Topic: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s - page 30. (Read 880520 times)

I'm talking about this guy, that has been trolling us at the beginning, has an ever knowing lawyer friend and has proven to have access to confidential information:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/armyof1ne-330963

/end of my posts here with you for the sanity of the poor customers following this thread.

are you talking about pezz? he has the all knowing lawyer from what he stated, gallo is God apparently
*update* he may have worshipped someone else, i thought he loved gallo

I don't know, do I know? I'm not the one with the lawyer friend that is ever knowing et all. Or the one that has proven to have access to supposedly confidential informations.

do you not know?

Why don't you ask to your ever knowing lawyer friend?

http://youtu.be/U1eGa-st3hs?t=32m20s

so lets say 5m out of 40M.

how many of those mil are going to the lawyers before we get the scraps?

Unless bitcoin prices rise substantially between now and the auction, I would think the company has wasted most of their value.   I would be shocked to see half of that bid by anyone.

nope, so supposedly they said something around 11M in stock, 124,000 in cash, and some bitcoins(a small amount) originally in US cash using the bitcoin cost at the time of purchase, they have about 20M in debts, since bitcoins raised up quite a bit, 40M is now due from hashfast...

That is before lawyers fees. The auction is on the 8th of Dec... they feel their chips and everything else is worth around 11 million...(its probably going to be far less than that) i just wanted to know how much the lawyers are taking out of the available pool.

You sure you're not confusing this with BFL?

So hay everyone, Got a quick question i hope someone can answer, out of the 11 million they supposedly have in cash and stock, how much of that is going to the lawyers before going to us? anyone know yet?

I would never give you the satisfaction, my little chocolate teapot.   

Sooo after 4 December will you go away?

Requesting product samples is one thing.  Ignoring the fact that other people paid and risked a great deal of money to produce those samples is quite a different matter.

Bitchnellski acts nicely when he's begging for free stuff, but if he doesn't get his handouts he turns into a hater, which demonstrates his deplorable sense of entitlement.

If he really wanted to provide leadership to some sort of collective, he should raise the money to buy a dev kit like everyone else.

I may be confused, it's been known to happen. But it looks like your're trying to give buddy a hard time for requesting product samples for his open source mining project? This is the worst PR ever. Well, actually Josh from BFL calling his wife was even worse but this is bad.

I am a HF customer, unlike Bitchnellski who is too poor to do anything except beg ASIC companies for free stuff that other people risked a lot of money to get built.

The "pain and hurt" we HF customers are feeling is the result of our losses being locked in and actualized by the monumentally ill-advised bankruptcy filing, which cut short HF's attempts to recapitalize and destroyed what value remained via a a lengthy and hideously expensive legal process.

Go beg on some street corner Bitchnellski.  You will have better luck with that than expecting start-ups operating under tremendous pressure to give you gifts of other people's property.

There you go again with that inapplicable histrionic paradigm I mentioned earlier, comparing a tiny start-up to violent kidnappers.   

We can't have a rational discussion when you resort to cheap stolen metaphors where you equate those who simply partially disagree with you to hostages suffering psychological damage.


That is only true absent best efforts.  HF's best efforts were demonstrated to the satisfaction of the bankruptcy court.  Please explain why you think Judge Montali is wrong.


So you believe that we are guilty until proven innocent?  Sorry but that's not how it works in America, where we are presumed innocent.

Please cite the law you believe HF has broken, or STFU with your vague defamatory claims.


The indicators were not "missing."  HF was meeting with potential investors to recapitalize when that process was disrupted by the spectacularly unwise bankruptcy filing.

Asking for a "guarantee" is not the proper standard; you should know there are no guarantees in life except death and taxes!

The proper standard is probability based, and as armyof1 pointed out recapitalization would have resulted in a new team because the investors would insist on it to protect their investments.

The only reason you ask for an unreasonable 100% guarantee instead of the more rational better chance of success as compared to the legal approach is because you want to indulge in absolutist histrionics.  You are trying to make perfect the enemy of better, like a child throwing a tantrum who won't accept anything less than exactly what they want.


That's only if you want to run a four chip module at top speed.  Much cheaper boards could be made to run more or less chips at lower power.

Once again, you use an artificial demand for perfection to justify your histrionic absolute negativism, like a cranky toddler that needs a good smacking and long nap.   

+1 Disgruntled shill who is angry he didn't paid his "fair" market rate. So he comes on here trying to extract pain and hurt from anyone that helped upset the apple cart. Too bad there wasn't a criminal prosecution and all the documents / communications were revealed his contract with HF would be laid out for all to see then.

WHAT? I thought HF didn't fail. What are you saying over here?

There is no victory in this. The bankruptcy action was the outcome of a deteriorating situation and irresponsible company behavior. Why do you think the action was approved so quickly? Because the company was being responsible?

Taking peoples assets and not delivering as agreed upon or represented by at the time is bad acting. The reason why the company started playing around with cash flow of their orders is massive undercapitalization. Simply put they bit off more than they could chew for the amount of risk capital which went into the company formation. Customers didn't sign up to become equity holders - they ordered a product.

By that logic the absence of a trial or a judgement means there was no crime. The only part I agree with is that the HashFast story has somewhat become the new normal: Reward owners and shareholders for failing businesses and perform a bail-in on customers and business partners when things become sour.

How big does a carrot have to be to keep you going in the face of failure? Apart from the missing indicators for the "shitton of money", what was the guarantee that this money would have been used to make good by the customers?

Ok. Let's hail the HF chip to maximize return on the upcoming auction. But let's just for a moment entertain the notion that the HF chip requires close to the most expensive board design in the industry to keep it operating. If you don't have break-through technology to build a cost-competitive board for the chip, you're toast.

The only thing I don't understand is your role in all of this. The only rational conclusion which lends itself to making sense is that you were "in on the scheme" and the disruption by the bankruptcy deprived you of a source of income. Anything else would suggest that you're suffering from the Stockholm syndrome.

I've provided most of the "exhaustive list."

Actually I am "the resource to summarize the 11,000 replies from this thread."  Sorry you expect too much for nothing, except grief.

Good luck with your massive sense of entitlement.