, we need to be getting some publicity from the reduced prices.

What do you mean by "what's done is done" ?
Most normal people do not read this fucked up thread. So, this is still news. No excuses.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
come on guys, crumbs has the cutest icon and those Tinkerbell pictures, he posted,  are cute too.
[snip!]

Eww, EskimoBob...  U and your dirty van -- go away!
sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
Every time crumbs has tried to sound like he knows what he's talking about, VBS has straightened him out pretty fast.  I don't need to be an electronics expert to know that 24.76TH/S is not an overly accurate estimate.  Rounding up could cause a difference of up to 500GH/S.  I think it's safe to say that Ken will be accurate within that amount  Roll Eyes
sr. member
Activity: 560
Merit: 250
Ohh hai guys look its volcanic erupter who didnt even know companies on btct had a details tab lol.
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
come on guys, crumbs has the cutest icon and those Tinkerbell pictures, he posted,  are cute too.
Ummm.. maybe this part of hes recovery therapy after that goatse happening?

Now, who in advisory board can write up a short, smart, caring and while also believable press release about price cuts and make sure it's posted on very BTC news site? Anyone?

I told Ken yesterday over the phone that this needs to happen ASAP.  From what I gathered, the Advisory board was pretty much in the dark on the price cut (not really a smart move on Ken's behalf).  Nonetheless, what's done is done, and there's no changing it, unless he decides to lower the prices even further.  Still, we need to be getting some publicity from the reduced prices.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
Understood, but one has hardware and the other has simulations. I do not see ads as they're blocked, so I don't know what ASICMiner is advertising. Can you give me an example?

So you expect Ken to round up to the nearest, what?  TH/S?  Estimation requires at least a small degree of accuracy.  
336MH/S for the USB block eruptor ..that's even 3 more decimal places precise than what I thought..
If Ken wants to advertise with accuracy in relation to other competitors, that's fine.  I don't expect him to round to the nearest TH/S.

You don't have a point.  Percentage wise, Ken gave a much more exact figure than Block Eruptor's 336.  Changing the clock by just *one percent* would trash his numbers.  
Further, we're not talking about finished, hashing miners, with a crystal locking in the clock -- we're talking about *chips*.

Edit:  You do understand the difference between a chip and a miner, right?

Edit2:  Pwnt by a lulzy ten-year old Cheesy  Here, have a funny picture:





You're kidding, right?  .336 GH/S is acceptable but 24.76 TH/S is not?  You also have to take into consideration that 24.76 is actually the sum of many modules.  If you estimate a certain level of accuracy which each individual module then you would not round them off after adding them up.  Crumbs, I didn't expect you to be this shitty at what you do! 

No.  I am not kidding.
.336 GH/s is the speed of a mining device, the clock of which could not be altered without replacing a crystal oscillator.  The chip itself is capable of being clocked higher or lower.
U fail to understand the difference between a miner and a chip, so that's one of ur fails.

Here's another:
The number .336 offers three digit precision, while the number 24.76 offers *four* -- a whole order of magnitude greater.  U even math, bro? Cheesy
legendary
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
Quality Printing Services by Federal Reserve Bank
come on guys, crumbs has the cutest icon and those Tinkerbell pictures, he posted,  are cute too.
Ummm.. maybe this part of hes recovery therapy after that goatse happening?

Now, who in advisory board can write up a short, smart, caring and while also believable press release about price cuts and make sure it's posted on very BTC news site? Anyone?
sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
Understood, but one has hardware and the other has simulations. I do not see ads as they're blocked, so I don't know what ASICMiner is advertising. Can you give me an example?

So you expect Ken to round up to the nearest, what?  TH/S?  Estimation requires at least a small degree of accuracy.  
336MH/S for the USB block eruptor ..that's even 3 more decimal places precise than what I thought..
If Ken wants to advertise with accuracy in relation to other competitors, that's fine.  I don't expect him to round to the nearest TH/S.

You don't have a point.  Percentage wise, Ken gave a much more exact figure than Block Eruptor's 336.  Changing the clock by just *one percent* would trash his numbers.  
Further, we're not talking about finished, hashing miners, with a crystal locking in the clock -- we're talking about *chips*.

Edit:  You do understand the difference between a chip and a miner, right?

Edit2:  Pwnt by a lulzy ten-year old Cheesy  Here, have a funny picture:





You're kidding, right?  .336 GH/S is acceptable but 24.76 TH/S is not?  You also have to take into consideration that 24.76 is actually the sum of many modules.  If you estimate a certain level of accuracy which each individual module then you would not round them off after adding them up.  Crumbs, I didn't expect you to be this shitty at what you do! 
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
Active Mining at 0.0025 on BTCT.co

I am the bagholder of bagholders. How comes my successful investment these past few months has been Labcoin and its Active Mining that has lost me a lot of coin.

You haven't lost anything until you cash out.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1015
Active Mining at 0.0025 on BTCT.co

I am the bagholder of bagholders. How comes my successful investment these past few months has been Labcoin and its Active Mining that has lost me a lot of coin.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
Understood, but one has hardware and the other has simulations. I do not see ads as they're blocked, so I don't know what ASICMiner is advertising. Can you give me an example?

So you expect Ken to round up to the nearest, what?  TH/S?  Estimation requires at least a small degree of accuracy.  
336MH/S for the USB block eruptor ..that's even 3 more decimal places precise than what I thought..
If Ken wants to advertise with accuracy in relation to other competitors, that's fine.  I don't expect him to round to the nearest TH/S.

You don't have a point.  Percentage wise, Ken gave a much more exact figure than Block Eruptor's 336.  Changing the clock by just *one percent* would trash his numbers.  
Further, we're not talking about finished, hashing miners, with a crystal locking in the clock -- we're talking about *chips*.

Edit:  You do understand the difference between a chip and a miner, right?

Edit2:  Pwnt by a lulzy ten-year old Cheesy  Here, have a funny picture:


sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
I told you what asicminer is advertising.  And I went on to say that it doesn't matter if Ken doesn't have the hardware yet, he should be able to advertise with the same accuracy as what already exists.  Nobody should expect him to round up just because he doesn't have the final product yet. 
Pages:
Jump to: