BFL will deliver ASIC devices before July 1st
Butterfly Labs aka BFL will deliver ASIC Bitcoin mining devices to their customers before 1st of July 2013. Devices must be in scope of at least +-10% of advertised performance in order to be accepted as valid.
Bet outcome: No
- Category:Bitcoin
- Bet started:1 year 9 months ago (15-03-2013)
- Bet closed: 1 year 5 months ago (26-06-2013)
- Resolved: 1 year 5 months ago (01-07-2013)
- Weighted No: 5`944`118
- Weighted Yes: 2`256`379
- Confirmed bets: 100 ( No: 40 / Yes: 60 )
- Histograph:
CONFIRMED BETS: 148.07 BTC
TIME | BET | WEIGHT | BTC IN | IN | BTC OUT | OUT | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
15-03-13 20:35 | Yes | 99`998 | 0.03000000 | 1DpLN | 0.00000000 | 13xg3 | |
15-03-13 20:35 | No | 99`998 | 0.07000000 | 1LjMz | 0.10465234 | 1F5xm | |
15-03-13 23:23 | No | 99`884 | 1.00000000 | 1EE2D | 1.49445774 | 1K4Fs | |
16-03-13 00:09 | No | 99`852 | 0.50000000 | 15MVG | 0.74714806 | 1DgRx | |
16-03-13 05:30 | Yes | 99`634 | 0.25000000 | 1GeSy | 0.00000000 | 1AUpr | |
16-03-13 05:47 | Yes | 99`622 | 0.10000000 | 1DquG | 0.00000000 | 18Aaq | |
16-03-13 05:47 | Yes | 99`622 | 1.25000000 | 1Lp92 | 0.00000000 | 1NfXM | |
17-03-13 15:42 | Yes | 98`239 | 0.06000000 | 1CWaZ | 0.00000000 | 19PDi | |
17-03-13 18:34 | Yes | 98`122 | 0.50000000 | 1C3wt | 0.00000000 | 1Cfni | |
20-03-13 11:30 | No | 95`473 | 0.20000000 | 12oPp | 0.29443605 | 15wnT | |
21-03-13 06:28 | Yes | 94`700 | 0.01000000 | 19A44 | 0.00000000 | 1KmBJ | |
21-03-13 18:51 | No | 94`194 | 20.00000000 | 1DXkE | 29.31441528 | 16tAo | |
21-03-13 19:14 | Yes | 94`178 | 0.10000000 | 12ZDK | 0.00000000 | 1Ltcp | |
22-03-13 03:17 | Yes | 93`850 | 0.20000000 | 1H69B | 0.00000000 | 1KJPb | |
22-03-13 21:02 | Yes | 93`126 | 0.50000000 | 1DGCc | 0.00000000 | 15tc4 | |
23-03-13 05:14 | Yes | 92`792 | 0.00001000 | 1CMv4 | 0.00000000 | 1GHbJ | |
23-03-13 23:01 | Yes | 92`066 | 0.20000000 | 18tii | 0.00000000 | 1BPFr | |
24-03-13 10:44 | Yes | 91`588 | 0.10000000 | 19sXG | 0.00000000 | 187Gb | |
24-03-13 11:11 | Yes | 91`570 | 5.00000000 | 1AqgF | 0.00000000 | 1E7hu | |
25-03-13 00:26 | Yes | 91`030 | 0.10000000 | 1Eje3 | 0.00000000 | 1BYEm | |
25-03-13 16:13 | Yes | 90`386 | 0.25000000 | 1JLwY | 0.00000000 | 1Bawg | |
26-03-13 00:21 | No | 90`054 | 10.00000000 | 197ox | 14.44811959 | 1P8H3 | |
26-03-13 03:47 | Yes | 89`914 | 1.00000000 | 14Gmu | 0.00000000 | 1CzCF | |
27-03-13 06:54 | No | 88`808 | 0.10000000 | 1KjAk | 0.14385191 | 1F7fC | |
28-03-13 05:48 | Yes | 87`874 | 0.20000000 | 1Kpnt | 0.00000000 | 1LZV9 | |
28-03-13 16:01 | No | 87`457 | 0.05000000 | 145uK | 0.07158479 | 143ZZ | |
28-03-13 17:25 | Yes | 87`399 | 2.00000000 | 1JTej | 0.00000000 | 1FCKX | |
28-03-13 20:11 | No | 87`287 | 0.30000000 | 1AWbU | 0.42925122 | 1JRBr | |
28-03-13 20:33 | Yes | 87`272 | 0.01000000 | 18JCu | 0.00000000 | 1AJ82 | |
29-03-13 05:06 | Yes | 86`923 | 4.00550000 | 19yzt | 0.00000000 | 1NfXM | |
29-03-13 06:00 | No | 86`887 | 0.01000000 | 1Ca8Z | 0.01428817 | 1C9Wy | |
29-03-13 06:00 | Yes | 86`887 | 0.60000000 | 1KNeM | 0.00000000 | 16Ub5 | |
29-03-13 11:28 | Yes | 86`663 | 1.00000000 | 1Mru6 | 0.00000000 | 1Dwqs | |
29-03-13 18:39 | Yes | 86`371 | 0.10000000 | 1N1qm | 0.00000000 | 1Psms | |
30-03-13 14:24 | Yes | 85`565 | 0.00800000 | 13WsW | 0.00000000 | 1AGoX | |
30-03-13 14:24 | Yes | 85`565 | 0.50000000 | 18rMV | 0.00000000 | 1DKVq | |
30-03-13 23:08 | No | 85`209 | 10.00000000 | 18E6H | 14.20342597 | 1GH1P | |
31-03-13 07:07 | Yes | 84`883 | 0.50000000 | 174Qf | 0.00000000 | 1HxC6 | |
31-03-13 08:22 | Yes | 84`832 | 0.25000000 | 1MC9z | 0.00000000 | 16iuM | |
31-03-13 09:07 | Yes | 84`801 | 1.00000000 | 13J9B | 0.00000000 | 19cRB | |
31-03-13 15:54 | Yes | 84`525 | 0.00400000 | 1361U | 0.00000000 | 1Danv | |
31-03-13 20:35 | Yes | 84`334 | 0.25000000 | 1FdjD | 0.00000000 | 19dn1 | |
01-04-13 09:32 | No | 83`805 | 0.01000000 | 1FgQt | 0.01413251 | 1HXcG | |
01-04-13 18:47 | Yes | 83`428 | 0.10000000 | 1BhW5 | 0.00000000 | 19dn1 | |
04-04-13 00:30 | No | 81`236 | 0.00440000 | 142H2 | 0.00616121 | 1Ki3s | |
04-04-13 02:41 | No | 81`147 | 11.00002233 | 19gGJ | 15.39813624 | 18d9Z | |
04-04-13 08:31 | No | 80`910 | 0.00100000 | 17ZT5 | 0.00139863 | 13EQa | |
05-04-13 07:16 | No | 79`982 | 4.00000000 | 1HzM1 | 5.57577587 | 1JJia | |
05-04-13 09:25 | Yes | 79`894 | 0.10000000 | 1Kpbx | 0.00000000 | 1Li5m | |
07-04-13 02:55 | Yes | 78`201 | 0.30000000 | 1Q7a1 | 0.00000000 | 1M37N | |
07-04-13 21:12 | No | 77`455 | 0.01000000 | 1AMsx | 0.01381181 | 18ofu | |
09-04-13 01:18 | No | 76`309 | 0.50000000 | 1EVqU | 0.68769685 | 135LG | |
09-04-13 15:07 | No | 75`746 | 0.04000000 | 19Q21 | 0.05490201 | 1NiuG | |
10-04-13 15:40 | Yes | 74`744 | 0.00920230 | 1Avv7 | 0.00000000 | 12fzH | |
13-04-13 02:46 | Yes | 72`333 | 0.09982308 | 19hjL | 0.00000000 | 1NASx | |
13-04-13 05:02 | Yes | 72`241 | 0.08219677 | 1CVUj | 0.00000000 | 1CjHy | |
