Bitcoin Forum

I think both Technology and Marketing are essential.

Right now I am evaluating two projects. One has great tech but a small community and very little marketing. The other project has a larger community and fancy marketing materials  but its underlying technology is not as strong.  

Which project should I support? Is it easier to fix broken tech or implement an effective marketing plan?

Both if you don't want just a P&D.

Marketing to speculators if you want a P&D.

Both was also going to be my answer. In the long term marketing should be easier to fix than poor cryptography so if I had to choose one over the other I would choose the project with better tech.

I would say the small community with little marketing because that means you are getting in early and it has room to grow by starting there marketing and growing there community. Especially if you feel there tech is very strong.

The one with the larger community and has already marketed may already be at the peak of its growth especiallt if its tech is not very good. The pump may already be over.

These thaughts are based on the limited description you give only. Can you say exactly what "projects" you are talking about?

Please distinguish marketing from promotion. Most of you would be referring to promotion to the speculator community, as the chosen marketing strategy. But there may be other marketing strategies which are superior and have greater real adoption. So far most altcoins have been merely promoted to speculators as the sole marketing strategy (perhaps DOGECOIN was an exception, maybe others).

I am trying to decide between AEON and DASH. AEON does not even have a website yet and DASH has well funded marketing efforts in multiple languages. At first glance DASH seemed like the obvious choice.

However multiple BTC core developers (and highly respected cryptographers) have said positive things about CryptoNote. To my knowledge exactly 0 BTC core developers have said anything positive about DarkSend.

Comparing deceit & technological ineptitude (Dash) to interesting technology without a future (Cryptonote/RingCT)[1] means there is no distinction on the long-term future from a technology impact standpoint (presuming that characterization is accurate[1]).

Be careful with trusting the opinion of the BTC core devs, since they managed to allow Bitcoin to end up in a Tragedy of the Commons on block chain size and economics of mining. They are smart on technology, but apparently clueless about economics and marketing positioning.

Then again I am not appealing to authority, as you have no good reason to trust my acumen/opinion either.

[1] Start reading from this post forward: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1219023.msg13636077#msg13636077

I agree about DOGE being the best marketed alt coin so far (with adoption and use as the goal).

Both are critical to the success of a project, but thus far marketing competence has been lax at best.

I'm planning to drop a full on manifesto and strategy for eMunie in the next week or so, its 20k words / 60 pages of intense dissection of how we intend to take the mass market.

The problem is that generally tech guys are not good marketers and marketers are not good tech guys, thankfully I've been successful at both so maybe my doc will serve to educate a little also :)

What is more important ?
Repeating the same question(s) asked here infinity for years ?
or
Making another topic to ask again ?

Aren't small community signals crappy tech?

I observe that also.

I am looking forward to your document. I have always thought I will join the best project, even if it isn't mine, especially if there is nothing I can add of unique value with my own project.

Not necessarily, but that almost surely signals crappy marketing and/or simply bad communication practices.

How do you measure the size of the community? By number of sockpuppet accounts posting in official threads?

A gut intuition based on reading quality comments in official threads?

Endorsement by Hero members?

So far the consensus seems to be that BOTH tech and marketing are essential. Good feedback so far.

The number of non-zero accounts in cryptocurrency ?

Seeing the title, Doge vs NXT came to mind.

That can be Sybil attacked unless these are connected to verifiable identities.

Good technology have there own marketing by there own customers. People who spread the word is the most successful campaign.

So viral adoption would be an indicator of a good investment, same as for DOGECOIN?

Imo, not really.  But it could be.  What if merchants slowly start accepting Doge for ther products/services.  Lot's of people (consumers) hold it, probably enough.  And volume and liquidity is not that bad if you decide to cash out to BTC.

It's puzzling that the 'lower tech' coins, LTC and Doge still have good trading volume.

It is plausible to contemplate that sometimes lower tech is enough, because sometimes higher tech features have no market or actual adoption utility.

I definitely considered that in my analysis of what tech was worth working on. To invest so much effort in some very complex tech and then come to find out after all there really isn't a market for it. How frustrating to lose all that effort. So yeah, I haven't felt entirely wrong for going slower and taking time to analyze the markets before jumping into implementing. Any way, that is my perspective from a potential (but current vapor) altcoin dev.

Then again if you mean lower tech as in comparing Dash's off chain mixing anonymity (relying on masternodes to keep the secrets) to on chain mixing anonymity (and I would argue Zerocoin being the only tech that in theory makes the entire block chain zero knowledge), then I would argue that the lower tech in this case is inferior to the point of being useless for anything other than convincing speculators to enjoin a P&D.

Yet I may agree if you mean lower tech in the sense of straightforward Bitcoin clone with some marketing innovation, as compared to some complex Zerocoin project, given the privacy markets are unproven and undeveloped, so who knows when and if such complex tech will attain adoption (outside of the speculators who are investing in it). Anonymity tech causes tradeoffs (block chain bloat, etc) so can in some ways argued to be retrogressive (especially if there is no proven market for anonymity with those maybe severe tradeoffs). The devil is in the details. Some coin might someday do anonymity well enough and have very astute marketing strategy. I am not saying it can't happen. I am saying it is very complex to analyze.

THAT ?

Makes me think noobs haven't been here long enough and think their reinventing the wheel.

Notice who is responding ?

The many thousands of old school users who already replied to this topic posted before ?
or
The usual Dash vs. Monero Shill'tards who are the only guys left in the altcoin scene *bickering* ?

i said they would kill crypto, play dumb then move to the long con..
Then bicker and fight over the scraps for attention fro their bag holder club.

What is the point talking about this with idiots want to appear smart for the noobs that come here ?
All anyone ever did here was spam & troll this forum then call it marketing.
..sorry Fake Social Media circle-jerk campaigns do not count.

THE REAL TOPIC IS AND SHOULD BE..
Does traditional marketing tactics taught in school today apply to crypto ?
Because apparently it does to some Fail rejects here who said YES it does long ago.
I have seen a few guys in crypto brag about being trained in "marketing"
And then watching how they act made me laugh my balls off.

What has any shit coin "team" every accomplished in "marketing" ?
NOTHING.
Sorry Nascar paint jobs & Olympic bob sled team donations for a combined 55k is utterly retarded.
Whoever thought of that Marketing idea should be dragged into the street, flogged & pissed on + laughed at.

Is Tech more important ?

Are we playing rhetorical questions with a new dummy account OP ?

I just can't guys.. you all are idiots sorry but that is what i see here.
I am not discussing things with Altcoin scene morons.. STILL HERE pushing shit coins.
Short-con to long-con pushers..

Hahaha. Spoetic.

Hey but if they somehow had so many users interested in tipping and using the coin, then maybe it could have potentially (or still is in the process of?) scale to wider scale adoption. I am skeptical though.

I tend to agree with you that the marketing strategy is almost certainly too niche to scale out to a diverse ecosystem. But it is still more than most shitcoins accomplished in terms of adoption (or at least the hype is that it did, but maybe there never were any significant number of real users?).

True to a point.  So how should a coin be marketed?  I have always been wondering about this.

I dropped a hint recently but I doubt anyone can guess what I have in mind:

Read “non-existent, with one notable exception” as I've yet to encounter anyone who appears to share an appreciation of the details of Jackson Palmer's input to the design of Dogecoin.

I suspect this lack of appreciation is leading people to ascribe to sheer coincidence the fact that out of over 2500 altcoins launched, Dogecoin is the only coin with an inarguably vibrant community and is also the only coin where a senior marketing professional was involved in the creation.

It isn't coincidence.

Cheers

Graham

Where can I read those details?

I just read that Jackson Palmer was formerly with Adobe as was Steve Guttman (marketed Photoshop to #1) our VP of Marketing when I was working for Fractal Design Corp (what is now Corel Painter, the one that shipped in a real paint can). I interacted with Steve Guttman even though I was a programmer. After leaving that, I marketed my own CoolPage (downloaded software for web page editing) to 1 million downloads (back when the internet was 1/10 the population) and 335,000 confirmed websites created with my product (imagine soccer clubs, churches, etc). Note I did this from a Nipa Hut in the Philippines, living in squalor until end of 1999 when the profit was pouring in.

So maybe soon you will be able to say two altcoins were marketed. And Fuserleer also claims he will bring marketing expertise to his altcoin.

Any way, I am eager to learn from others. If you can kindly send me a link, I would be grateful. In particular he seems to better understand social memes than I do. I am more focused on user needs (being very pragmatic in my thinking). So maybe I can readjust my thinking and learn from him.

What do these have in Common ?
MintPal, Cryptsy, OpenEx, Coins-EX, BTER, MT Gox, ComKort, Poloniex, Crypto Trade, BTCe ?

Ya uhhh better get working on that marketing..
or
Tech (AKA: Anon coin methods)

They mined the speculators. Their marketing strategy was to extract money from speculators. They did not have a marketing strategy for increasing adoption above and far beyond that of Bitcoin (if that is possible), because it is much easier to mine to the speculators. Achieving a million users adoption is difficult and very risky to attempt. The most likely outcome of such an ambitious attempt is FAIL.

But note you are conflating exchanges with altcoins, which isn't entirely valid since this thread is I presume about altcoins. Nevertheless my reply applies to altcoins. Centralized exchanges also mine the speculators, and the propensity to cheat and/or lose coins is inherent. Some centralized exchanges claim to have some form of transparent auditing, but I doubt that resolves the inherent ability to cheat and/or lose coins (I need to study these more).

Note I am working a bit also on decentralized exchange (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13647053#msg13647053), which could hopefully eliminate the need to use centralized exchanges.

In other words 1 BILLION dollars STOLEN while you all argue over $1.50 worth of Dash or Monero  ::)

A billion?  Hey that's not bad marketing.

Appears that Dogecoin's marketing strategy has no long-term legs. It was just a fad preying on the inexperience and enthusiasm of those who didn't understand the lack of value in micro-tipping, and the idealism was temporarily funneled into some stunt events (Jamaican bobsled team to the Olympics and Nascar) to the profit of Alex Green who was raising funds and using them to do publicity stunts. Ended with delusion and realization that it was just a fad.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/jackson-palmer-year-dogecoin-jar-nutella-all-i-have-show-1478649
http://www.coindesk.com/dogecoin-founder-bitcoin-toxic/
http://www.dailydot.com/business/moolah-dogecoin-alex-green/

Additionally it is important to understand that microtransactions will never be viable for any activity except where there is no other way to monetize the activity:

http://hackingdistributed.com/2014/12/17/changetip-must-die/
http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2009/02/why-small-payments-wont-save-publishers/

I remember reading some of those articles about problems with microtransactions in the distant past and it is good that I re-familiarized myself with their main point as summarized above.

I can understand how it might appear so to observers outside the domain.

You're opting for the “coincidence” explanation, then?

Cheers

Graham

No I wrote that they got the initial boost for being the first to trying micro-tipping, but that micro-tipping is fundamentally flawed as a paradigm, thus as the initial hype fades and everyone who has tried micro-tipping now realizes it is just a one-time delusion that can't be repeated.

Well look at all the marketing for Neucoin, did it help yes, at the start but I am pretty sure it has devalued gradually since release. So marketing is good, but tech is more important in the long run.

Thank you for sharing your assessment. To be brutally frank, it dodges the main question and it's too uninformed an explanation to be useful (I don't consider pundits’ opinions to be authoritative) but thank you for making the effort. It has to be obvious that an “initial boost” cannot be currently sustaining the strong performance two years down the road so we're right back where we started.

But that's just my peccadillo, staying focused on the awkward questions and trying to understand what the answers might mean.

Cheers

Graham

The marketing for Neucoin was rubbish.  They took a strategy of "plaster every crypto site with a banner or popup ad" and there has been nothing since.  That's not a marketing strategy IMO, they might as well of took the mentality of "build it and they will come" and they did nothing at all to promote to the remaining 99.9% of the worlds population outside of our little crypto sphere.   Nearly ALL marketing efforts for crypto adopt the same approach.

A REAL marketing strategy is long term, over a number of years, and identifies the initial and changing needs of the market over that time.  It knows what the market needs even if the market doesn't know what it needs to start with.  It considers the sentiment of the market at all times and modifies campaigns and strategies to suit this sentiment.  It adopts differing strategies for the different demographics you are targeting.  It details how the marketing will evolve as you garner adoption and looks for ways to incentive those that might not be interested, to try out the product and up sell from there to keep them engaged.  It considers all advertising mediums, not just the internet, and how best to use them together to push adoption.

I could go on and on...

An experienced professional marketing team with a moderate budget could take almost ANY crypto and bring it to mass market, regardless of the tech.

Why has that not happened?  I think for 2 reasons.

1.  No one develops their product using their own money first.  They hold an ICO for an idea and start development.  By the time its ready, theres nothing left for marketing.
2.  No one considers the long game, and instead focuses on short term money making schemes like pump/dumps and partnering with banks/corps.

I'm neither of the above, I've developed using my own funds with assistance from a handful of people, so any fund raisers we hold will be spent mainly on marketing and roll-out.  Secondly I'm here for at least 5 years, as that is the absolute minimum time it will take me to recover my investment as I wont be insta-generating millions of EMU for myself or any other similar shady practices. (which will also be detailed in this manifesto).

Lol of course TPTB thinks that the greatest marketing strategy (in more recent times... most successful was Litecoin) in the history of altcoins was flawed, and of course he thinks he can do better... so typical.  ::)

Everyone is forgetting a very simple marketing scheme that made arguably the most successful alternative cryptocurrency what it is today. "Litecoin is the silver to Bitcoin's gold"

Lying to myself will lead me to failure. Therefor I am honest about the research documents I quoted which explain why micro-tipping will ALWAYS fail.


You missed the part where that also meant my planned distribution scheme is flawed. And so now I am forced to think of a way around the dilemma:



When will you learn to stop that B-lister crap (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13528235#msg13528235) that makes you look so pathetic? I advised you (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1219023.msg13637511#msg13637511) to lift your game up the A-lister level.

150 IQ, yet you still can't understand why Dogecoin was successful.  ::)

You are a B lister that has convinced himself he is an A lister.

"and I can't put x86 assembly code in the browser without a browser plugin that n00b users won't install "

you could write a compute-shader in GLSL and deploy using WebGL to HTML5 browsers, GPU accelerated and no browser plugin necessary.

Please read the last linked document in my original quote:


The mass delusion was fueled by that Ponzi scammer Alex Green and his huge tips. But he was using that marketing gimick to take more money from investors in an unsustainable scheme that declared bankruptcy.

Yeah if you give users the impression they can change the world with tipping, then they will adopt it with a passion because people really do want to believe. But the reality was it is economically impossible to change the world with micro-tipping (read the research scientists explanation such as Nick Szabo from 1996) and Alex Green took their money and made huge tips thus furthering the mass mania bubble "we can change the world". But Green was just manipulating the users and investors in an unsustainable, uneconomic delusion.

As for why it continues to have some trade on exchanges, some people still don't understand the above and still have hope that they can change their world. Thus it is reasonably possible someone can do the same scheme again and the deluded users will once again come back for sloppy seconds and hand their money over again to the scammers.

It is conceptually in terms of HOPE, no different than the delusions speculators have with handing their money over to the insiders in all the altcoin projects.

So to be clear the marketing strategy of DOGECOIN was HOPE (and even the so called marketing guru Palmer can't articule it that succinctly). And this a very powerful human emotion and can drive delusion and mass manias.

And now you will understand I am an astute marketer, as well as an out-of-the-box economist (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13647887#msg13647887), and an expert multi-decades of experience programmer who has coded (all by myself!) and marketed software to adoption by 1% of the internet population. Not very many people have all three of those talents combined. I may not be the absolute best at any one of those, but I am in roughly on the order of the top 10% in each (maybe top 1% in some narrower facets).

What I am really good at intellectually is drilling down to the generative essence of an issue. I can find and state the succinct generative essence (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1219023.msg13646526#msg13646526).

Wrong, try again.

If you read the research on why micro-tipping is uneconomic for humans, you will understand that masking HOPE in the delusion of GENEROSITY (and other memes about better society) has the underlying generative essence of HOPE.

Edit: and you are certainly a prime B-lister (all elbows and acrimony) example of being deluded by HOPE and not using sober, detailed analysis.  :P

Edit#2: so the best marketing strategy would be the one that fostered HOPE, yet was not a delusion and could actually effect world change!

Thanks. Yeah I had done that research last night too:

http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/10320/how-useful-is-a-javascript-miner

But I think that only uses part of the CPU and I want to use all the CPU (relative electricity cost is inapplicable in my use case of unprofitable mining). I think that can maybe used in addition to a memory hard algorithm. Does WebGL always use the GPU or is there a way to detect? Any way, I will dig down into those details. I am first revisiting my 2013 work on memory hard PoW algorithms (since I can't get access to AES-NI from within the browser which is what my latter PoW hash was primarily based on and which for example Cryptonote's hash requires which is why it can't run fast in the browser).

