Topic: BFL announces 28nm 600GH/S blade for $4680 - page 21. (Read 41067 times)

No new posts? I think everyone is in shock that there can actually be a civil conversation on BCT

I respect your views here, PG.  I think both of us have managed to get our points across well.

Back to the normal schedule of flame wars!

Will

I honestly do have the best interests of fellow bitcoiners at heart, whether they are BFL customers or not. Them owning a BFL device that is not FCC certified is a mute issue as far as I'm concern. Highlighting the risk of pre-ordering from BFL is a given, given sales are based on lies.

Josh and I both have thick skins when it comes to each of us calling each other names and accusing each other of things that are obvious not true, e.g. me stealing barn wood at night or ripping off Bitcoin 100. We may both resort to silly tactics while presenting our overall agenda: Him, advancing sales for BFL, and me making sure as many people as possible do their due diligence, hence joining the choir on pointing out the lies and misinformation.

There are bitcoiners a helluva lot smarter than I that have shown time and time again that what BFL has presented in the past, and now with their new line, that they are not passing the smell test.

I honestly believe that if I never stated a negative word about BFL, bitcoiners would still be incurring the same increased cost you've so kindly pointed out.

Note the tone in our conversation, to date. Pretty civil, eh? Josh was given every opportunity to conduct himself in a civil manner. He could have easily addressed the FCC concern as a mistake on his part, or with a lie, for how would we truly not know the truth. That issue would have died by December of last year. But, by it being ignored, he no longer has that option, short of admitting that he fucked up. We all fuck up. You, I, Josh, Sonny, etc.

Speaking of Sonny, I have no problem with his past, but his past has turned into a reflection of how BFL is currently operating. Big difference. The parallels are too overwhelming to ignore.

Thanks for your reply PG.  If you have the best interests of BFL customers at heart, e.g. if you felt customers were actually at risk from not having an FCC approved device in their living rooms, then I applaud you.  If you continue to highlight the significant risks of placing a pre-order with BFL (which you do very voraciously, I have to admit!) then I also salute you.

However, if you're just upset because Josh lied to you some time in the past, or called you a name, and you end up costing people on this forum $$$ because BFL have to delay their shipments dealing with the results of your missives, or end up having to charge more for their devices, then I do find that hard to support.

Will

Tollin', Tollin', Tollin' lyrics come to mind:

I'm tyin' to understand 'em
While the trolls try to brand 'em
Hopin' to be living high and wide.
But while others are calculatin'
BFL's got me waitin',
Waitin' at the end of the line.

Keep trollin PG   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kt6rRNANSgI

Will

You have respectfully asked questions of me of which I will do my best to address.

My stance again BFL is mostly centered around the lies and misinformation put forward by their camp, namely Josh Zerlan.

Last November, Josh stated the following:


3 months prior, Josh penned the following with his BFL_Josh account:


See the lie?

As far as for the FCC statement goes, Josh, nor anybody else from Camp BLF, has responded to requests about how the certification process is going after it was proven that they lied about having some of them already certified, yet as of Friday (two days ago) there is nothing about BF Labs Inc., et al., mention on the official FCC site. If I were to submit a device Monday, by Wednesday it would show up on that site, but 10 months later, nothing about Butterfly Labs, et al.

To be clear, I can give a rat's ass about the FCC, UL listed, et al., requirements, but I do care about people being lied to by an entity to better their financial position off the backs of those who worked hard for the money that they have given BFL, only to have them referred to as Monumental Assholes.

I hope the above sheds a little light as to where I'm coming from, Will. You seem like an alright guy, and wouldn't mind speaking with you on the phone if you so desire. Simply PM me if you wish.

Feel free to ask me any more questions via a post or PM, but please PM me if a post goes unanswered for too long, for I may have missed it oppose to ignoring it.

Later, bud.

Bruno Kucinskas

Perhaps Paypal is mad at them for all the refunds?

What is spurious about BFL having to respond to unlawful attempts to deny refunds.   BTW BFL doesn't have to respond to FTC investigations they can simply comply with the UCC and offer refunds on uncompleted orders.

BFL saying "all sales are final"* is fine however under the UCC a SALE involves the transfer of ownership of the contracted good (in this case mining hardware). If you take contracted funds and haven't yet delivered** the goods then a sale hasn't yet occurred, you only have a funded sales contract.  A company can't choose to both not complete the sale and refuse a refund on the unfilled sales contract.

So the idea that BFL would be held hostage is silly.  If they are held hostage to the FTC it is only by their own choosing.