15-04-13 07:24 | No | 70`187 | 0.81230000 | 1K62m | 1.09211700 | 1Ac8Y | |
15-04-13 14:39 | Yes | 69`891 | 0.01000000 | 15nR3 | 0.00000000 | 1Piwz | |
15-04-13 18:13 | No | 69`745 | 0.00114430 | 1BjAJ | 0.00153592 | 12Sm1 | |
17-04-13 14:15 | Yes | 67`949 | 0.99950000 | 1FcRQ | 0.00000000 | 1B1vY | |
19-04-13 07:21 | No | 66`272 | 0.30000000 | 1L4gv | 0.39741074 | 1FKg6 | |
19-04-13 22:28 | Yes | 65`655 | 0.20000000 | 1DMRv | 0.00000000 | 1BhXQ | |
21-04-13 01:09 | Yes | 64`567 | 0.36967796 | 1NMY7 | 0.00000000 | 1FY8V | |
21-04-13 05:29 | Yes | 64`391 | 0.20000000 | 1FcWx | 0.00000000 | 1DzCh | |
23-04-13 04:35 | Yes | 62`469 | 0.17281086 | 1GSV2 | 0.00000000 | 1NASx | |
24-04-13 00:32 | Yes | 61`656 | 1.00000000 | 13yvS | 0.00000000 | 132UT | |
24-04-13 00:32 | No | 61`656 | 0.63000000 | 19XWY | 0.81987549 | 12MBQ | |
24-04-13 02:00 | Yes | 61`596 | 1.50000000 | 15v4t | 0.00000000 | 132UT | |
24-04-13 09:26 | Yes | 61`293 | 0.00005700 | 1KXRH | 0.00000000 | 131ct | |
26-04-13 17:30 | No | 59`005 | 0.01000000 | 1KgAj | 0.01288000 | 13VjX | |
26-04-13 20:50 | No | 58`870 | 0.05000000 | 1Miah | 0.06436595 | 1JJSp | |
26-04-13 23:12 | Yes | 58`773 | 0.50000000 | 12Cbf | 0.00000000 | 1KnJo | |
27-04-13 02:31 | Yes | 58`638 | 0.20000000 | 1JPov | 0.00000000 | 1DzCh | |
27-04-13 18:46 | Yes | 57`974 | 0.08000000 | 13kUr | 0.00000000 | 17NDb | |
29-04-13 21:48 | Yes | 55`893 | 0.75536442 | 1A8qD | 0.00000000 | 19xWC | |
30-04-13 07:30 | Yes | 55`497 | 0.00020000 | 1Ba8J | 0.00000000 | 1PduM | |
30-04-13 21:40 | Yes | 54`919 | 0.10000000 | 1PFx5 | 0.00000000 | 1M1Ro | |
01-05-13 05:44 | Yes | 54`590 | 0.05000000 | 1NAZJ | 0.00000000 | 1Mo5z | |
01-05-13 09:38 | Yes | 54`431 | 0.00100000 | 1NqZD | 0.00000000 | 1PL8v | |
04-05-13 01:52 | Yes | 51`811 | 0.10000000 | 1DUBM | 0.00000000 | 13ZCq | |
07-05-13 06:22 | Yes | 48`691 | 0.00004960 | 1CMv4 | 0.00000000 | 1GHbJ | |
13-05-13 01:02 | No | 43`034 | 2.00000000 | 1MUjH | 2.41468092 | 14iJW | |
17-05-13 19:04 | No | 38`383 | 0.04708024 | 13BYK | 0.05573598 | 1JuNG | |
20-05-13 07:11 | No | 35`930 | 0.00200000 | 1MTrt | 0.00234292 | 1McE5 | |
25-05-13 15:05 | No | 30`713 | 0.01000000 | 1NYLE | 0.01145114 | 1PZ5f | |
26-05-13 12:03 | No | 29`858 | 16.00000000 | 1MgDk | 18.25273466 | 1bZhs | |
26-05-13 12:54 | No | 29`823 | 0.00100973 | 1MTrt | 0.00115171 | 1McE5 | |
31-05-13 07:29 | No | 25`149 | 0.10000000 | 16wxu | 0.11170134 | 1MvSk | |
01-06-13 00:26 | No | 24`457 | 0.32400000 | 15DuW | 0.36077999 | 1PJv1 | |