Come on, a self-proclaimed genius ought to be able to figure this out. You are still wrong about why Dogecoin was successful. Hint: It has nothing to do with micro-tipping.

And enough about this nonsense about me being a B lister. I know that I am a B lister (actually I am probably a C or D lister at best.) It is you that is delusional in thinking that you are an A lister. You tried running with the big dogs as "AnonyMint" in the Bitcoin development subforum, but the true A listers picked your half-baked ideas apart. So, you tucked your tail, changed your name, and retreated into the alternative cryptocurrency subforum far away from the true A listers so that no one would be able to point out how dumb your ideas are.

No zero balances, rich list and checking out the coin's own forum (if there are any) usually give a relative good base for a rough but relevant estimation.

Quality comments are not good for this kind of "measurement", as miners and other people who intend to dump and quit are also used to ask meaningful questions, and also used to make quality remarks, however they are not part of the community (or only for a short time).

Hero endorsements are not very accurate in these days :).

Instead of playing hide & seek, you could just tell us your opinion. After all, it is only your opinion until you prove or convince. That is why we share here.

One might argue that users of DOGE felt a sense of participation, empowerment, and cooperation, e.g. that some programmers could chip in and create bots for micro-tipping to various social networking. In other words, that it wasn't all controlled by some core developers. Thus a sense of community purpose. Again I think this all derives from the HOPE fundamental.

The cute dog was a symbol of love and the ease of doing good, juxtaposed to the overly serious, corporatism (which is even present in Bitcoin). Again all derives from the core emotion of HOPE.

I think perhaps what you are thinking at is that DOGE was perceived as an undervalued asset relative to Bitcoin. And so you may be viewing from the "mine the speculators" marketing strategy. Again that has proven to be a P&D unsustainable strategy, except perhaps in the case of Litecoin which for various reasons has served as a hedge or alternative to Bitcoin economically (e.g. GPU miners transitioned to Litecoin when Bitcoin got ASICs).


You still apparently haven't understood that the B-lister aspect is stalking me around in every thread so you can try to attack me. It has nothing to do with whether I or you are correct on some issue. We are all free to share and argue our positions here, and in an adult manner devoid of ad hominem noise and focused on eliding the facts from our sharing.

Again I urge you to raise your contribution to the A-lister level and focus on sharing instead of throwing your toys in a temper tantrum because you don't like that I post a lot and defend my logic (until someone convinces me I am incorrect).

Instead of getting to the point, you again have succeeded in filling up another thread with drivel and flaming noise. Make your point. If your point is about me, then there is another thread specifically for that (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1336264.0). Don't spam every thread with your off-topic jealousy about me. If you think you can be a better spokesman in the community, then go for it. Prove it. Rather B-listers just complain.

My job is not to educate you TPTB, you can figure out why Dogecoin was a success on your own. You have still yet to come to the correct conclusion. It is not my fault you post in every thread and claim to be a know it all on every subject. I was posting in the altcoin subforum on every thread long before you came along. I was simply pointing out that you are incorrect about why Dogecoin was successful. I have no interest in educating you as to the right answer.

Also, you can stop playing the victim and crying about "ad hominem" bs. I was very civil with you until you started quipping your ad hominems toward me... everyone knows what I'm talking about here because it is the way you speak to everyone as if everyone is inferior. You are the definition of a grumpy old man (I could elaborate but I will try to be nice and stop there.) Furthermore, I am annoyed with you passing off your opinions as factual statements, or basing factual statements on opinions, which amounts to FUD. You attack every cryptocurrency without being able to deliver a solution. Those that can't do spam internet forums. I know that to be true, that is why I am here spamming myself.

This subforum is not called "altcoin technical discussion", it is called "altcoin discussion". Sorry, I do not want to spend 1 week month reading all of your posts, the rantings of a lunatic rather, just so I can figure out what you're talking about. You are angry I'm not explaining my point in this thread to you, but you fail to realize it is the same thing you do when you say "read my thread" as if it isn't a trillion words long.

I concur. I had the same thought actually. Micro-transactions apply when there is no better way to monetize. One example is paying someone to video chat with you and do it decentralized. If it is centralized, then no problem the site can have you load a balance and pay out of that. But then the site has to comply with FinCEN and other regs. Decentralized means you need to pay the other party on the spot. That may not necessary be "micro" value though. And it may not even require instant transaction, but probably will. And "micro" would be better in terms of being able to bill per minute.

So in general, microtransactions apply where the granularity can't be aggregated because decentralization is required. So microtransactions are a generally useful paradigm especially for our crypto aims. But for me the microtransactions as a marketing strategy to launch and do initial distribution with doesn't work due to a chicken & egg dilemma of not enough ecosystems ways to use them. And I realized from my re-familiarization with the theory of why microtransactions are often not economic, that the scenario I was thinking of for a killer ecosystem feature to drive over that chicken & egg hump wasn't going to be compelling for the users. The key challenge facing microtransactions is that no one is going to go out-of-their-way to obtain some 2 cents worth of tokens to go do some ecosystem action (no matter how compelling that ecosystem action is). The point is there isn't enough value in play for each user action. The cognitive and effort load on the user is too high.

This is what I mean by the attrition barrier.

Of course not, you are making it obvious to every reader that your job is to spend your time making a fool of yourself by wasting everyone else's time reading about how you hate me. As if that helps anyone here. It is extremely selfish to subject all the readers here to your private vendetta against me.

So after all, we see you were just bullshitting. As usual.

Afraid to put your idea to the test of peer review and scruntiny or don't have an idea just bluffing.

State your idea about DOGE, or it didn't happen. Period.

No, I am sincere in the fact that micro-transactions is not the reason for Dogecoin's success. In fact, I question your intellect if you truly think that is the reason for Dogecoin's success.

Duh. That is also what I am pointing out.

That is the definition of backpedaling, which you are certainly a master at because you are never wrong.

There is no backpedaling. It is an inability of yours to comprehend that I wrote that micro-tipping was just a(n uneconomic) gimmick and that the underlying marketing strategy was HOPE (and its various derivative memes of generosity, sense of community purpose, etc).

Here we go again...every thread!

Yes... the omniscient TPMB has spoken.

I don't expect a 50+ year old man to understand why Dogecoin was successful, and I'll simply leave it at that.

Good day.

It will always be that way because humans have emotions. And B-listers get all bent out-of-shape and can't stay on fact. I decided there is nothing I can do to stop people from getting pissed off at me. I continue to try to elide facts, share, and discuss.

If you want to join with him to try to develop a "hate AnonyMint tribe", then go ahead. Or you can wisely stay on fact.

Can we get back to the pertinent discussion here?

P.S. I already see your marketing strategy is perhaps fundamentally flawed. You are hoping to convince people here that you have a superior long-term plan. Sorry that is not what drives markets. Good luck though. And I will reserve final judgement until I read your entire document.

That is possible. It could be a younger generation thing that isn't on my radar. But so far, afaik no one has articulated it. So I still say that unless you state something, then you are just bullshitting and bluffing.

Edit: I do remember now someone articulating that Doge was driven by "dark" attitudes, where people just want to write nonsense comments about anything. It is sort of Twitter generation concept, where it doesn't matter what you say as much as being clever. Impressing your friends. I notice my 16 year old daughter does that excessively. It is a form of social upmanship or same as we used to do by hanging out and joking in the yard, the youth now do it virtually. Someone wrote the Doge tapped into that demographic on social commenting sites such as Reddit.

But it doesn't appear that has anything to do with the currency. Why do you need micro-tipping to do those comments? Is it part of the joke to insult someone by tipping them 1500 microcents.

The store-of-value ramp appears to have everything to do with speculators either buying into the HOPE delusion and/or just following (the money) on the coattails of a phenomenon.

This is a quote I found...

"It was fun for hyperactive twenty-somethings to Photoshop designs as humorous advertisements. This gave dogecoin a legion of marketing specialists free of charge, who proceeded to plaster the web with DOGE propaganda.  Why?  Because it was funny".

Another angle is the tips aren't economic values but rather votes. I actually had mentioned in the past this as the possible way to use micro-tipping to better sites such as stackoverflow.

So the users are competing to see who can have the most votes, regardless that the votes have no significant economic value. So Doge is a decentralized fungible voting unit. Actually that is one of my marketing ideas. The key is how to distribute the units.

