BitBet incorrectly declares yes to a no bet. Stay Away from BitBet!! - page 2.

integrity42

full member

Activity: 476

Merit: 100

Quote from: dexX7 on September 07, 2013, 04:17:37 PM

Quote from: deizel on September 07, 2013, 02:28:42 PM

So for people ordering the 400GH Miner with 16 hashing boards, where do they put the 17th+ hashing board(s)?

Totally got your point, though my argumentation is not based on "a unit is a mining machine", but "a unit is not defined by the number of boards".

A mining machine (or unit) is a Raspberry-Pi, connected to an M-board. The M-board can have a maximum of 16H-cards plugged into it.

This mining machine, as advertised here, http://www.bitfurystrikesback.com/product/400gh-miner-october-2013/ , clearly shows that this is what was advertised.

The bet says the unit must perform as advertised. At least 400Gh, and under 400W. It met the wattage requirement, but did not meet the hashrate requirement.

The 400Gh unit only does 365Gh. Therefore it did not meet performance requirements, therefore the bet is a NO.

integrity42

full member

Activity: 476

Merit: 100

Quote from: Anduck on September 07, 2013, 03:15:42 PM

Nobody ever declared "unit" to be 1 m-board with 16 h-boards. Or "unit" to be 1 m-board with 1 h-board. The bet wording clearly means unit as the kit. Unit can be a group of smaller units. And it wasn't about the amount of hardware or hardware specs, it was about the performance of the unit/kit.

This is incorrect. punin himself considers 1M-board with 16H-cards to be called a unit, as can be seen by the posts in this thread.

So, you're totally wrong.

A unit, as advertised, was 1M-board, with 1-Raspberry-pu with 16H-cards connected to it. This unit does 365Gh. Therefore the unit did not meet performance specs, therefore the bet is a NO.

There's already rumours that you bribed BitBet for them to make the bet a yes, considering that the yes outcome flies in the face of logic.

Anenome5

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Next time don't do a combo performance + ship date. It should be ship date only, and if you want to bet on performance, bet on that separately.

integrity42

full member

Activity: 476

Merit: 100

Quote from: ?? on ??

Well yeah it's obviously about the performance (as explicitly stated in the bet), not the number of boards, no one cares. They even outperformed!

I lost money in the bet but seing fractal/hypocrisy42/? cry about it makes my heart warm.

This whole thread is just for you. xoxo.

dexX7

legendary

Activity: 1106

Merit: 1024

Quote from: deizel on September 07, 2013, 02:28:42 PM

So for people ordering the 400GH Miner with 16 hashing boards, where do they put the 17th+ hashing board(s)?

Totally got your point, though my argumentation is not based on "a unit is a mining machine", but "a unit is not defined by the number of boards".

Anduck

legendary

Activity: 1511

Merit: 1072

quack

Nobody ever declared "unit" to be 1 m-board with 16 h-boards. Or "unit" to be 1 m-board with 1 h-board. The bet wording clearly means unit as the kit. Unit can be a group of smaller units. And it wasn't about the amount of hardware or hardware specs, it was about the performance of the unit/kit.

deizel

member

Activity: 114

Merit: 10

Quote from: dexX7 on September 07, 2013, 01:55:05 PM

.. because I realized that they shipped an additional board, not "two mining machines".

According to website description of the 25GH Miner with 1 hashing board:

Quote from: MXRider on August 31, 2013, 03:08:09 PM

This is what I got yesterday:

dexX7

legendary

Activity: 1106

Merit: 1024

I have to relativize my statement above further in favor to BitBet, because I realized that they shipped an additional board, not "two mining machines". (Edit: further clarification #39)

I define the term "unit" as "mining machine" in this context and the bet stated further "must meet advertised performance", which was met, due to their power consumption being below 1 W / 1 GH/s with a combined hashrate of more than 25 GH/s / 400 GH/s in one unit.