03-06-13 12:01 | No | 22`027 | 0.01000000 | 1FmLG | 0.01101245 | 1JCKt | |
05-06-13 06:51 | Yes | 20`280 | 0.24523372 | 18xvR | 0.00000000 | 1FEiW | |
11-06-13 06:09 | No | 14`434 | 0.01000000 | 1Jg8N | 0.01062897 | 1JVTC | |
11-06-13 20:56 | No | 13`831 | 0.85000000 | 1LvQw | 0.90087469 | 12i5V | |
19-06-13 12:08 | No | 6`358 | 12.00000000 | 1NFT3 | 12.26532806 | 1ETQX | |
20-06-13 23:44 | Yes | 4`906 | 0.07000000 | 1JCDV | 0.00000000 | 17pYp | |
21-06-13 23:17 | Yes | 3`945 | 0.00100000 | 14Vae | 0.00000000 | 1PX17 | |
22-06-13 11:20 | Yes | 3`454 | 3.00000000 | 1LuSp | 0.00000000 | 1KLNS | |
23-06-13 11:49 | No | 2`455 | 14.80000000 | 1CYNX | 14.83550254 | 1KCQ8 | |
24-06-13 11:29 | No | 1`490 | 10.00000000 | 1AHDT | 9.97525149 | 1KAke | |
25-06-13 22:02 | No | 80 | 2.00000000 | 1Hn2s | 1.98080806 | 1ENdh |
DISCUSSION
#366: Anonymous 16-03-13 at 00:11
Great opportunities now!
#369: Anonymous 16-03-13 at 09:05
It’s easy money, obviously put it on "No". Watch those BFL babies cry.
#400: Anonymous 20-03-13 at 14:46
lol hopelessly late
#401: Anonymous 20-03-13 at 16:15
It’s not a bet, it’s a robbery. The -10% requirements REQUIRES BFL to underperform within that tiny range for the bet to resolve to yes.
I’m creating another sane bet.
#402: Anonymous 20-03-13 at 16:58
I read it as -10% up, so the Single would have to be approx. 54GH/s or up. Yes, it’s not clear.
#405: Anonymous 21-03-13 at 07:02
It probably means +-10% just like all the others.
#408: Anonymous 21-03-13 at 11:24
> It probably means +-10% just like all the others.
There is no reason in this insane word that he would have had to edit the bet test, if you think so. This bet is a scam for fools, full point. (and i’m completely against BFL, i betted 180BTC against them on the other bet).
#410: Anonymous 21-03-13 at 18:14
Fixed.
#455: Anonymous 28-03-13 at 05:44
Bet the farm on yes….
#457: anonymous 28-03-13 at 10:47
i would bet but the listing is not specific enough…does it mean atleast 1 of ALL their units will be shipped or delivered or just one unit of one type to one person by that date?? lamee!! bump this trick..
#458: Anonymous 28-03-13 at 12:12
Dont care specifics. BFL will never ship anything.
#462: BFL_Josh 28-03-13 at 14:57
Rigs are ready to be assembled and shipped by end of April. We are just doing final chip testing this week.
#468: Anonymous 28-03-13 at 20:07
Why would you assemble them all and get them ready for packaging and THEN do your chip testing?
