u/combatcovid19global

I know a lot of people here have been told it's too late. You get the same templated replies from the Support Team. Your post-marked objection was ignored. Japanese law firms turned you away because they're overloaded with local claimants. It feels like the door is shut.

I'm posting because I was in a similar situation and found a way through. I'm not a lawyer, just a creditor who eventually got legal help that worked.

There is a rarely used procedural avenue in Japan that allows the Tokyo District Court to review a rejected claim if you can show that the trustee failed to consider material evidence during the original assessment. This isn't about arguing with the trustee or the Support Team. It's a formal petition to the 20th Civil Division.

The key is proving that the trustee's decision rested solely on internal database records while contemporaneous evidence, like Mt. Gox support emails acknowledging a security breach, or IP/geolocation data showing unauthorized access, was never weighed. Under Japanese civil rehabilitation law, that can constitute a procedural error that the court has the power to correct, even after deadlines.

I can't share legal details publicly, but after I connected with an English solicitor who works with a Tokyo-based co-counsel, they successfully petitioned to have my claim reinstated. I'm now back on the list and have received interim distributions. It wasn't free, there were court filing fees, translation, notarisation, and a court bond, but the legal team worked on a pure contingency basis, so I paid nothing for their time. They only got paid if I recovered.

If you have genuine grounds, especially evidence of a hack or unreviewed support correspondence, it's worth having someone who knows this specific court process take a look. I'm happy to pass along the contact details of the firm that helped me if you DM me. I don't gain anything from this; I just know how hopeless it feels and want to pay it forward.

Edit: A lot of DMs asking the same thing. They do not charge legal fees upfront. You only pay the unavoidable third-party costs (court, translation, bond). And they won't take your case unless they genuinely believe you have a viable petition. So you've got nothing to lose by asking.

I absolutely love this open-source community and the AxeOS ecosystem. It is the best way to learn the mechanics of mining. However, I want to open up a discussion about the realities of trying to scale these units into a larger home setup.

Lately, I have noticed that once you try to run more than three or four of these boards together (especially the newer BM1370 Turbo builds), you hit a massive wall with physical logistics.

Here are the main bottlenecks I am seeing:

1. The 5V Power Drop:
Running multiple boards usually means daisy-chaining power or buying massive 5V server supplies. The voltage drop across cheap cables causes random reboots, and finding high-quality 5V rails that do not overheat is becoming a real challenge.

2. Thermal Density:
The J/TH efficiency looks great on paper for a single chip. But when you put five of them on a desk, the ambient heat forces the tiny fans to scream at 100 percent, and the efficiency curve drops as the chips thermal throttle.

3. Cable Management:
Having five different power cables and five separate IP addresses to manage is fun for a weekend project, but it becomes a nightmare for long-term stability.

For those of you running clusters, how are you managing the heat and power issues? More importantly, at what total hashrate do you think the DIY open-source model stops making sense, forcing a home miner to look at larger commercial machines?

I would love to hear your thoughts on where the "ceiling" is for Bitaxe scaling.