Bitcoin Forum

What is happening to Synereo guys, more than +500% during the night?

People are staring to realize the true value of Synereo.

Poloniex just has added it

Yes, people from every corner of the world are speaking of Synereo and how it's going to be the next big thing.

Let me fix that for you:


During last 2 hours it has dropped from 94k to 37k.

Look at the chart. It was very cheap to pump this coin. Now whales are simply unloading on noob traders.

Exactly!

That's just a small correction.  You will see that soon...

30k now. When is soon?

Just a P&D.

Yes it was obvious that whales were playing, sold half of my AMP at the top, made nice profit and now going to hold the rest since I am not in need of liquidity.

Yep, that's it. The Polo effect.

Synero proved to be one helluva sleeper! ;D

That's what I did when it reached only (!) 10000 satoshis on Trex. I'm now playin' with house money. :)

I can say the same now  ;D ;D

Price is looking very manipulated at the moment. Stay out unless you want to get pushed around by the sharks.

And I just found out that Synero benefitted from a two-fer: listed on Polo and mentioned in a Huffington Post Business article.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pradeep-aradhya/are-we-ready-for-a-global_b_9591580.html

 :)

Synereo is up against someone who knows marketing and implementation of million user adopted software better than they do. And we didn't and won't ICO/premine/instamine, meaning that our network effects and adoption will blow theirs away. Synereo is a vaporware P&D so keep that in mind:

This is a nice article  ;D but maybe too long for most actual outsiders to read it.

Lol that's not the likely explanation.   More likely is that a whale is pumping it to draw in the suckers.  I agree with the above comment that it's a big manipulation and if you buy in now prepare to get burned.  Never heard of this coin but I'm still 99% sure it's just another shitcoin.

Oh, man you are such a dumbass! Actually it's not a coin it's a token of a decentralized social network. And you better buy some because it means a lot.

Agreed. You'll find links to my analysis in the other Synereo thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1344997.msg13713923#msg13713923).

Why Just 99% sure?  Why aren't you 100% sure?

I am not even 100% sure I will live until tomorrow.

Seriously I know software development. I know how to detect which projects are capable. Synereo doesn't have the chops. I listened to their Hangouts and I studied the technology. I am quite confident this is just a scheme to sell a token to fund the math delusions of Greg Meredith.

I already explained they the economics they are proposing for a business model make no sense.

Sorry because I know readers do want to see a real decentralized alternative for social networking. And that is what I am working on. So yes my comments are biased. Synereo and my project are competitors. The difference is I did not launch a token before making the social network popular. I don't put the scam horse before the development cart.

Well, that's your opinion and you are entitled to it, but I don't agree with it.  There are quite a few people who also don't agree with it.  Imo, Synereo is a thousand times better than the centralized alternatives like Facebook and Twitter, and Synereo's business model makes much more sense than theirs.  I respect your intelligence, but you aren't the only "genius level" person on this forum.

Thanks. I will quote from my other reply to you and leave it at that. Good luck to them. May the best competitor win.


Oh and yes, Greg is smart. And probably (almost certaintly) smarter than me at math.

Why do you think it won't work? What chops are needed? You said nothing but 'I know...'.
And don't be so sick about Synereo because your project is a failure and this one is a success.

I answered you already as quoted above, but you are obviously blind or simply a disingenuous asshat.

Reality check:

http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/what-happened-to-the-facebook-killer-it-s-complicated

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_software_and_protocols_for_distributed_social_networking

Anyone ever counted how many "facebook killers" are out there? Tsu.co is the last one I heard of.

And what about Diaspora, if we are talking about decentralized social networks? Didn't work out either. The name sucked anyway.

The problem all this "faceook killers" have is the same problem sodas have that are trying to compete with Coca-Cola. Or operating systems that are trying to compete with existing ones. Or… well you get the gist. But it's ten times worse, because the main premise of social networks is, that they need to be popular; that is their function.

It's like trying to sell a telephone book, but you are missing half of the numbers, or selling a map, but you are missing half the street names. Even if you would try to sell it at 1/3 the price and it is printed on real nice paper, nobody would buy it.

This make no sense, it can be deducted from "that they need to be popular" that facebook, twitter, instagram, etc started with userbase of millions and not a few people? this is completly wrong, you need to gain popularity thanks to diversification in this market.