What a surprise, you haven't even read a single word of any of the documentation regarding our plan and already I'm wrong!

So long term marketing strategies don't drive markets, or better yet create markets from nothing in some situations....ok  ::)

Bottom line, I do have a long term plan, and it's better than whatever you might believe you have thanks to one crucial element. Ive actually written the damn thing down and taken it through a number of drafts so please...enough already!

I was hoping this would be an interesting thread about marketing v's tech, but already its derailed into the usual playground rubbish.

Doge has been successful because it was fun, users could relate it to something they were comfortable with already and it didn't try to be something it wasnt.  Very smart.

Says the guy that supposedly had a ton of cash from some product no one's heard of in a long while and now lives hand-to-mouth off the charity of his girlfriend who (by your own admission) is already getting tired of supporting your pompous ass BS.

Even if you have the marketing prowess you purport, it must be substantially dwarfed by your inability to manage your own (or others) finances.  That, in and of itself, leads me to be wary of investing in any project you might try to sell to the unsuspecting masses.

Your statement is true in a very general way and well stated, that is also true about many other marketing ideas. It doesn't tell us specifically what were the unique attributes of Doge's marketing strategy.

Liar. I have never claimed that. I explicitly stated recently too bad I don't have 150 IQ, otherwise maybe I would have completed my project sooner. You are conflating where I have mentioned Eric Raymond's claimed 150+ IQ.

---

It was until CoinHoader derailed it (he could have stayed on topic instead and we'd still accomplish the same insights). And it appears you decided to further the derailment as follows.

---

I provide the finances of my gf. She is very charitable in the way she helps me around the house and daily matters that would consume hours of my time otherwise.

Thanks for reaffirming how low forum members can stoop. You dredge up off topic personal details.

Btw, I have lived hand-to-mouth when I created CoolPage from a Nipa Hut. I couldn't even afford meat. I was eating salt & rice. I am not in that deprived scenario yet. And btw, CoolPage was a tremendous success reaching 1% of the internet and generating $500,000 for me (inflation adjust that to well over $1 million). Not too shabby for a guy who was coding with a 120110+ dB karaoke in his ear 24 x 7 and had dysentery weekly due to squalor. In 1995, left an $80,000 salary and $1.2 million in stock options because of stupid love for a girl who later was instrumental in me losing the vision in my right eye (and likely one of the causes of my current chronic illness). So back off if you think I am not driven to succeed. I did the impossible with damn fucking slow and unreliable dialup internet connection.

---

The statement below has some truth to it, but it contains no specific marketing strategy. It states many generalities. The main strategy is "long-term". And the other problem I see is the concept of incentivizing usership from those who might not be interested which is an egregious error. Marketing is always about prioritizing the lowest hanging fruit. No one can predict years into the future. The marketing coups are immediate, not some 5-year top-down Communist Party rigidity. That you need to write a 60 page document just to communicate a marketing strategy indicates your skill is writing long documents and your marketing strategy is to target people who like reading long documents. I am a person who believes in "Just Do It". And I also believe in getting directly to the point and communicating as concisely as possible (when referring to polished presentation).

I would say - if you have the marketing and following in place go with that, seems easier to fix the tech than get marketing going.  I am biased because I work a lot with marketing and social media, including research. 

Fuserleer pretty much hit the nail on the head. Dogecoin is like the anti-Anonymint. Dogecoin's success has nothing to do with the underlying technology it is based on. Dogecoin made cryptocurrency fun, funny, and relate-able. Comparing the first Dogecoin conference to a Bitcoin conference... people were dressed in costumes like a comic con, there was a decentralized dance party, and people were generally there to have fun (rather than network and talk about the technology like what is done at Bitcoin conferences.) Dogecoin is all about having fun, which happens to introduce people to decentralized cryptocurrency at the same time. Tying itself to the internet sensation that is Doge catapulted the awareness, adoption, and price of Dogecoin.

It was also at the right place at the right time, which is perhaps the greatest reason for its success. It was a perfect storm of multiple factors. It was released towards the peak of the popularity of the Doge meme and size of the Doge community. It was released towards the peak of Bitcoin's awareness in the media. It was released towards the peak of the number of cryptocurrency speculators entering the market. Because of that initial influx of speculators, it now has a wide reaching network effect and a large community of supporters that will (IMO) carry it into the future. It is here to stay.

https://i.imgur.com/b3iadXb.png

Says the guy who has "done nothing" but whine on this board ad nauseam to the point of alienating nearly everyone in the hopes of one day finding someone to have pity on you and code what is supposedly the second coming of Jesus Christ carrying the cure for cancer.

I was making some general points about marketing, I'm not going to write an essay on here going into great detail, just to highlight general points.

Furthermore I'm not going to detail any marketing strategies I'm working here in a post to prove a point.  You'll have it all soon enough.

The low hanging fruit is the crypto-space, 0.1% of the worlds population...so what are YOU going to do to market to the rest of the planet?

Also, just to clarify, its not a 60 page document all about marketing strategies but a full manifesto of everything.  Organizational structure, a small brief on what eMunie is and intends to do for the uninformed, the market we are targeting, a breakdown of all the advertising and promotional mediums we can use, cost and expenditure information, income and future forecasting, infrastructure support and encouragement, and of course marketing.

It covers every angle of everything we want to do and how we are going to do it, down to the smallest detail.  A 60 page document that covers all this says nothing but "I'm thorough and I've thought this out end to end!"

Seriously?  You think so? 

You should change your handle from TPTB to TL/DR as that's the overwhelming opinion of most when they see one of your long winded diatribes.

That is an egregious lie. I have expended enormous effort researching and developing a wide range of fundamental technological issues including but not limited to:

• anonymity from all different angles
• PoW hashes invented including memory hard and AES-NI variants
• an entire thread explaining decentralization and the CAP theorem

In addition to other herculean accomplishments in my past:

The smart people on the forum sends me copious encouragements such as "don't mind the idiots" private messages. You stay with your tribe. I will stay with mine, lol.  :P

How again is any of that relevant to "Technology vs. Marketing"

Much like this "on topic" gem from your OWN thread about your hot coin idea:


How on earth is THAT on-topic unless your coin truly is a piece of shit borne from your own ass?  :D

This is back on topic and yes I agree with that. But also factor in that if the principles only know marketing and don't know how to manage tech, they may fail on the communication barrier between themselves and the programmers.

All developers here have been on similar quests, weeks, months, years researching, trialing and rejecting ideas.  We don't expect any pat on the back for it, its hidden in the shadows, forgotten, rejected, useless.

I've accepted that whatever I do, say, or produce you (and others) are going to have an issue with or an opinion on, fair enough.

But for once, for the love of God, I'd like a straight answer if I may.  Think of me as your student.  If your student was wrong, you wouldn't scold him, and not explain why he was wrong, nor give the correct answer.

Give me just one, trivial example of what you would do to market a crypto to the mass market, either a user or a merchant, it matters not which.  If you have so many ideas, then letting a solitary one out of the bag won't hurt and I'm sure if its a good one, you'll get a dose of respect you feel you deserve.

So, explain it to me like I'm five....no....explain it to me like I'm a Cocker Spaniel...

Precisely. Why are you forcing me to respond to allegations about my personal life in this thread? Why are YOU derailing the thread.

Your behavior does not reflect well on Fuserleer's eMunie, since it is quite clear you are one of the insiders/investors (or otherwise closely affiliated). Fuserleer should reign you in. I would not tolerate you being affiliated with my work and doing that behavior to anyone, including to my competitors. It extremely immature and selfish. You are forcing all the readers here to slog through your off topic hate for me. Take your hate for me to an appropriate venue.

It is quite clear that you are insecure that I might have more influence over readers and you are thinking eMunie is not being treated fairly. And you blame me for that. So instead of dealing with that in a mature way, you decide to go 5 years old mode. Congrats.


Why are you quoting from my thread (where I can talk about what ever I want, no one is forced to read my thread) to a thread which neither of us started and is supposed to be on topic discussion of the thread title and OP.

You've blown a fuse. Go count to 10 and take your meds.

Good. So what is your point? You've done nothing then too by that criteria.  :P

Why are you and your Munie cohort Peachy spamming and derailing this thread with off topic discussion?

Every time you spam, I am going to make sure I put the name of your coin in, so the brains of readers can come to associate eMunie with strife and wasted time. Marketing anyone?

Can you please answer the real question of my post instead of diverting?  I believe its on topic and as far as I know, I've made 2 posts at most in this thread that could perhaps be considered off-topic.