#472: Anonymous 29-03-13 at 06:46
Good news: It’s gonna ship soon.
#473: Anonymous 29-03-13 at 06:48
Bad news: Performance probably not valid +-10%.
#475: BFL_Josh 29-03-13 at 10:50
Having some problems with the FCC. Some electricity safety tests are required before we are able to submit documents for approval.
#477: Anonymous 29-03-13 at 15:36
Does "performance" just mean GHps, or does it also take energy efficiency into account?
#478: Anonymous 29-03-13 at 16:10
What do you think?
#480: BFL_Josh 29-03-13 at 20:53
Had a fire at shop today. First chips are destroyed but new chips are on their way from the foundry. Still shipping by the end of April.
#482: Anonymous 30-03-13 at 02:39
Ship to overseas customers already! They don’t care about your FCC
#483: Anonymous 30-03-13 at 03:38
BFL further delaying shipments in order to comply with pointless local regulations.
As a buyer I say, lesson learned! Next time buy Chinese
#488: Nikola Tesla 30-03-13 at 18:00
BFL ASICs were the secret project I was working on just before I died. This bet will be no, as each single will reach 100GH/s and only use 10W.
#498: Anonymous 31-03-13 at 01:33
They’ve already said it will excede the advertised power consumption, who would bet on yes??
#503: Anonymous 31-03-13 at 12:24
Maybe they believe that BFL will have the power consumption issue fully addressed before July.
Pass some of that over here…
#510: Anonymous 01-04-13 at 04:38
What does it mean by +- 10%? If BFL does ship 2 singles to customer who ordered one in order to accomplish the same hashrate, does it mean yes or no?
#511: BFL_Josh 01-04-13 at 14:12
Hope you enjoyed our April Fool’s joke this morning. We will still deliver by July 1st though. The power requirements are double and the hash rate is is half. So basically we are 4x our original power specs. Don’t worry. We will have it figured out by July!
#538: Luke_Sr 04-04-13 at 00:30
My boy gonna get ‘r done!! I bet a bucket ‘o bitcoins on it!
#541: Bowjob 04-04-13 at 03:37
I like how this is more popular than the May bet.
#546: Black 04-04-13 at 17:16
They just doubled thier price and lowered the hashrate. I would say that this bet is a win for no
#549: BFL_Josh 04-04-13 at 22:44
We were attacked by aliens therefore we will ship by 2016. Also I totally am a BFL employee…
#550: ThickAsThieves 05-04-13 at 03:31
"Advertised" specs have changed. So, this bet might be a Yes now.
#551: Anonymous 05-04-13 at 03:41
loltroll
#552: Anonymous 05-04-13 at 08:21
Advertised at the time bet was made. Ulterior changes don’t matter.
#588: BFL_Josh 07-04-13 at 22:35
We’ll be shipping any minute now.
#608: Anonymous 08-04-13 at 23:46
The only "advertised" spec is the hash rate. Power usage has always been an estimate, and is not by any definition "advertised".
Nice try though.
#629: hmmm 10-04-13 at 00:22
why Butterflylabs double prices now? and lowed the speed from e.g. 30 GHS TO 25? I think Butterflylabs is big scam!
#635: German 10-04-13 at 11:49
Butterflylabs, why you double the price? I want buy some stuff from you, but now I am very sceptic. Are you scam like ARMSDEPOT on Darknet? Please give an answer- i dont trust you!
#637: Anonymous 10-04-13 at 12:00
BFL NEVER SHIP ONE PIECES TO YOU! WHICH ONE IS SO STUPID AND SELL MACHINES THAT MAKE BIG MONEY?
BFL WILL MINE ALL SELF; SO THEY GET FASTER RICH. Think about! ITS BIG SCAM-THEY EARNS YOUR MONEY TOO AND MINES BITCOINS SELF.
#702: BFL_Josh 19-04-13 at 15:45
Hey folks, please see our 5GH unit demo here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uez9AVfDQIg we’ll be shipping these puppies out by the end of May, probably earlier.
