Bitcoin Forum

Can a cryptocoin survive if a dev remains anonymous?
I do not think so. What's your opinion?

Well if you know anything about btc, you'll know that the real identity of great Satoshi Nakamoto is unknown yet it is still the most successful cryptocurrency in terms of market capitalization. So yes a project can and will thrive without the real identity of its developer(s). It just depend on whether the project solves a real life problem or does something relevant.

Bitcoin developers are unknown. But it is the most successful cryptocurrency. But developers of all the other coins that I personally know are known. And I think developers of all the coins that will be created in future, must be known. Because no one will trust unknown developers as there are many scam projects.

Well it happen now and still cryptocoin like bitcoin is an example of cryptocoin still functioning for more than so many years. So i guess it could survive because no one has interfered on the cryptocurrency system even the government system. They are just only giving some advises regarding on this kind of investment. As we all know that all of us here who had join in the forum are all anonymous and what have we observe in this forum? well we are still free and continue in doing business so meaning we still survive and we will because some of the members here are depending now on bitcoin as their ways of getting another source for income. BTW i like your merit points.

Absolutely !

What  difference does it really make! You're right it is good that we are unaware of the founder of the bitcoin and there is no much chaos. Had Satoshi revealed his identity in today's date, there would have been a lot of critics opposing him. The crux of everything is that there is no need for the owner to be disclosed. Who is bothered about the owner until the system is working perfectly well.

So the thing that really matters is what the project is and how well it goes.

The identity of any developer is only important if you need to trust them.

What do you think about bitcoin, the initial developer is anonymous and still is revolutionized and created a new market, unless the project is aimed to get money from investors then the situation changes, if the developer is coming up with great ideas and if he really wants privacy, then he can remain anonymous and there is nothing wrong with it, we must not mix these with ICO and a developed coin.

Ever heard of Bitcoin?

OK, it may be reassuring to know the lead dev in some cases, though it really means nothing if the code is open source. Most of the time it is simply unnecessary. Particularly if the coin is decentralized, which should be a goal of any serious crypto project.

Yes it can! Bitcoin is the most popular example of it. It is a common phenomena that bitcoin has been created by someone called Satoshu Nakamoto but no one knows him for sure. We have seen numerous people claiming themselves as Satoshi but could not prove anything for their claims. So it is one of the biggest mistries of cryptocurrency world but still bitcoin didn't only survive but remained as number one since the inception. In crypto world, only merit matters.

When the cryptocurrency starts being used as a currency - it does not matter who created it, but it only matters hows successfully it can be used. Like it does not matter who drew the pictures on dollar banknotes. But for a currency to become usable there must get some critical mass of trust in it. And this trust can be more easily acumulated by an established developer or even a group of developers. So I think that despite the Bitcoin example, in the future none-anonymous cryptos have better chances.

Who wrote the Internet protocol? How can you use a protocol if you don't know the developer who wrote it? Easy, you are doing it right now.

It can survive if it was established it's market already and it has a bigger market cap. We don't know even who's the real Satoshi but we are remaining as a strong community with bitcoin. That's why a coin can survive even the dev/s are anonymous but if they will leave and abandon the coin that's a different story.

Well it happened to bitcoin and it is a successful cryptocurrency but I do no think it could happen to other coins and new incoming coins because bitcoin is different to them and at this time where there are many scammers, I don't think any coin will survive if dev is anonymous.

yes of course it can survive. look at bitcoin. we dont know who satoshi nakomoto is but bitcoin survived.

there is also komodo coin, team is anonymous because the coin itself is anonymous. And KMD is a very strong coin

Development Team need to be public since people are trying to background check them in order to say their project is not a scam, this is a common theme for the project, but if you want all your team members to be anonymous, you need a big plan in order to achieve a big achievement. Since most of the people only buy token from projects they know the person behind is trustworthy. (This theme don't apply to BTC anymore)

When we are talking about the developers which are from the existing coins,these projects can easily survive despite of being anonymous,but if we are talkign about these new ICOs which has anonymous developers? i doubt it because most of the investors nowdays arent going to take the risk of putting their money into something that they arent sure of because 95% of these new projects are scams.