What peachy posts is up to peachy, I'm not his or anyone's "boss", and I'm certainly not going to attempt to influence his right to free speech just as I wouldn't anyone else's, regardless of if they were a supporter of the project or not.  If that reflects badly on me then so be it.

So 33 (42%) of the 79 post in this thread are by you so who's derailing this thread with useless discussion?

We were having a great discussion in this thread. And yes I was contributing/participating. And now we've added a dozen posts replying to you and your eMunie lead developer's attempt to turn the thread into a personal attack against me.

Congrats. The smart people are I am sure aware of your focus on wasteful activities.

Please do, brand recognition :)


I'll take your avoidance of answering the simple question I asked, so as to perhaps form an elevated understanding of marketing, as evidence that you have nothing to share.

And then you wrote in your prior message that are asking me to detail at least one of my specific marketing ideas (when I have already done so up thread), and then you edited your post (before I could quote it because I clicked to the next page and came back) to remove that statement when you realized it doesn't reflect well on you and exemplifies the duplicity of your ethics. Haha. You and your eMunie cohort Peachy are just trolling.

You are so confident in your marketing plans, that you need to worry about whether I have any influence on the forum.  ::)

OK, the fact that you are now fabricating stories of me editing posts to "cover up" some conspiracy you've concocted is about all I'm going to tolerate.

Ignore for you, and I'm signing off.

Back on topic...


That fun happened without any features (technology) whatsoever eh?

Micro-tipping (per my upthread post apparently a voting gift culture, not an economic meme) was not at all important to the perception of Dogecoin being fun to participate in?

To nail something you need to also understand the details that were required. We can all say Bitcoin is fun, but it depends what we mean by fun.

To be more specific, I think what you and Fuserleer mean to say is that the Doge users were enjoying the sense of community spirit from a confluence of attributes, including the ability to vote up (tip) people on social networks and the festive/carefree/creative/cute dog atmosphere surrounding the community.

Again I see a fundamental generative essence of HOPE in that, but I also commend you[Fuserleer] (it can't be ascertained if you had this idea or you were bluffing and picked up on Fuserleer's fun idea) stating that interactive, gift culture oriented, creativity-themed fun is more specific than a general notion that it taps the human need for HOPE (or belief in something better). Everyone loves to have fun. But fun means different things to different people. For me, fun can be dancing or engaging in vigorous sports. I have observed that many of the youth want to do what I tend to think of as frivolous or irrelevant fun (in other words not so fun for me in my older age, although sometimes I relate). For example, all that community sharing and creativity I tend to think of as time waster, but then when I sit down with my gf and watch her scroll her timeline on Facebook, I become also interested in all the diverse stuff going on. So I guess it is an acquired habit. The youth are on their phones 24  x 7.


I remember the Ape who showed up at my high school house party and I escorted him to the dance floor! Yeah okay I agree. Partying is fun (although I haven't been able to enjoy my life lately due to pain/fatigue of chronic illness). Yet I remember what it was like.


I was oblivious that there was even a Doge meme circulating through society in 2013.

Which part of the confluence is repeatable and sustainable?

Was there any value in the gift culture voting of micro-tipping and the fun that created to pass those tokens around instead of just clicking "Like" when ever you feel like it with no limit on how many times you can do it?

Upthread someone was claiming there is some lasting effect or value in Doge's marketing theme. So what is that? Is it still fun to use Doge? Why?

You are lying. I don't forget what I read.

Can we ask Theymos to check the logs?

You wrote something like, "Just for once can you throw up a scrap and tell us your idea for marketing". You continued on and it was clear you were trying to frame it as if I never share.

120 dB 24/7 will not only create damage to your ears, but your brain will restructure trying to prevent the hearing loss, and becomes weaker processing other signals.

I didn't refer to a decibel table before making that comment (in as rush and deflecting flame wars rapid-fire), and I forget off hand which levels relate to threshold of pain (134 dB?) and other levels, so I just picked a number quickly that reflects that it was very loud.

I suppose I exaggerated (decibel scale is logarithmic as you know and so one needs to be careful as 6 dB is a significant change). Maybe 110 - 117 dB outside. Perhaps 105+ dB inside (estimating). Yeah it was bad. It wasn't every day, but sometimes it was 24 x 7 for the entire weekend and then sporadically during the week. Incredibly annoying. And yeah I noticed I am very sensitive to noise now (can't process any information at all when there is significant noise, unless I am very very deep in concentration mode).

Not only that but I saw my underwear on my neighbor (people often walked around in their briefs in our squalor locale because the hand pump water well was where people showered) and if I turned my head while eating, my spoon was gone. It was hell. But not as hell as acute peptic ulcer which is literally going to visit hell. Burning from the inside (acid leaking onto all your internal organs) is an intimate experience with the underworld. You will literally wish you could die and contemplate that in hell you can't ever die to stop the pain beyond any words can describe. I did. Look I played tackle football. I have played with broken bones. I can handle some pain. But burning from the inside is indescribable. Three days of that nonstop pain, then several  more days of feeling like I wanted to get out of my own skin (that was more horrible than the excruciating pain). Two times they gave me morphine and I floated in heaven for 3 hours, then I could hear the pain train coming from a distance. Here in the Philippines, they do not give pain meds. I had to beg the doctor for it over and over. She (resident doctor on the floor) finally relented because I am a foreigner. I tried to go as long as I could before the second morphine trip. But then I heard the lady wailing dying of breast cancer down the hall without morphine, I gained some perspective. Any one doubts my story contact Dr. Alcasid at Adventist Hospital, Davao (May 2012).

P.S. my abdomen is burning just very slightly right now (nothing painful just annoying and signals fatigue or headache coming later). Welcome to my reality 3.5 years hence  :( Or if you mean the karaoke & squalor, 20 years hence. And I deserve it because I made my own choices.

Peachy this is for you...

So is that the approved standard for how we should post "off topic" material by reducing it to 8pt font as you have done?

Just wanna be sure I learn the proper method from the Self-proclaimed overly-prolific Board Police.

If so, then you are a sad little man

Perhaps that may of been what you were missing from the equation. http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/doge


We will agree to disagree that micro tipping had a great affect as to the success of Dogecoin. I maintain my opinion that it didn't have much to do with its success, although I suppose it couldn't of hurt. The dogetipbot is popular on places like Reddit.. where Dogecoin initially took off.

Carrying on from the questions I presented in my reply to CoinHoarder, if we take a broad prespective, we can conclude the obvious which is the youth (all age groups in fact) are consuming more and more online media and that includes interactive scenarios:

http://kff.org/disparities-policy/press-release/daily-media-use-among-children-and-teens-up-dramatically-from-five-years-ago/

We can see that jump to using the computer more spurted at the turn of the century (as expected because that is when the internet went mainstream):

http://ns.umich.edu/Releases/2004/Nov04/teen_time_report.pdf#page=8

Much of that activity is being done not for direct economic income, rather for derivative motivations (which may be economic for participants in some holistic life calculation even though event locality may be uneconomic, e.g. clicking a Like) such as fun, learning, collaborating, politics, and socializing (just as we are doing here in this forum).

In what way can crypto technology (block chains, decentralized currency, etc) participate in the aforementioned trend?

Yeah people want to have fun, but that doesn't seem to have any direct relationship to crypto currency that we can yet identify, other than some promotional confluence mania that flamed out. (Unless someone can explain any other reason for Doge's continued existence, I will assume it is because some people still believe it has a future and that can be self-sustaining at some small level).

So I have stated above that most of the youth are consumers of interactive (social) media, and their economic motivation is holistic (fun, learning, collaborating, politics, and socializing) and not for an immediate income. Whereas the media providers (not always the content creators as the content may be produced by the participants for free) are motivated by direct economic gain, either in the form of income (usually ad driven) and/or company market cap appreciation.

Thus I have concluded that in most scenarios the consumers of interactive media have no use for crypto currency.

Is it possible to create interactive media where some of the participants (maybe providers of content or interaction) are motivated primarily by economic income (or a combination of the holistic benefits and income)? What are the examples out there already in cyberspace? The examples that come to my mind seem very limited in participation, e.g. live nude chat, typing job, creative job such as graphic arts or writing. Are there any music distribution sites where the providers of content are being paid by the consumers of content? Isn't it so competitive to get your music heard, that you must not charge for it?

Can anyone comment?

