Topic: BitBet incorrectly declares yes to a no bet. Stay Away from BitBet!! (Read 5676 times)

Well - We all know what was originally advertised as 400gh unit hardware. The actual delivered hardware changed for August orders. Read this thread and look for the posts that suggest the bet outcome was determined correctly. You can't say unit must be 1 m-board + 16 h-boards.. the bet said 25gh unit and 400gh unit, if unit = 1 m-board + 16 h-boards, what is 25gh unit? This means you can't define unit by the hardware.

The quote is real - and indeed, the post has been edited by its' author. You saw the original post though so... don't even bring up the possibility of faking a quote, please. Also note that you quoted it first, lol.

I notice that either Anduck fraudlently made up that punin quote, or punin EDITED his post.

I have asked him again what amount of hardware was originally advertised for 400Gh.

We will see if he responds. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3218725

Wow. I can make really big fonts too.

He admits that one UNIT (as advertised) is 16 H-cards + 1-Mboard + RasPi. 

2M-boards is 2 units.  1M-board is 1 unit.

They did not reach 400Gh/sec in 1 UNIT (1M-board), which is what was ADVERTISED.  and which is what the BET was based on.

If the hardware amount can change at any time then the BET SHOULD BE VOID OR NO.

The hardware did not perform as advertised. Therefore the bet is a NO.


Now that you see we can all make big fonts. lets keep the discourse civil. shall we?

Yeah, according to that quote, it should pass as a YES, since one whole unit is fulfilling 400GH 

This proves that the bet was incorrectly passed and should have been a NO.  

He admits that one UNIT (as advertised) is 16 H-cards + 1-Mboard + RasPi.

See how he says they had to ship extra hardware because they missed performance specs?

The bet is a no.  The hardware didn't perform as advertised.

He asked this thing in another thread and got the answer from BFSB. Thought it's worth sharing it here so everyone can see the bet was correctly declared as yes.

If the unit advertised met the performance advertised there would be no need to package extra hardware.

Latest bombshell to drop... another smoking gun that proves 1 unit is M-board + 16 H-card + Rpi, as advertised on bitfurystrikesback.com


And this is the user that posted pictures of his miner to help 'resolve' the bet.

Even people receiving the units themselves admit that 400Gh was not delivered in 1 unit.

Furthur evidence that performance specs , as advertised, were not met, and why the bet should have been a clear no.

You can only have a performance bet based on a particular set of hardware at the time the bet was advertised, according to BitBet, the 'advertised performance' statement is only valid concerning the advertised hardware at the time the bet was created. If the hardware changes, then the bet is either void, or a no, because the hardware as advertised didn't perform as required.

Hardware specs of the 400gh unit changed, yes. But the advertised performance did not... They had to use more hardware to make the 400gh unit (the thing people ordered). Read the thread carefully, there are pretty valid points for the bet resolution to be correct.

Ah, so I see the problem! 

You didn't read what was written right underneath that part:

---------------------
What’s included:
1 Master board
16 hashing boards with 16 Bitfury 55nm ASIC chips for total of 256 chips
Raspberry Pi Model B with SD card and software preinstalled
--------------------------

This is what everyone, including punin, considers to be a unit.

So when the bet says '400Gh unit 400W', it is based on the hardware described above.  When this hardware only did 365Gh, it didn't meet performance targets, and the bet should be a no.

Trying to fudge the definition of a unit so that it can include 'multiple units' or an unlimited amount of hardware that was not as advertised to make the bet pass is complete farce.  It makes people think that BitBet is some sort of scam, or that someone paid them off to pass the bet as a yes.

Well when I go to that site, I see the title being "400GH Miner Full Kit (October Delivery)".

Then I see the product description under the title "Product Description".

Then I see the section that has a title called "Performance".

Then I look what that section says... it says:
- 400GHash/s
- Total power  draw max. 400W (Efficiency at wall depends on your PSU)


The bet was about advertised performance. That thing, what is written at the "Performance" -section, is the advertised performance.

Please stay on topic and stop hijacking the thread with your trolling posts.  The discussion is what a unit is considered to be.

As the bet states, a 400Gh unit, must perform as advertised on bifurystrikesback.com

This is what was advertised http://www.bitfurystrikesback.com/product/400gh-miner-october-2013/

It did not do 400Gh. it did 365Gh.  Therefore the bet is a no.

If you don't have anything to contribute to the discussion, stop trolling and hijacking the thread please.

