Topic: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s - page 243. (Read 880461 times)

Once that all of this is over i will do a few frames with some of the posts in here.

Has anyone been in contact with Ciara? It would be interesting to know how many units they have assembled.

I think they're waiting until they've mined enough coins to profit before paying any refunds out.

Well i am a batch 3 customer, also have send a e-mail to Scamfast, i also ask for my refund if they cant deliver this month. i totally get confuse by them and ask them if they already know if they cant deliver then dont let batch 2,3,4 wait so they can also ask their refunds back.

By the way we now all discuss about ScamFast but do they read this? or react something? I mean they havent react here since December ? I mean?? they know they under pressure? And still not communcating with their clients? In the begin they were very easy to contact and if you want to order ... they react directly.., but when it becomes to Fail to deliver and asking refunds back then they gone and dissepear in nowhere?? And lie and make photos how they packkage the boxes to shipping and set it on Twitter? I mean come on.. ?? Soon or later they know they will been trapped.??

They promote their business on evenings without deliver even 1 rigs jet? What do they want? Promote Scamfast so they can steal more money?? Eduardo De Castro?? What are you doing with your customers? Pay your clients back + Every mineday that we have been lost.

another place to report scamfast if you havent already. dont forget to include eddie's name in the report so they can add him to the no fly list

http://www.ic3.gov/default.aspx

"Like, oh my god! They spelt Skrodenis wrong."

Something tells me that the people who are responsible for the last 4PH jump (and i'm not saying that it's HF) don't really care about making more sales, since that they already do in the millions per day of money they don't have to pay taxes over.

But those people can't reach 50%+ of the network by self mining, and if they are avid enough, they will start selling this hardware as well.

im sure the thread will start again soon as Hashfast lies about something else or steals another potential clients money

Since that the thread is dead, i would like to share my last stupid tough... if you compare the branding used at the december booth and the CES one, you will see that the december one was studied, it was done by someone that knew what he was doing, while the CES one seems like to have been done with word and/or paint.

(bullet points with that interline? please)
(logo on black background? has that something to do with black being the default color to replace transparencies in PNG? please)

(i got some good ideas for points against them but i won't share them or my lawyer would kill me )

you dont ...., you dont..   i loose a part of my mind in this story too ..

Nice...

I liked the slogan "Bitcoin mining and transaction verification happening live @ CES"

Were they hiding an Avalon under the table or just playing a movie?

Too bad, I would really have liked to meat them at their stand (it's not a typo)

They're just using different algorithms for the calculations, they were both reasonable estimates depending on how you're estimating.

Like 

I have no clue what "bitcoindifficulty.com" is calculating, but the timestamps since the last re-target say:
$ bitcoind getnetworkhashps
14783251099573804

Which would be a 45% increase.. and across 1830 blocks, thats probably a pretty good estimate.

If you're going to correct people's facts, it might be wise to cite something that explains what they're actually calculating.

But who cares? 24% vs 45% ... Hashfast customers are screwed either way.

Edit:  Ah, the getnetworkhashps got changed to default to "last 120 blocks" instead of "since the last retarget" by default. There was a huge step up in hashrate ~5 says ago. I'd be betting on an actual change of 27% or 28%.

Thanks Phin.

This may help some more: https://www.google.com/search?q=https%3A%2F%2Fblockchain.info+%22hashfast%22&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS549US549&oq=https%3A%2F%2Fblockchain.info+%22hashfast%22&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i58.6767j0j4&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8#es_sm=122&espv=210&q=site:https:%2F%2Fblockchain.info+%22hashfast%22

Where all the magicians go!

jcambond posted an address HashFast used to collect payments.
This payment was then sent directly to address 17hCi8apMUkzzLLJgUwfXxRJuykuo5Lcur
We can be confident this is HashFast's own address by looking at the first and last deposits to the address, and the dates.
On August 6 2013 at 6:30pm a test deposit of 0.001 BTC was received, this is in line with the timeline for the first sales.
On October 28 2013 the last transaction can be observed, from this point deposits were directed to another collection address.
By this time it had become evident to customers there was a problem, and HashFast began directing payments elsewhere.
Looking at the total BTC deposits it is clear HashFast have received most of the payments in BTC.  It also appears HashFast have oversold the number of stated units available.  This may explain why Batch 2,3 and 4 Baby Jet orders are not published.  It can also be confirmed that not all of the BTC deposits have been converted to USD through BitPay as suggested.  Here at address 17Vj6tneMEueGgS64aEiNr1fHurEiEHZas we find 1.25 BTC.  This deposit came from address 1BGWkLdRwK8PPGH5ziToopTSdnsjtjM8aa which in turn came from 17hCi8apMUkzzLLJgUwfXxRJuykuo5Lcur
There can be no confusion because both addresses have had only one deposit.  Hope this helps.

Look! I'm outta quarters and somebody stole our fans.
So, I guess I get to go home now.

Meanwhile, at the Badlands Saloon.