You don't think so, even though Bitcoin has survived for years with the dev being anonymous. You're not making sense.
It doesn't matter who the dev is as long as the code can be viewed and analysed and the dev doesn't have any power. If the coin is premined and the dev owns a large chunk of it while remaining anonymous, it's going to be very hard to gain enough confidence for the coin to become popular. If he doesn't I see no reason not to trust the project.

Yes, it can relatively.
and any guarantee it can survive if a dev is well known by you or anyone ?? No!
but, I agree that if projects should be developed by people who are known by public to minimize chance of fraudulent that can disserve investors and distrust issue in crypto-world.

A cryocurrency cannot be successful if developers are anonymous. And bitcoin is exception as the first cryptocurrency.  Who will pay money to a person or a team which is anonymous?

Thats the point if Satoshi Nakamoto remimain unknown for the next more years I think the probability of this currency to survive will be lesser the fact that we dont know how can we make Bitcoins which is only known by the mentioned name, I think this will challenge us to make this forum lasts longer cause how could managers pay the workers if there's bo more single Bitcoin to be spread and distribute, thats kinda unexplainable scenario for me if it happens.

It will be better if we knew the developers when we invested or using particular crypto, if we knew the developers it will be easier for us to give suggestions, but its not a must for us to know the developers, most of the people don't really care about the developers and the coin still success, if the coin already got a solid feature then the developers existence won't be too affected

It's better that we always think in a positive way, and I believe that it will always survive and develop well for the future.

I guess it could survive because no one has interfered on the cryptocurrency system even the government system. They are just only giving some advises regarding on this kind of investment. As we all know that all of us here who had join in the forum are all anonymous and what have we observe in this forum? well we are still free and continue in doing business so meaning we still survive and we will because some of the members here are depending now on bitcoin as their ways of getting another source for income

Satoshi nakamoto is the chief designer of BTC and has not been seen in the world before!

I believe that the survival time of an encrypted currency is not related to the designer, but mainly depends on the application of the digital cryptographic currency.

It will survive and survival depends on the demand and transaction of the coins and not on the popularity of the developer. Look at Bitcoin, the identity of Satoshi Nakamoto is still unknown until these days, but through the demand and high transactions of bitcoin, it is still surviving and the most famous coin,

We actually know who did it.

Department of Defense, ARPANET used packet switching to allow multiple computers to communicate on a single network. The technology continued to grow in the 1970s after scientists Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf developed Transmission Control Protocol and Internet Protocol, or TCP/IP, a communications model that set standards for how data could be transmitted between multiple networks. ARPANET adopted TCP/IP on January 1, 1983, and from there researchers began to assemble the “network of networks” that became the modern Internet.

That said, you are right about the identity of the creator being irrelevant. Bitcoin proves that you don't need to have a known creator and be successful.

Yes. And Bitcoin is a very true and appropriate example of how a coin may survive with anonymous dev. The reason is the value and benefit the coin and its system may bring to potential clients and the benefits that are there.

If it's a fully legit coin, ie not one with a ridiculous or secret premine and fully open source, then a real developer puts it together and sends it out into the world. Then it's the rest of the world's business to take it and run with it.

If you're talking ICOs, bank backing, private funding, back doors, then the coin is likely to be hammered by regulators at some point unless it complies from the beginning and someone anonymous trying to maintain a large amount of control over something that isn't in spirit supposed to be controlled will probably come unstuck.

it definitely can because it has evolved to such a level where in it has moved passed the level where any one person can influence it , fact is we are using this technology and we see it definitely has a role to play so it will outlive whoever created it , the creator's identity is not necessary because at the end of the day bitcoins is self sustaining and dosent need anyone to "nurse" /nourish it anymore ....it has morphed into its own identity now and satoshi is really not needed anymore, kudos to satoshi though , obviously a genius among men.

Actually since from the start when satoshi nakamoto,created this crypto technology its still remains anonymous the personality of creator of this cryptocurrency system,even until now we dont know the true identity of this person,and  this bitcoin survive  now many centuries,so there's no reason that this cryptocoin could not survive with the development  remains anonymous,therefore this progressive happen now of digital currency is the living present,thats its still survive in terms of investment .

yes I think it's should remain anonymous, so why reveal the real identity?
there is no reason, even these are p2p project full decentralized open source!

the crypto-coin will survive as long as anyone develops it, even though dev is an anonymous even though dev blurry crypto coin will keep it running while still there developing it. that's the thing I've met.