Of course people pay for music... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_on-demand_streaming_music_services
This is a good article: http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-rockstars-cryptocurrency-music-industry/
The Bitshares ecosystem has been working on an interesting solution which allows listeners to invest in the success of an artist or band, and profit off of finding good talent early in their career: http://peertracks.com/

I think social media can possibly be taken over by cryptocurrency/decentralized/blockchain technology. Think about it... Facebook has a market capitalization of 266.3 billion. What if a portion of their net profit was distributed to its users instead? Which service would you use... one that makes money off of you providing you nothing in return, or one that pays you to use its service? There are likely a few projects attempting to capitalize on this space. The only one off the top of my head I can name is Synereo and I am on the fence as to whether it is is a legit project or a P&D... I am waiting on the sidelines for now. http://www.synereo.com/

Cutting out the middlemen in "live nude chat, typing job, creative job such as graphic arts or writing" could prove to be a lucrative decentralized business plan as well. Any business that is ran by middlemen can be eliminated by decentralized technology. People call all these random features "gimmicks", but they fail to understand that we are cutting out middlemen with each feature added. Coins like Nxt and Bitshares are attempting to become the Google/Apple of blockchains, and this is a successful model in my opinion. That is why I support them so. All of these "cryptocurrencies are only supposed to be used as currencies" types really annoy me, because I think decentralized technology is going to be very disruptive in a lot of industries.

There are many people who create content for YouTube with the primary goal of income generation (through advertising revenue share) and countless other examples. In many cases the platform owner (in this case Google/YouTube) captures the lions share of the profits. Micro transactions (tipping income instead of ads) could help provide more income for the content generators in such situations assuming the infrastructure was built to easier facilitate it. Users would benefit (from voluntary tipping) by not being forced to watch as many advertisements.

You might not be aware that I also proposed this idea in my vaporcoin thread.

Please read again the links I provided upthread on why the cognitive/effort load of paying in small morsels is hated by humans.

I am believing in the concept that content producers want to earn an income. I am not believing in the concept that users want a pay-per-view model for enjoying videos. It appears to me that Google is experimenting with just how frequently they can push ads on viewers without causing attrition. I agree the ads are annoying, but I don't think that per-per-view is going to work for an activity that people simply want to enjoy. Even if you asked people to knowingly pay $5 a month a month to avoid ads, I think they would not bother to switch from Youtube. Google would moderate the ads sufficiently so that the incentive to switch would be diminished.

I think rather the incentive is on the content provider side as you said, Google is taking the lions share of the revenue, but also bear in mind they have the lions share of the web traffic.

Again a chicken-and-egg dilemma and additionally the problem that users won't pay-per-view. I think I may know how to solve the latter issue, but the former issue is very challenging to conquer. Even if you assume users will agree to have their microtransaction balance automatically deducted some microcents for each video viewed, you still have the initial problem of how to distribute the currency into their hands in the first place. If they have to go buy it on an exchange, that kills adoption right there. Even if you could sell the coin for credit card or Paypal, it still would cause a huge attrition rate.

A third problem is that the value users are willing to transfer for watching a video may be much less than the advertising revenue that could be generated. Typically afaik ~$10 CPM, that is 1 cents per video viewed for each ad on the page.

Are you going to pay $1 for each 10 - 100 videos you view so there will be no ads on the page?

The video ads are the most disruptive (unlike banner ads) but they also probably pay a much higher CPM. I haven't researched that though.

Edit: also ideally you would feel better if you only have to pay once and can own viewing rights to that video forever. And you would feel better to pay for what you know in advance will be quality content. A potential difference between YouTube and music, is if you could trial music for negligible cost then you may pay more when you are sure you want to own the song for unlimited future listening. Whereas, for video we typically watch most videos only once. Music doesn't require our total attention, so it can coexist with doing other activities and thus can be replayed in more circumstances. Video demands our complete attention which is perhaps why advertising is more lucrative for videos (I am assuming, not sure  about that).

I will respond to the rest of your informative post later (as I need to go outside on this Sunday).

I think Synereo may be conceptually on the right track, in that ads should preferrably be content that users want to see. I can envision content providers being creative in how they advertise products within enjoyable content. The bottom line is the economics per my prior post in reply to TechorMarketing. There were one or two ads on Google that were so interesting to me, I wanted to save a copy of the video ad. Meaning the way to beat Google is by making the advertising more efficient, thus superior ROI for all participants (advertiser, content creator, and viewer). If the superior algorithms require decentralization and cutting out the middle man, then Google with all its technical prowess can do nothing to compete.

I only scanned a portion of their white paper. I believe they may have Sybil attack problems in their attention model (thus being gamed and not having the result intended), but I can't yet judge that with any certainty as I need to study it more carefully.

You've given me something very intellectually deep to chomp on, so thank you. I love conceptual paradigm shifts and I like to analyze models. I will need more time on this.

Looks to me as though they are serious. The devil is in the details on their technical model. They have a brainy looking CSO mathematician, so perhaps some of the model theory is originating from him.

Thanks, that's interesting, it's been done already then, this one from your link uses a fragment/vertex shader for Sha256: https://github.com/derjanb/hamiyoca/blob/master/glminer.js

It's kind of a gaping hole in WebGL that full GPU-compute access is given without permission from a cryptocurrency perspective because someone could embed an alt miner in a HTML5 page and make a web-based botnet if they could get the traffic.  On the other hand I guess someone could monetize a site by running a background WebGL miner with the user's permission instead of e.g. advertising.  Neither have the barrier of needing the user to install additional software.

Regarding your requirement, I see what you mean, I don't think there's a way to get at a specific instruction set because browsers are CPU-agnostic in terms of the code you can run.  You just have GPU access via WebGL and multi-threaded Javascript via HTML5 WebWorkers which is pretty quick but nothing that would limit to a CPU I think (unless you can create a memory hard algo with those 2 features).  

What's giving you the impression of malevolent intent by Synereo?

The main thing to understand about money is that it's all about people, neither marketing nor technology. David Jerry puts it best!

“Money is a collective delusion. (Or in case of fiat, a Ponzi scheme) You need believers everywhere otherwise its value is zero.” ~ David Jerry

Once you digest and comprehend that, everything else becomes easy. Value your community as you value yourself, believe in your community and believe in yourself, extend your hands to help one another, and everything else will fall perfectly into place.

technology is important long term, good marketing can make you a quick buck..... if you have both then its to the moon

Technology is more important!

Check out Warpcoin - They will have a built in VPN client within the wallet as well as a cloudsync (direct P2P communication).

They are currently in a cloudfunding stage at the moment and available on slack!

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1329494.msg13566927#msg13566927

I think VPNcoin already has that feature (I have not used it) and is much better known in a very important market (China). I agree that technology is most important. That is why I support the project with the best CryptoNote implementation and ongoing development to improve it further.

One of the foundational technical challenges is decentralized, permissionless file storage (and databases); otherwise if a corporation is providing centralized file storage then they control the content and can monopolize.

Afaik, the current attempts such as Storj and Maidsafe have a fundamental economic flaw. That is they are selling for free that which is not free— the bandwidth (and most saliently the asymmetrically more expensive upload bandwidth) of the ISPs. I had warned Bittorrent about this flaw in their economic algorithm and had suggested a fix in 2008:

---

---

Now what is really fucking amazing is that the link quoted above worked correctly a few days ago when I issued it. Apparently someone in the Monero thread communicated to Bittorrent folks and had the entire archive of the Bittorrent forum removed from the archive.org. I am not joking and I am not hallucinating.

What I had written there in 2008 (which luckily I reread a few days ago so my memory is refreshed) was I explained to the Bittorrent developers that their tit-for-tat algorithm was orthogonal to their optimistic unchoking algorithm (http://bittorrent.org/bittorrentecon.pdf), and that they could improve the tit-for-tat algorithm by have the two peers that exchange a shard of data to encrypt those shards. Then after the shards had been received by both peers, the decryption keys could be exchanged. The economic benefit is that the bandwidth has already been exchanged before each peer can use the data. Thus neither peer has any bandwidth cost reason to cheat. The reason this was important is because typically download bandwidth is much greater than upload bandwidth, so by forcing all peers to trade equally, it would mean that peers could only download as much as they could upload. Bittorrent didn't like this suggestion because they preferred to leech the upload bandwidth of those who have higher allocations with their ISPs thus forcing those ISPs to pay for the upload bandwidth that the other peers at the ISPs with lower upload bandwidth allocations do not incur.