Why is that? If a "unit" would be defined as "H-board", a 400 GH/s hasher would be "16 units", which is not the case in the bet terms. Thus the term "unit" is not related to the number of H-boards.

integrity42

full member

Activity: 476

Merit: 100

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/hire-a-troll-quality-copywriter-240677

pankakke nothing but a paid shill for BitBet...

integrity42

full member

Activity: 476

Merit: 100

Quote from: deizel on September 07, 2013, 01:12:53 PM

Quote from: punin on August 26, 2013, 05:03:15 PM

Our preliminary tests show that the boards are falling a bit short on hashrate. This might be due to differences between wafers, immature software or SPI issues. Because we are in a hurry to ship, you win: I will ship your ordered hashrate regardless (ie. more hardware free of charge) until we fix this issue and can provide 400GH in one unit.

This..

400Gh was not delivered in one unit. The bet specifically mentions the word 'unit', as in 'a 400Gh unit must exist'. The 400Gh unit was 365Gh, therefore the unit, as advertised, does not meet performance specs. Shipping more hardware does not change this requirement in the bet language.

The bet is therefore a no.

deizel

member

Activity: 114

Merit: 10

Quote from: punin on August 26, 2013, 05:03:15 PM

Our preliminary tests show that the boards are falling a bit short on hashrate. This might be due to differences between wafers, immature software or SPI issues. Because we are in a hurry to ship, you win: I will ship your ordered hashrate regardless (ie. more hardware free of charge) until we fix this issue and can provide 400GH in one unit.

"Devices must meet advertised performance (400 GH/s unit)" - did they? No, not yet. ^

klondike_bar

legendary

Activity: 2114

Merit: 1005

ASIC Wannabe

Quote from: pajak666 on September 07, 2013, 12:05:30 PM

This bet is a big NO NO!
The unit did not meet requirements.
Unit is a standalone miner, which hashes max 365 GH/s not 400 GH/s as stated in bet
If they would produce M boards with 17 slots they would meet the requirements.
Otherwise bet is a NO resolution.
You can't actually buy something from punin which will hash more than 365 GH/s... DUCY?

The cards underpreform due to manufacturing methods, not the chips or design. the next batch is expected to work perfectly, and some cards in this batch CAN run >25ghash each, ohers can't

They met all customer promises: they shipped >400GHash to a customer who ordered it, even if a few extra boards were needed to do so. (BFL is shipping thier 'Units' one at a time, several weeks/months apart)

This thread reeks of 'sore-loser', and in my mind the company delivered on every promise: minimum hashrate for an ordered product, maximum power consumption, and delivering in the month of august. (which i might add is the most important factor of the bet IMO). They delivered on time and every customer is satisfied (save for a few technical errors in rare cases). Focusing on the definition of a 'Unit' is pulling at hairs

integrity42

full member

Activity: 476

Merit: 100

This x 100.
Luke-Jr seems to think that an extra 'board' is an H-card,... but doesn't understand that you can't fit more then 16 H-cards in a single unit.
A single unit does 365Gh.

2 Units != 1 Unit.

pajak666

hero member

Activity: 746

Merit: 502

Looking for advertising deal

This bet is a big NO NO!
The unit did not meet requirements.
Unit is a standalone miner, which hashes max 365 GH/s not 400 GH/s as stated in bet
If they would produce M boards with 17 slots they would meet the requirements.
Otherwise bet is a NO resolution.
You can't actually buy something from punin which will hash more than 365 GH/s... DUCY?

b!z

legendary

Activity: 1582

Merit: 1010

That's the problem with sites like these. There will always be those who agree and disgree on judgements.

integrity42

full member

Activity: 476

Merit: 100

Quote from: Luke-Jr on September 06, 2013, 06:27:58 PM

Betting when one is certain of the outcome is morally wrong unless the other party agrees knowing you are certain.
This can clearly not be the case for everyone who bet before the forum post in question.
So, I'm not at all sympathetic, as he basically tried to steal from the other betters.

The BitBet FAQ Clearly states that "Bets will not be cancelled because it became impossible for one side to win." Bettors acknowledge this risk before betting.

I take offense to this statement that I was trying to 'steal' from other bettors. You come across as a serious prick throwing accusations around like that.

Furthurmore, based on punin's statements, and others, it's clear that a Unit is whatever fits on 1M-board, plugged into a Raspberry Pi... Though I don't expect you to acknowledge this.... it's usually crickets when one's pride is damaged... It takes an honest and virtuous man to admit when they're wrong.

dexX7

legendary

Activity: 1106

Merit: 1024

Edit: post #35

The first question to be answered here is not "do the given circumstances meet the conditions as stated in the bet", but something else I'll address right away.