#724: BFL_Josh 21-04-13 at 16:40
Hey folks, please see our first delivery of Jalepenos unboxing video here: http://youtu.be/_6mmTRheUzg
#738: Anonymous 23-04-13 at 09:46
Given that the devices are now shipping and are within -/+ 10% of advertised specs, when will this bet be paying out?
#739: anonymousg64 23-04-13 at 10:52
this bet resolves to no.
people have based their orders on the hashrate and power consumption promise, they failed on both premise. They also failed on formfactor.
#740: Anonymous 23-04-13 at 11:28
The bet specifically says, "Devices must be in scope of at least +-10% of advertised performance in order to be accepted as valid." The advertised performance is "Processing Power: 5 GH/s (+/- 10% running variance)".
Power consumption is completely irrelevant to this bet as power consumption hasn’t been advertised. Therefore, the bet quite clearly resolves to "yes".
#741: Anonymous 23-04-13 at 13:52
ThickAsThieves changing the advertised specs does nothing, bet goes by the specs at the time it was started.
#743: Anonymous 23-04-13 at 15:52
Performance must be as it was originally advertised and must include power consumption.
#750: Anonymous 24-04-13 at 00:00
You can see what they previously advertised using waybackwhen machine, https://products.butterflylabs.com/homepage/4-5gh-bitcoin-miner.html
As you can see, their previous advertisement was, "Processing Power: 4.5 GH/s (+/- 10% running variance)"
You can claim power is part of the advertised performance as much as you want, but unless you can prove it, then it means nothing.
I’ve shown that the current and previously advertised performance never mentioned power.
#752: Anonymous 24-04-13 at 00:02
So, what where the original advertised specs? Can you prove it?
#755: Anonymous 24-04-13 at 00:41
And the advertised performance: Jalapeno – 4.5gh/s 4.5w, Single SC – 60 GH/s 60w, MiniRig SC – 1,500 GH/s 1,500w. Sauce: http://i.imgur.com/pXyy3.png and http://i.imgur.com/5MBoA.png
#758: Anonymous 24-04-13 at 01:07
Screenshots are not proof as they can be easily doctored.
Besides, they’re not even advertisements.
#778: Anonymous 25-04-13 at 08:56
Forum posts != product advertisement. See the wayback machine for the actual product page, where no wattage is mentioned (still not mentioned to date). The product pages were always updated to reflect latest GH/s and prices: The only two advertised specs of the products
#783: CheckIt 25-04-13 at 13:36
Well, the original advertised specs were 3.5 GH/s for the jalapeno… 40GH/s for the Single and 1000GH/s for the mini-rig. From this we can say that the mini single would be 20GH/s.
#784: Anonymous 25-04-13 at 14:56
The wayback machine specs say the dimensions will be 100.32 mm x 100.32 mm x 17.1 mm. The current Jalapenos are significantly taller than 17.1mm so on size alone they’re out of the 10% spec range.
#785: Anonymous 25-04-13 at 14:57
Also, the wayback machine specs say it will include 2 USB cables and the current spec says 1, so that’s more than 10% off as well.
#786: Anonymous 25-04-13 at 15:13
Do you people not understand English or something? Size and included accessories have nothing to do with performance.
Due to the way this bet is worded, the only thing that needs to be considered in GH/s.
#793: Anonymous 25-04-13 at 22:58
Everyone stop being retarded. The Gh/s and the wattage are the relevant metrics. They count as originally advertised, not as modified.
Anyone trying to claim surprise once bet resolves on either of these two points will simply be laughed at.
#794: Anonymous 25-04-13 at 23:05
I start thinking that including performance at all was a bad idea. Why didn’t the submitter simply bet on whether BFL deliver ASIC device or not?
#795: Anonymous 25-04-13 at 23:24
so when is this bet going to be resolved?