* As a contrast here are some legitimate example protected by "all sales are final".
a) a customer waits until BFL ships a product and then asks for a refund because difficulty is too high.  
b) a customer refuses delivery of a BFL product (and hasn't prior to shipping requested the order be cancelled).  
c) customer receives a minirig and realizes (due to lack of customer due diligence) it is too loud or hot and wishes to have it returned for a refund.
d) customer has a BFL single "die" after taking delivery and it is outside warranty period (or BFL isn't offering a warranty)

In these examples BFL would be legally allowed to refer the customer to "all sales are final" clause and the customer would have little legal recourse.  If they didn't like the policy they shouldn't have purchased the product.

** In most cases shipment by the seller to the buyer by a common carrier constitutes a transfer of ownership.  The seller does not need to wait until physical delivery to consider the sale completed.  

PG is just a big troll. You are all feeding the troll.

^ So if/when BFL goes out of business it will be PG's fault? 

Mr. Gage,

With respect, I'm trying to work out your aims of continuing to post stuff about BFL here - you've made it quite clear that you don't approve of their business practices and that you think other people should not order from them, or trust them any more, but it's your end-game that confuses me.

Are you trying to put BFL out of business, or just dissuade people from placing any further order or trust with BFL, or is it just a personal vendetta you have against BFL because of some perceived or real slight from the past?

If the first, are you aware that if you succeed in your task, then there will be a lot of people on this forum who are waiting on good to be delivered that will be put out of pocket.  BFL are delivering the equipment ordered, albeit at a very slow pace, and I don't think you disagree with this fact.  If by some miracle you manage to cause BFL inconvenience e.g. having to respond to spurious FTC requests, or reply to letters from their landlord - it's just going to cost BFL money which they will have to pass onto their customers - members of this forum.  How do you justify this?

If it's the persuasion issue, then I think you have already succeeded, and to be honest, starting any campaign against their building management, or raising issues with the FTC, or any other active protests don't really help that cause.

If it's the latter, then I suppose there's not much I can do since it seems it's a personal issue that I'm not going to convince you otherwise, but do you really have to be so passionate about it?

Cheers,

Will

Exactly. Unless for some people buying mining hardware is the only way for them to acquire large amounts of Bitcoins, as getting money into Bitcoins is much harder than purchasing hardware in many circumstances.

The price of BTC is irrelevant in making an investment decision between moving your capital to (1) BTC, or (2) mining equipment. This has been explained many times. If BTC gains value both choices bring more returns. If BTC loses value both choices bring less returns. The question is which one will make you end up with more BTC at the end. So the only part of the equation to take into account is how much does the mining equipment cost today (in BTC), and how much BTC it could mine in the future.

A L Huber
10770 El Monte St
Overland Park, Kansas 66211

Sirs,

It's come to our attention that a tenant of yours, Butterfly Labs, occupying the same building as your address is refusing to refund millions of dollars paid them for products ordered since during the middle of 2012, forward.

Would you be so kind as to let us know if BF Labs Inc.'s lease is about to expire or is their lease a multi-year contract?

With tens of millions of dollars at stake and Sonny Vleisides, a convicted felon, at the helm, their silence could only mean one thing: The company is about to fold after Sonny's probation expires on September 15, 2013, for fleecing hundreds of millions of dollars from the elderly with his 15 year running lottery scam.

It has even come to our attention that people who have worked with Sonny Vleisides in the past scamming millions, are now part of the BFL organization with offices at the building that you lease to them.

Regards,

A Bitcoiner

PS: As many times as people have accused BFL of the above, they have never once made a public statement refuting any of the claims. But, their COO, Josh Zerlan, has reverted to calling all bitcoiners, Monumental Assholes.

Red Flag #X: The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.

Yep.  My 6800 series dual gpu cards with a vapor pipe engineered by a multi billion dollar company run at 100C when mining.  Two fans will not keep them cool on a hot summer day and that's just two chips. 


BFL is a long con only interested in stealing money from unsuspecting noobs.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2958722

if it keeps up at the current pace of 8.4 blocks found per hour,   next increase will happen in about 140hrs...  my guess is that estimate will be closer to 75 mil by that time...



http://bitcoindifficulty.com/     is where i got the stated increase to 67.3mil....  in the past they have been more accurate imo

http://blockchained.com/ says:

Current difficulty: 50810339
Estimated next difficulty: 61989891 (+22.0%) in 6 days and 10.6 hours

Will

thought I'd share

What's the ETA of 67.3M?