First off, the circumstances:

1. Bet terms:

Quote from: punin on August 26, 2013, 05:03:15 PM

Our preliminary tests show that the boards are falling a bit short on hashrate. This might be due to differences between wafers, immature software or SPI issues. Because we are in a hurry to ship, you win: I will ship your ordered hashrate regardless (ie. more hardware free of charge) until we fix this issue and can provide 400GH in one unit.

3. MP's statement:

Quote from: punin on August 26, 2013, 05:03:15 PM

Bet outcome: Yes
Even if not a very clear cut case, all technicalities aside the bet was substantially delivered upon.

There are no terms defined by BitBet how the outcome of a bet will be determined and obviously there is no definition of a "unit" given, thus all "facts" are no facts, but a subjective interpretation.

The following addresses that:

Quote

14:32:06 fractal: so in general, if there is some ambiguity to the bet language, users trust the site to make the correct decision, based on previous fairness?
14:32:32 mircea_popescu: pretty much.
14:32:55 mircea_popescu: some users get pissed off with the eventual results on occasion, but what can you do.

Basically this translates to "BitBet has the last word".

Thus I think this discussion shouldn't focus on subjective interpretations, but on the question: "does BitBet has the right to rule?"

integrity42

full member

Activity: 476

Merit: 100

Quote from: ?? on ??

The guy wants you to think every detail are performance. The bet specifically refers to advertised performance. The bet even mentions what performance is, 400 GH/s for less than 400W. And it has been delivered.

What world do you live in? The bet says '400Gh Unit 400W' This means:

A) A 400Gh unit must exist.
B) It hashes under 400W.

- A 400Gh unit does not exist. The hardware 'unit' as advertised only does 365Gh. Therefore the bet is a no.

Not sure how much simpler this can be? I'm racking my brain but having trouble explaining in simpler english.

integrity42

full member

Activity: 476

Merit: 100

Quote from: Kluge on September 06, 2013, 06:56:02 PM

Hmm. Did anyone simply ask punin what he was calling a unit? Cheesy

ETA2: Alright - how about this?

Quote from: punin on September 01, 2013, 07:25:44 AM

ALERT!! ACHTUNG!! HUOMIO!!
We've spotted a minor (potentially major) security issue with the image that was distributed with the shipped units. The user pi and root both have some ssh credentials set. You should remove these so that no one can access your unit. (This should not be such big issue if you're behind NAT).

(Again, I haven't kept up on this, so I don't know if this makes an indication) Is he referring here to one unit as one m-board? Can the m-board be accessed like that, or does it go through something else?

Wow.... There can be *no doubt* at this point that punin himself (bitfurystrikesback) defines a UNIT as something attached to a raspberry-pi. Only 1M-board can be attached to a Raspberry Pi. Only 16 H-cards can fit on 1M-board.

This means that a UNIT as advertised only performs at 365Gh.

This should be the smoking gun. Hopefully this clears things up for Luke-Jr and others who weren't clear on what a UNIT was...

integrity42

full member

Activity: 476

Merit: 100

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on September 06, 2013, 06:54:05 PM

Quote from: Kluge on September 06, 2013, 06:50:24 PM

Thanks. Edited my own post to try covering that a bit. If the boards can't fit in one unit, then it's not ambiguity being a problem at all, but explicit clarity which covered this exact kind of situation, right? The quote I posted shows punin indicating he was not (at that time) able to produce a 400GH/s unit, and that 16 boards make up a unit.

What is "fit in one unit"? To use more than 16 boards requires 2+ m-boards. All 400 GH/s orders shipped with additional m-boards.

One UNIT , which punin describes, is 16 H-Cards, which are plugged into 1 M-board, which is plugged into 1 Raspberry Pi. You cannot fit more H-cards on here (H-cards contain the hashing ASIC chips).

This is also the hardware advertised on http://www.bitfurystrikesback.com/product/400gh-miner-october-2013/

If you want more hashrate, you need another, completely separate unit onto which you can plug in more H-cards.

2 UNITS != 1 UNIT.

Topic: BitBet incorrectly declares yes to a no bet. Stay Away from BitBet!! - page 2. (Read 5615 times)