#799: Anonymous 26-04-13 at 10:14
Because BFL has a history of displaying boxes of fans at industry events under the pretense they’re showcasing their product, that’s why.
#812: BFL_Josh 27-04-13 at 18:41
testing I can use whatever name I want
#823: Anonymous 29-04-13 at 14:27
So, the first Japaleno’s have been delivered and are running at the specified hash rate. Is this going to be revolved?
#851: Anonymous 01-05-13 at 03:36
The May bet resolved to "no" due to the owners conspiring on some IRC channel to include power consumption who then placed a bet on "no". The owners are using a forum post from 2012 as proof that power consumption was part of the advertised spec, despite it being pointed out to them that there were also forum posts made before the bet was created claiming that the power consumption target could not be met.
Anyone who has bet "yes" is going to be scammed out of their rightful winnings.
Check here for further info, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=192122.0
#852: Anonymous 01-05-13 at 03:39
In those forum posts the claimed power consumption was 7.5W per chip.
The owners are scammers.
#854: Anonymous 01-05-13 at 21:04
bitbet owners are scammers. they angled this bet, never using this site again.
#858: Anonymous 02-05-13 at 03:46
BEWARE YES VOTERS: bitbet.us is breaking their own policies and already ripped off the "yes" voters on the May 1st bet, see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=192122.0
#859: Anonymous 02-05-13 at 03:59
Should this bet just be taken apart and given back to the betters? If I pretend that the May bet’s outcome was valid, then this bet’s outcome will have to be the same. It’s selectively picky, so Yes can’t win.
#860: Anonymous 02-05-13 at 06:29
first and last time I use this site. Seems like the rules are meant to be broken for these people. I’m on the winning side here but I SHOULD loose the few milicoins I did bet
#861: Anonymous 02-05-13 at 07:20
According to the email from BitBet, the outcome of this bet has already been decided apparently. Those who voted "yes" have already lost.
#862: Anonymous 02-05-13 at 13:51
Seriously? Am i being scammed?! I was thinking for months i might get scammed by BFL, but the truth is that bitbet.us is the scam? Am never betting here again, and will make sure that everybody i know won’t too. Unbelievable.
#863: Stef 02-05-13 at 13:52
This bet should be cancelled and money sent back to all betters. The bet is unclear.
#864: Anonymous 02-05-13 at 16:02
The owner of this site is a scammer, this bet was already decided as soon as it was made with the ambiguous advertised performance.
This becomes a bigger problem when the OWNER HIMSELF placed a 20 btc bet on no. Winners or losers, this is shady and unethical. This bet should of never be made according to their policy and bets should all be refunded.
#866: Anonymous 02-05-13 at 17:41
BFL has announced they started shipping May 1st.
So the bet is already decided?
The +-10% is the real catch and the reason I didn’t participate in any of the BFL bets.
#867: Anonymous 02-05-13 at 17:42
Now that BFL is finally shipping are we gonna run out of bets?? Omg!!
#869: Anonymous 02-05-13 at 18:13
Here’s a quote from the BitBet owner. "Neither bet was ambiguous at the time it was allowed. The only thing that changed is that BFL found yet another way to scam. Betsofbitco.in empowered this scam (which comes as little surprise, they were in BFL’s pocket anyway, as detailed other places on this forum). BitBet did not."
So, the owner has a grudge against BFL and bet 20 BTC on "no".
Also, if you value your privacy, don’t email these scamming cunts, as they’ll post the email online on their shitty blog, as they did here, http://polimedia.us/trilema/2013/i-am-the-best-customer-rep-in-the-world
#870: Anonymous 03-05-13 at 04:33
the immaturity in this site’s many actions regarding this bet proves its directors deserve no trust. A shame indeed
#878: Maarten 05-05-13 at 19:03
Well, since bets can still be placed, there can be no doubts whatsoever: if one of the ASIC devices currently advertised on the BFL homepage (which DON’T include power specs) is delivered on time the bet should resolve to "Yes"
#880: Anonymous 05-05-13 at 19:22
Maarten, so naive.