I warned Bittorrent that without my suggested fix, then the ISPs would end up blocking and rate limiting Bittorrent, which is exactly what has happened as I predicted:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/145786/isp.html
http://guides.wmlcloud.com/windows/how-to-bypass-torrent-connection-blocking-by-your-isp.aspx
https://www.quora.com/My-ISP-has-blocked-all-the-P2P-downloads-Is-there-any-way-I-can-bypass-them

Note that any solutions to the problem of ISPs blocking P2P apps that involve a TURN (when STUN tunneling fails or is blocked), VPN, or other server in the middle, defeat the entire point of extracting the value of the bandwidth allocation of users provided by their ISPs, because then one is paying for the bandwidth of the server to relay the shards.

If Storj and MaidSafe max out the consumption of each user's upload bandwidth (thus leeching off users with higher allocations charging the costs to those users' ISPs), they will also be blocked by ISPs. Additionally STUN tunnelling often fails and thus a TURN relay server has to be employed (or using the other peers as relays thus leeching the upload bandwidth of those ISPs who don't block tunneling).

In short, P2P for bandwidth consumption between ISP hosted user accounts is not going to be reliable. Many users will have frustrations when trying to be a storage provider. It will not be the case that every user in the system can also be a storage provider. And it will probably end up being the case that the most efficient storage providers will be hosted on dedicated servers.

In other words, it is a fantasy to think we can get decentralized file storage without paying for it.

We can try to design decentralized, permissionless file systems that correctly incentivize the storage and bandwidth providers, and the users of the system need to pay for it somehow. Whether or not these can remain permissionless given the need to host these on servers is open to further contemplation and study. Most all hosting providers include in their Terms of Sevice a restriction on hosting illegal copyrighted content, so unless one can provide a mechanism for which illegal content is removed from the system, it seems to me that hosts will be forced to ban the protocol (system).

So where I am headed with this line of thinking is that we ought to just give up on illegal content and illegal uses of anonymity. It isn't going to work. It is a fantasy.

Both technology and marketing are important. But continuous development of the coin is most important.

What possible basis could do you have for such an accusation and how does the allegation relate to the topic of technology vs marketing?

Because I viewed the linked archived content (and saw the existence of the Bittorrent forum archive going back many years even before 2008) when I made the post in the Monero Speculation thread, and now as you can see the entire archive is gone. And that was only a few days ago. So the probability that the sudden removal of that archive did not result from me pointing out that Bittorrent is in bed together with the corruption of the Net Neutrality movement is approximately Nil.

I am not saying necessarily that any particular Monero community member was responsible for the removal of the archive. I am saying that someone who reads the Monero thread and/or who reads all my posts was responsible. And it is very likely that TPTB are watching very closely all my posts, because they understand (as do many astute readers) that I am one of the brighter minds on the forum who is very truly anarcho-Libertarian oriented and that I have the marketing skills to actually make something happen on a large scale.

However, TPTB shouldn't fear me, because I am not going to do anything illegal.

The most important point to take from the post I made is that Bittorrent is a political gimick used to fool the masses into submitting to taxation of the internet bandwidth via Net Neutrality. Bittorrent was never economic. It is a fraud and those who are stealing content deserve their fate by buying into an uneconomic lie.

And this pertains to the Technology vs. Marketing thread in the context of we are discussing whether potential markets and technology are viable. It makes no sense to state marketing or technology are important, if we don't understand how delusions about each can be foisted upon us. Also I was responding to an upthread post claiming that we can replace centralized social media with decentralized variants. And to address that possibility, I must talk about the foundational issue of decentralized file storage. That should have been obvious from the post (and its context) that you are reacting to.

Also for those who don't fully grasp my economics point, the point is that if we try to force ISPs to give away bandwidth for free, then we in effect socialize ISPs. And then the government can step in with Net Neutrality taxation to make it "fair" by compensating some ISPs for others or what (but in essence what we have done is attempted to steal and thus the government is called upon to take over and steal from all of us). We are fucking idiots!

For those can't deduce the implications, without stealing bandwidth by doing file transfers P2P (taking the expensive upload bandwidth that ISPs have statistically allocated for client-server model paradigms) then we can't have file storage that is resistant to regulation and thus we can't steal copyrighted content (as I explained in my prior post that hosting content on servers will be regulated by the hosting provider's Terms of Service). Afaik, the reason upload bandwidth is expensive for ISPs, is because telcom "last mile" technology is focused on maximizing download bandwidth for the client-server model of HTTP. It is a natural law of physics that you would not run a main line water/gas pipe from the substation to each home, instead use multifurcation from the main to progressively smaller diameter pipes.

P2P can not be a bandwidth driven paradigm! Fuhgeddaboudit.

The problem for humanity is that ISPs are playing along with this Net Neutrality takeover (even while pretending not to), because of course it is a plan by which the internet can be monopolized and controlled by an oligarchy. So our problem is that paradigms such as Bittorrent which foster this theft, are less expensive to host content with. And thus this is why the new Bittorrent browser is receiving funding because TPTB have decided this a good direction to go and further their control of the internet. How can we can compete with the download costs of stealing it from the collective. We probably can't. So fucking clever how TPTB fooled us into thinking we had won (after they closed Napster and we thought we fought back), and yet we dug our own grave. Because stealing is evil. But the problem is that this lower bandwidth cost (by stealing it) paradigm can also be used for distributing legal content.  However Bittorrent does have the weaknesses that files are slower to start loading (i.e. higher latency), it isn't interactive, and it only applies to files that many users are simultaneously downloading. So thus we still have a means to fight back if we are clever.

When will fools learn that anything pumped up in the MSM is always a fraud to fool us. Kim Dotcom is being made into a martyr to fool us into believing that we must fight for Bittorrent every where and to give a boost to the launch of a Bittorrent web paradigm. We will be totally fucked with Net Neutrality.

---

Continuing my analysis, the other advantage of decentralized storage is durability and availability. This is a facet of permissionless in the sense that no one entity has a monopoly on the storage. It is not permissionless in the sense of allowing illegal activity as explained upthread (because the storage will hosted on servers, even those are owned/managed by different entities, they all are regulated by the law reflected in the hosts' Terms of Service).

So I am envisioning the possibility to design a system for decentralized file storage where the users pay the storage providers, but the storage providers are decentralized entities (even though they are all high performance hosted providers and not ISP user clients).

In this case, I think microtransactions is the only way it can be done decentralized. If we instead attempt to aggregate a monthly use plan (or similarly analogous aggregations), then some centralized party will be in charge of paying the decentralized entities, so then it is not decentralized.

So therefor I have just identified a potential market for microtransactions that can't be offered by centrally owned cloud services.

Alternatively, Storj and Maidsafe are paying storage providers coins for proving they are storing data, then data is exchanged in a tit-for-tat[1]. If used with ISP user clients as storage providers, this will have performance weaknesses as well as being economically a theft paradigm in support of Net Neutrality oligarchy and taxation (for the reasons I explained upthread). But a user can't do a tit-for-tax exchange if user is not also a storage provider, thus afaics Storj and Maidsafe are forcing every user to be a storage provider. Otherwise they need to use some form of upload bandwidth theft model such akin to Bittorrent's optimistic unchoking. The only way to fix Storj and Maidsafe is for them to adopt a microtransaction payment model so users can pay for the upload and storage costs to decentralized providers.

So therefor I have explained why Storj and Maidsafe are fundamentally flawed. And I have explained why decentralized file storage can ONLY be done with microtransactions.

Next we need to reason about the viability of the markets for decentralized file storage and also the technical viability/tradeoffs. We need to not only think about ability to prove the data has been retained by some provider, but also about how to enforce against the storage of illegal content (otherwise I have argued upthread that the entire plan is flawed since hosts' Terms of Service will likely block protocols/systems which can allow copyrighted material to be stored without recourse by injured parties).

[1] Note Storj also alludes to microtransactions (http://storj.io/storj.pdf#page-9), so perhaps the tit-for-tat exchange only applies to Maidsafe. I will study this more.

I asked a question in the DASH thread relating to future development and below was the best answer I received:


It sounds like DASH really is trying to improve its technology (based on the response above). How close they can come to closing the technology gap remains to be seen. When will the Dash Evolution whitepapers be released?

It is disappointing that besides TanteStefana2 other community members essentially deflected my question or provided non answers. DASH seems to be great in attracting newcomers and selling them on the idea of financial privacy. I wish they were better at answering technical questions.

Why did you change the name of the thread to make it another Monero vs. Dash thread? It was started as a thread on the general topic. It seems quite unfair of you to change the entire target of discussion to that narrow focus after several of us have invested significant effort in generalized Marketing vs. Technology discussion.