Please stay on topic people. The discussion here is what a 'UNIT' is defined as. Lets keep the discussion relevant.

No more name-calling and trolling.

Sockpuppeting means using a different account to bump and praise your main accounts thoughts and opinions, for example. If one has more than 1 account, the others are sockpuppet accounts.

Order 400GH -> Get 400GH.
The color of the miner is yellow but they promised it's red!!! They didn't deliver the advertised performance?

Just to win a 40 btc bet? That's ridiculous.

Whats a sockpuppet?   What are you even talking about?  This thread is about the 400Gh miner not being 400Gh. please stay on topic.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/hire-a-troll-quality-copywriter-240677
unfortunately you're the only troll around here.

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.

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.

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.

This whole thread is just for you. xoxo.

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".

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.

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

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.

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

pankakke nothing but a paid shill for BitBet...

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.

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

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

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.

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?

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

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.

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:


3. MP's statement:



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:


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?"

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.

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...

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.

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

I mean - maybe he's biased, but at least it'd give something to point to.

ETA: site:bitcointalk.org "quote from: punin" "unit" Nothing yet... 7 more pages to go. Wish I had something productive to do, instead, heh.

ETA2: Alright - how about this?
(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?

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. 

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.

This is an interesting point -- I just checked the forum and can confirm that nobody who ordered only 1 UNIT (400Gh) confirmed getting more then 400Gh before sept 1.

Only 1 person ordered 2 UNITS (400Gh + 25Gh), and on the second unit they gave him more H-cards to make up for missed hashrate... BUT I am yet to see a single example of someone who ordered ONLY a single 400Gh unit and get more hardware.

The additional boards were shipping with the original order.  The individual boards were rated @ 25GH/s they seem to do on average 22GH/s (some more and some less).  

Starter kits (25 GH/s total vs 44 GH/s shipped):
Advertised: 1 host + 1 board
Shipped: 1 host + 2 boards

Full Kit (400 GH/s total vs >= 400 GH/s shipped)
Advertised: 1 host + 16 boards
Shipped: 2 hosts + 18-19 boards (enough to ensure total output is >= 400 GH/s)


Still the bet was poorly worded and hopefully people in the future will start making better worded bets.  Bets should be written as contracts so there is no possibility of ambiguity.

What is a "unit"?  It would appear the company delivered >=400 GH/s using 2 hosts (M-board) and 18-19 hashing boards (H-board) instead of 1 host (M-board) & 16 hashing boards (H-board) as designed.  The hardware was on time (for 5+ orders per the bet), at least 400 GH/s was delivered per 400 GH/s order, and the efficiency was <= 1J/GH (looks like ~0.7 J/GH). 

The only thing in dispute is doe delivering hardware using 2 hosts + 18 boards not meet the criteria of a "unit"?  The OP complaint isn't that not enough hashing power was delivered or it wasn't efficient enough.  His complaint is that on the 400 GH/s sales it shipped as 2 hosts + 18-19 boards instead of 1 host + 16 boards.  Is 2 hosts + 18-19 boards "one unit"?  I would say probably yes but bets should be worded better so there is absolutely no ambiguity.

Sorry Luke-Jr.  You're wrong and I will explain why.

It seems your definition of what a UNIT seems to stem from your mis-understanding of the actual hardware and what a single 'board' is. I belive you're mixing up a M-board with an H-board.  

When punin says that their 400Gh unit will NOT perform as advertised he is referring to a completely full and populated M-board.  This M-board only has enough slots for 16 H-cards, which do around 22Gh each for 365Gh total... This is the maxiumum amount of hardware that can be defined and comprised of as a single UNIT.

This is why punin says that they can't fit 400Gh in a single UNIT.  The bet says that a UNIT must do 400Gh.  It does not.  The bet is a no.

Finally, This post isn't about your sympathy, or being prepared to lose or not.
However, I'm glad you posted that link, as it clearly states

" it must be uncertain for them both. If, however, one has absolutely certain evidence of the truth of his contention, and says so to the other party, he is not precluded from betting if the latter remains obstinate."

As soon as I had evidence of the truth, I made it clear on the comments and elsewhere, before betting.  Thanks.

Maybe.
"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."

If he didn't ship the additional boards by September 1st (I have no idea) which'd get a unit up to 400GH/s, then it couldn't be considered that 400GH/s units were delivered, right? 365GH/s delivered + more later =/= 400GH/s delivered. Or maybe I'm misreading and the extra boards (which still fit with the ordered # of boards in a single unit?) were shipped with the number of boards ordered for 400 or more GH/s?

