Topic: [LABCOIN] IPO [BTCT.CO] - Details/FAQ and Discussion (ASIC dev/sales/mining) - page 330. (Read 1079974 times)

@Deprived: At this point there isn't much reasonable suspicion of it being an outright scam, the main suspicion is of their competence, and their willingness to miss, forget, or re-interpret their promises, and apparently thinking that sharing proof with shareholders is some kind of mortal sin.

They're not likely to send fake bitcoins to pretend they're mining, but they are suspected of being economical with the truth about how development is going.

Actual bitcoins will be a good indication that they are successfully mining. Without it there is worry that they won't get a damn thing working this side of November.

Labcoin could prove they are mining with their own mining hardware in about 5 minute by taking a picture and posting it, yet they still refuse to do so, and went through the trouble of switching to pool mining and posting an address which means nothing. The address only holds significance if they stayed solo mining.

With pool mining, I expect to see live json stats which nearly every pool provides.

We don't.

We only know that this someone, who initiated the payout, must have been mining on slush approx. 16 hours ago, because that was [when the latest block was credited. This is the absolute minimum and contradicting to Swede's statement that they are going to start pool mining just now.

Though they might be mining for more than 16 hours on slush and Swede didn't get the memo or there was a miscommunication like "we  start to pool mine very soon" vs. "we receive a payment very soon"

1. The sending address is a well know address of Slush sending out mining incomes and the transaction was indeed distributing mining income.
2. Slush pool only shows the rank  sorted by the total BTC mined. So it takes a while for Labcoin being listed even they have large enough hashing rate.


By checking the address sending the BTC to it, we can know whether the BTC is from a (well known) pool or not.

Hopefully my explanation is correct. I did it because I am an investor of DMS.SELLING and respect what you have provided to us, even when you are apparently drunk.

One thing I completely agree with you is that they're definitely the worst manager of a mining project can be with my poor imagination.

Ah cool - good to know I was missing something.

Maybe someone can explain how we know the payment came from Slush and how we know it was generated from mining hardware owned by them?  In my drunken state I'm clearly missing how this is better proof than having a miner published on a pool's list of miners with the name 'Labcoin'.

I mean I could show a BTC address that regularly receives 5-7 BTC payments (I send them so I know it exists).  What mining power does that prove it has (it has none that I am aware of but does receive other transactions)?

Obviously if the address listed is getting 3 BTC every 10 minutes (and those transfers are directly from freshly mined coins) then it strongly suggests it has a bit over 10% of network hashing power but I sense that isn't the case.

EDIT: Let me clarify my point.  Right now my fund (LTC-ATF) has 77.209 BTC on Bitfunder.  If one of my investors asked me to prove it (which they are perfectly entitled to do) I'd screen-share, log in to Bitfunder and show them a balance of 77.209 BTC.  I would NOT show them a BTC address that had an incoming transaction of 77.209 BTC and ask them to accept that was from Bitfunder.  Do you see where I'm coming from?  There's a HUGE difference between proving you have X BTC and proving you have/had X BTC at a specific place/from a specific source.  Doubt anyone thinks Labcoin people couldn't RAISE 3 BTC (anyone with a net connection should be able to come up with 3 BTC in a few hours) - issue is whether they actually mined it.  And I'm not grasping where the proof is that it was mined - I'd happily stipulate that I agree they can control an address with 3 BTC in.

since the team is located in various countries, they could be coordinating for a official news release of mining. who knows? 

Probably because they're sick of all the haters. Here's what TheSwede said:


Which would imply they no longer have anything they feel they need to prove, and can rely on the blockchain to communicate for them. That will really be the case when we see another 24 blocks come in and slush sends it's next tx, unless they switched pools, stopped mining, or made less then their threshold.

Those might actually be attempts to manipulate share price, very poorly attempts..

Yeah, one does get the uneasy feeling that someone, somewhere is pulling the strings and laughing his bloody ass off.

May I know what do the first 3 transactions mean? There's a 0.0062166 and two 0.001 BTC went to the LC mining address. Thanks.

FTFY

I thought I was good at understanding people's behaviour before, but now I am totally lost. What is labcoin doing now?

If they are mining in a pool, is the name of the pool top secret? Is the hashing rate top secret, or they don't have any idea about their own hashing rate themselves? If they want the public to monitor their hashing rate, why not choose a pool showing hashing rate? If the 3 BTC really are mined by them, they should've joined the pool more than 12 hours ago. Why they wait until the panic selling happened to announce the address?

All these things are beyond my understanding. Only one word is left in my mind: unbelievable.

slush allows you to hold 5btc max so payouts would have to be frequent if labcoin is mining there

It's just their first payment.  The next one should come in when Slush gets 100 confirmations on it's next block:

http://mining.bitcoin.cz/stats/

Unless they stopped mining or the reward is less then their threshold, or if someone was trolling us by pointing their slush account at that address.

Basically when you mine in a shared pool, you get your portion of the block based on how much work you did compared to everyone else to earn it.
In this case, "someone" had mined 3.xxxx BTC worth on Slush and had it sent to LC's now official mining address.

So if it is LC, then they are mining. If not, someone just did it to make them appear to be mining to bank on a price rise.
We will know more as time goes by.

That is where the 3 btc comes from.

-Ukyo

when you mine in a pool, you set threshold payments so that after so much work, you will get paid X BTC (in this case, 3).  This is so you don't get 100,000 deposits of 1 satoshi each to your account.  If this 3 BTC payment repeats itself enough times, a hash rate can be calculated based on how long between payments.  That's the idea anyway.

edit: please correct me if wrong here?

A bit drunk?

Please GTFO off bitcointalk, have a couple more drinks and then come back. 

I'm a bit drunk but what significance does 3 BTC have here?

If you mine solo and find a block doesn't it still pay 25 BTC plus transactions?  If you mine in a pool then isn't what matters your rate of finding shares/hour?  I can't think of any reason why 3 BTC is relevant to anything - it's 100 GH/S mining for Y*X time or 1 GH/S mining for 100*Y*X time : it's exixtence says nothing about what X or Y is.

Quoted for the lulz. Love the phrasing.

Meanwhile, every announcement seems to take us down another rabbit hole...

not really, they can just set their threshold for 3btc+ and hold up payments, and then say " oh look, an opportunity to make 20 btc, and it only costs me 3 btc"