Does this entire Altcoin Discussion forum have to be about fucking Monero? (Monero needs to STFU and get busy on fixing their fundamentally broken paradigm for anonymity, if your point is about technology).

I have no issue with the post you made comparing the two, but I do have an issue with you changing the name of the thread as stated.

My first few posts in this thread clearly addressed this exact question:

But it wasn't made clear that was your only focus and that you would limit discussion to another Monero vs. Dash thread.

You should not invest in either of them (nor any anonymity coin!). They are both fundamentally flawed.

Can we please open the thread to discussion about other possibilities, or do I need to go create another thread for us to have that sort of open discussion?

I propose a compromise. I changed the topic title back to its original form.

I ask you that you kindly stick to the topic instead of going on tangents about bittorent forum archive conspiracy theories:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1337615.msg13665862#msg13665862

Is that fair?

I am just expressing my opinion that the forum doesn't need more Dash vs. Monero threads, but its your prerogative. And I wish I had known from the start that you wanted a Dash vs. Monero focus and you didn't want to allow the thread to mature into an open discussion. If I had known that, I would not have entered this thread in the first place.

As for the Dash vs, Monero soap opera, I have already explained factually in other threads why neither of them are reliable anonymity. If you get enough speculator fools to buy into nonsense, then they will all go around shrilling for their nonsense, and so the entire forum turns into nonsense. Neither Dash nor Monero have any user level adoption nor business adoption and they likely never will (certainly not given the attitudes I've seen displayed by their communities). Face it, you all are here just to gamble and P&D. I am here to find out if we have any serious opportunities for large markets. If there are no valid opportunities, I will soon be gone and finding a valid opportunity so I can earn an income working on something worthwhile.

Any one trusting their activity to be anonymous based on using Dash or Monero, is clueless enough to get themselves in big trouble, which I guess is what they deserve. I've tried to educate readers, and I get a lot of flak for it. I don't see any markets for unreliable anonymity. Sorry.

Sorry I can't agree to not explain how a factual topic I am discussing, can't be linked to because the archived content (which was there since 2008) was suddenly removed. You call that a conspiracy theory, I call that a blatant in our face smoking gun.

I am interested in discussing facts openly, thus I will start another thread. Thank you. No hard feelings. You haven't been disrespectful to me and I haven't been disrespectful to you.

Apologies if I any way impinged on your desired focus for the thread you started. It's better I start a new thread so I can focus on working through the factual analysis I deem to be very important (especially for my decision process on whether I remain in crypto or leave).

You certainly have some great ideas so I sincerely hope you do not leave crypto. This is an uncensored thread I never wanted to silence you or anyone else. My comment was not so much about the relevance of the content you were trying link to but the allegation that the Monero community somehow had the influence to get that content removed.  I did not see how such an allegation had any relevance to this topic.

In regards to marketing when do you think your new coin will be ready for launch? Are you working on a whitepaper now? I would like to hear more about your distribution model.

In the reply I made upthread, I stated clearly that I could not know that it was any member of Monero's community that was responsible for the archived data disappearing. I stated it could be anyone that was reading the Monero thread and/or reading all my posts. That doesn't implicate Monero. Nevertheless my opinion is the way some Monero community members try to control the discourse on the forums, I wouldn't be surprised if they wanted that information gone, which documented that I was making such insights back in 2008 before Satoshi came on the scene. Of course even that wouldn't implicate every Monero community member. A few bad apples does not a community make (yet a few serious flak holes can sink the ship).

There are many anonymous users here in these forums. We don't know who is doing what. We don't know who is funding certain things for certain reasons, which may have more to do with misdirecting the focus on the community than actually ever accomplishing anything for our crypto goals. Cryptonote was created by anonymous people. Even Monero's cryptographer is anonymous. Who created this anonymity that is easily broken by meta-data. I don't know if that is circumspect or just the way the world turns. And frankly I don't care. I only care that the archived data is gone and that crypto is moving too slowly towards realistically large markets. I am not anonymous (just click the AnonyMint link on my signature line).

Thank you for your comments. Same respect back to you.

Edit: I think this thread wants to be about Technology vs. Marketing and I want to discuss more in depth Technology AND Marketing, so I think a new thread is more appropriate. Also I can't tolerate the personal attacks any more (because I am losing too much time explaining about myself...which is irrelevant to my research), so I need to operate from a moderated thread. Hope you understand my reason.

Spot on!


The attention model is mine. We've designed it carefully against Sybil attacks. If you think you've identified an attack vector, do let us know -- I'll give you with an AMP bounty for it.

Feel free to join our Slack channel at slack.synereo.com and chat with us there directly.

I think if you want to become an interesting project among tech savvy users, then technology is more important than anything else. but at the same time if you want to make the project popular among anybody you need a good marketing.

but after all that considered, the project needs to be actually useful and not just with complex technological features.

As I asserted upthread, DOGE's marketing strategy is HOPE and nothing more (the fun aspect was only the confluence hallucinative mania icing drug on the P&D cake):

Marketing is most important. There is no difference in terms of technology between bitcoin and litecoin, but due to the bigger community, bitcoin is worth more than litecoin.

Marketing  is much more important. From marketing you can know the future profit of the project.  ;)

Marketing is very important. I will stay with me opinion,without technology will not be marketing or inventions who can change the future and get job places, change your lifes?

Yes you need to add microtransactions for things to scale properly, but it doesn't need to be added day one. User can buy storage tit-for-tat, the don't have to trade if they don't want to.

Technology vs. Marketing. Which is more important?

This is one of the questions you really cant answer its not really something you can measure.  If this helps I am moving from marketing to technology professionally. As a marketer i can tell you this: U gotta be able to sell the sizze. No sizzle=No sale. if you dont have the right marketing no one will hear or understand your great idea. SO these things are intertwined like lovers creating a baby which is the project. u absolutely need both.

Stop, go to the cookie jar, take 1 bonus Friday cookie for reward of your poetic statement :)

Oh, I don’t know about that. Back in 69/70, I was in the NE of the UK, pursuing a Business Studies HND at Sunderland Poly. The course had a marketing emphasis and as result I had the inestimable honour of being not-taught marketing by Jim Quigley -- also a successful businessman, the owner of a chain of supermarkets (verging on “magnate” status, that).

First day of term, we're all sat in the big lecture theatre, keyed up for our first Marketing lecture, bright-eyed and bushy-tailed (or at least desperately trying to appear so).

Down at the front, standing beside the lectern was this slightly-built, silver-haired, *very* well-dressed, little elderly guy. In a gentle Irish lilt he introduces himself (as Jim) and kicks off the lecture with a softly-spoken question: “What is marketing?”

Everyone assumed it was a rhetorical question. During the lengthening silence that followed, it started to dawn on us that it was an actual question. A composed Jim waited calmly. Some brief confusion reigned, after some frantic sideways glances a definition was hesitantly ventured: right product, right place, right price? the venturer expecting to be corrected.

“Mmm” said Jim, tilting his head slightly to one side and looking up at us. “Does everyone think that covers it?”

Someone bravely narrowed / broadened the definition. Someone else chipped in, expanding it to include research and over the course of the time allotted for the lecture, with an occasional light supplementary question from Jim, we thrashed out our own definition of marketing.

And that's how the pattern went for the rest of the course; Jim asked a question and the rest of the lecture was spent by us in vigorous debate over the answer, where there could be an answer and whether it could be fitted nasally.

<fade out>

<fade in>

Some time later, we labbies at HP were encouraged to take the in-house marketing course. I declined but many of my colleagues sensibly took up the offer. I was again impressed with Jim's perspicacity and also mildly amused when they each came back bearing a copy of Philip Kotler’s Marketing Management textbook, 7th edition --- 25 years earlier, Jim had selected Kotler (the 1st edition) as the set book for the marketing course at Sunderland.

I'm quite confident that were he around today, Jim would understand why Dogecoin has been successful. After all, I'm his pedagogical legacy and I understand why.

Cheers

Graham

Technology vs. Marketing     

Some copy-coins around here dont have any of both. The better could have both.

For the copy coins, it is the marketing which is more important. For the original coin, both are important.

Both, but in this Altcoin status, i think marketing is even more important than good technology.

But only the good coins with good develoments will survive in longer term. The competition is high.

Short term:  marketing.   Long term:  fundamentals.  For me it's about that simple, kind of like penny stocks and probably just about everything else.