More info from IRC...

He claims that punin defined "unit" as not being the full 400 Gh/s in this post.
I disagree; punin admits the single board did not meet expectations, but he never says the ordered unit won't. On the contrary, he says an additional board will be provided to make sure the delivered specs are met.
It seems to me two boards comprise the full unit of this "first batch".
Not the advertised design, but it does meet the advertised specs the bet mentioned.

Furthermore, he also admits that he made this bet after he though the conclusion was certain (ie, reading that post), and that he was not prepared to lose.
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.

While I still wouldn't recommend trusting mircea_popescu (who runs bitbet), he clearly made the right decision in this case.

The fact that people who ordered 400Gh got >= 400Gh does not change the fact that the 400Gh UNIT does 365Gh, making the bet a NO.


PS. I made this post just for you.

The bet says that a UNIT must do 400Gh.

A unit is defined here: http://www.bitfurystrikesback.com/product/400gh-miner-october-2013/

This UNIT does 365Gh. The bet is a no.

Oh, so I was mistaken. I thought the argument was that the power consumption was lower, but the Ghash was as well. If the GHash is higher than claimed, and the power is lower, I don't see what the problem is, I too would call the bet confirmed.

I guess you could call me new to bitcoin... Who runs bitbet?

Yeah, 270 W is definitely better than specs...

no, from this post https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3050985 it seems they use 270W. I believe thats how Bitbet was able to confirm the bet, based on the Ghash/Watt. However the bet wasn't about the Ghash/Watt or $ or BTC/Watt, it was about the performance statement. Had they overperformed based on their claims, for example 415Ghash instead of 400 Ghash, and a proportional power increase, I'd say that is fair, but with the info provided, I'd agree the answer to the bet was obviously No.

No surprise there, considering who runs it.

Do the 365 Gh + extra units still run with only 400W power?

Been a few posts detailing that Bitbet is fudging some bets..

It is run by MP. And I hold him in decent regard.. But I think 3 people deciding if a bet is valid would be better then just 1.

That's a clear "no." The bet description isn't very long, but this is very explicit: "Devices must meet advertised performance (25 GH/s unit 40W, 400 GH/s unit 400W) in order to be accepted as valid."

All of the betting-on-real-events sites seem to have a murky track record on this, though... (not that it makes it okay - just not an isolated issue. Maybe the ops just don't take it seriously?)

ETA: Or is there evidence of at least five delivered units meeting the advertised specs? That would arguably change things.

1) The bet in question is this:
http://bitbet.us/bet/520/bitfury-eu-august-orders-will-ship-before-1st/

2) The bet language states:
"Bitfurystrikesback.com (Bitfury EU reseller) will ship their 25 and 400 gigahash mining units before 1st of September 2013. Devices must meet advertised performance (25 GH/s unit 40W, 400 GH/s unit 400W) in order to be accepted as valid. Atleast 5 deliveries confirmed by respected members of the community required."

3) I found this bet interesting, it says that the hardware must 'perform as advertised to be accepted as valid'.  I was pretty sure what the '400Gh unit' was based on the forum posts, but just to make sure I went to bitfurystrikesback.com to see what the advertised hardware was.
http://www.bitfurystrikesback.com/product/400gh-miner-october-2013/

400Gh Kit @ 400W
INCLUDES:
- 1 Master board
- 16 hashing boards with 16 Bitfury 55nm ASIC chips for total of 256 chips
- Raspberry Pi Model B with SD card and software preinstalled"

4) I decided that the hardware, as advertised, would not reach 400Gh hashrate. So, I placed a NO bet.

5) The hardware, as advertised, did not meet performance: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3050985
The '400Gh Unit' meets the power usage, but only hashes at 365Gh.

6) A short while later, I was shocked to see that the bet was passed as a YES anyway, with a note that says: "Even if not a very clear cut case, all technicalities aside the bet was substantially delivered upon." 
So, basically, BitBet thinks that the 400Gh Miner in question only hashing at 365Gh is just a 'technicality', and passed the bet anyway.

7) Fraud? Scam? You decide.  Either way I urge you all to stay away from this site.


A side note:  BitFury did a great job and shipped on time. In fact, they are such a great company, that they offered to provide more hardware to customers since they missed hash rate targets.  However, one should not confuse the additional provided hardware with the bet language above which states the '400Gh UNIT' must perform as advertised.  It didn't.