#885: Anonymous 06-05-13 at 21:07
So Bitbet loses any sort of legitimacy because one of the owners is prejudiced against BFL?
#902: Anonymous 09-05-13 at 20:28
Bitbet loses legitimacy because they let their prejudice against BFL decide a bet. That means that all bets are subject to their opinion, whether it’s correct or not.
#906: Anonymous 12-05-13 at 02:11
Why is this bet still going?? They’ve already delivered haven’t they?
#907: Anonymous 12-05-13 at 16:03
You can see by the amounts going to last ‘yes’ bets that poor people are idiots. Also they are gambling small monies just in case if wrong button gets pressed and its resolved to ‘Yes’.
#910: Anonymous 12-05-13 at 16:24
Dude obviously bets are subject to the arbiter’s opinion. How the fuck else would it work.
#921: Anonymous 15-05-13 at 02:14
I don’t know, maybe they could be based on provable facts instead of the corrupt whims of self-righteous, elitist, racist operators who are clearly biased against BFL.
#922: Anonymous 15-05-13 at 04:45
like I said, including "performance" was a bad idea.
#944: Anonymous 18-05-13 at 18:52
In case you’re wondering how this bet will turn out, it’s clearly been decided in advance:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=192122
#953: Anonymous 19-05-13 at 20:39
this shows how shady bitbet is. they just lost a customer and this is cleary -EV for them.
#1038: Anonymous 14-06-13 at 22:29
they got on a hot ground. any way they decide this, people will be pissed. even if they canceled the bet now, it won’t be good.
#1042: Anonymous 15-06-13 at 01:12
heh, this bet is a good reminder how much of a scam bfl really is.
#1064: Anonymous 22-06-13 at 12:27
Did they even actually deliver anything to customers yet?
#1065: Dave 22-06-13 at 23:35
Deliver anything with advertised power specs? lolno
#1066: Anonymous 24-06-13 at 03:59
BFL are currently shipping all their products but this bet is going to be resolved to "No". This is because the owners of this site are dumb fuckers who don’t understand the difference between performance (Gh/s) and efficiency (Gh/J). Seriously, how dumb does someone have to be to think that performance and performance per Watt are the same thing?
#1067: Anonymous 24-06-13 at 06:13
It’s going to be resolved to "No" because the owners of this site bet "Yes". That’s bitbet in a nutshell.
#1069: Anonymous 24-06-13 at 11:20
I’d expect "performance per watt" to be part of "performance", the clue being in the name.
#1073: Anonymous 26-06-13 at 16:13
>This is because the owners of this site are dumb fuckers
No you douche, it’s because BFL DID NOT MEET ITS OWN SPECS!
I hope you order (and pay for!) double cheeseburgers and receive single potato chips for the rest of your fucking life.
Dumbass.
#1076: Anonymous 27-06-13 at 16:54
Yeah, distance and velocity are also the same. They must be because distance is measured in meters and velocity in meters per second.
BFL are shipping devices that meet the specs listed on their website. Power consumption is not listed on their website.
#1077: Anoymous 27-06-13 at 18:22
So, I start shipping oranges instead of apples. I’d update my website too. Congrats on spotting it’s no longer listed on their website, because, they could not admit, that they couldnt deliver on it.
#1078: Anonymous 27-06-13 at 18:23
BFL standard fail
#1082: Anonymous 28-06-13 at 14:21
>So, I start shipping oranges instead of apples
A more apt description would be that they’re shipping a 500 HP, 200 MPH Ferrari that gets 10 MPG instead of 30 MPG. Nobody cares.
Bottom line, the "advertised performance" did not include any measure of power usage. Performance constitutes GH/s, and BFL have (finally) delivered units of all types which meet their advertised performance.
#1085: Anonymous 29-06-13 at 01:34
Mining equipment is a tool, like a semi, not a cock extender, like a Ferrari.