Hm. Diversification is a good point. The thing about twitter, instagram, tumblr and so on is, that none of them was supposed to be a "facebook killer", but filled it's own niche. Calling something "Facebook killer" implies that it is trying to occupy the same space as facebook, which is going to be hard as balls. I don't think it is impossible (wasn't facebook kind of a "Myspace Killer"?), but highly improbable.

Astute. That is precisely the only way to scale up.

This is the issue we are facing here with every coin, including Bitcoin. there probability of being used by a broad population is very low, but as bitcoin showed and still showing, as times passe the latter probability increase.
Don't forget that we are speaking about a disruptive innovation here, that is better in all ways that what we currently use. Thus, we may be in the destructive creation process described by schumpeter, and the user increase will follow the S-curve of innovation diffusion:

https://i.imgur.com/y8nl0JL.png

Bitcoin started with a niche use case.

Synereo will go no where without one. Ditto every other altcoin.

… hence all the "it's not money, it's something else"/Blockchain as a Service-coins popping up, like ETH, Lisk, Waves and so on. I'm curious to see where this is going.

Yeah but those niches need to actually work technically and exist. We've done a thorough job of destructing ETH in the Ethereum Paradox thread. I did an initial analysis of Synereo's niche and afaics is based on flawed concepts such as the value of paying social network users to share which I think is entirely undesired and uneconomic for the same reason that ads have a reputation of being mostly spam (linked upthread).

I don't know enough about Lisk and Waves to comment meaningfully on them.

Well, if you take it all together, you can see that something is cooking. I don't believe that BaaS is just a means of creating (fake?) value for a coin, I think a lot of people think the blockchain technology is a game changer and are now trying to find out what to do with it, apart from making money. Although, it might be a problem that they are fuelling their innovation and popularity by trying to drive the "get rich with us" train, which attracts a lot of people, who are only in it for fast profit (myself not necessarily excluded…). It is telling that projects like Bitnation don't seem to have a lot of popularity in this forum(regardless of the validity of the idea).
I don't believe that ETH is the one thing making it happen, and I don't believe it's Lisk (or Waves, for that matter) either. But you gotta start somewhere.

Ok, I got a little OT, sorry. I guess, I'm out.

r0ach, smooth, I, and some others think the only killer app of blockchains is probably currency because of the self-referential requirement of what a block chain can reach consensus on securely. Thus technically we think all the other crap won't work, unless it is using a centralized block chain and then what is the point of that?

Bitcoin locked up large $ transfers. Monero has locked up anonymity. I am going after micro-transactions.

we don't need to speak about Synereo strategy differenciation in details here to point its relevance in the market: getting paid to do what you do with facebook. Even if it would just try to kill facebook, we could consider facebook as a pre-paragmatic design and Synereo as a paragmatic design of social network (even thought an improved design could be created). If you would go to war, would you use the old first WW weapon design or the latest weapon design of war against ISIS ? I made my choice. ::)

I've read your post (fartbags, please re-login) and there was nothing but your doubts that mean no thing.

I repeat you need a niche to scale up against Facebook, else no one will even bother to use Synereo.


Thanks in advance for your detailed rebuttals of each of my detailed points at the linked thread. Until then, your hot air is as useless as fartbags.

Let's suppose that one day Synereo provide exactly the same as facebook exept that users get rewarded by using the social network (without speaking about huge privacy issues in centralised social networks), isn't that enough for people to switch to Synereo ?
Moreover, the russian social network Odnoklassniki got destroyed by facebook and Vkontakte which did not provide added value, which annile your point of needing a niche.

I already documented the economics of that. Ad revenue would never pay enough to motivate users to share. They share for much more valuable reasons. No one is going to work for $1 to $10 per day. Ads in developing countries pay less, because people spend less.


No. That is what the past experiments of many decentralized attempts have shown.


Facebook won because it had more users or Odnoklassniki won because of Russian language niche and Russian culture focus. This proves the point of why you can't beat Facebook at its own game. You have to have an untapped demanded niche.

tsu.co is trying just that. I have an account there that I use to communicate with exactly one person. From what I've seen so far, paying people for using their social network dramatically decreases the quality of the content, plus, increases reposts, at least if you base earnings on activity.

Get back when you have a research not your own understandings. But for now GTFO keep envying the success of Synereo it makes me laugh.

It's so jerk to think if one failed you shouldn't even try. Actually every new attempt brings new experience and makes it better. So something will replace Facebook eventually just like Facebook did to MySpace.

TPTB, using a social network doesn't equate to "working".  You are miscorrelating the two.  You are correct in the fact that people share for much more valuable reason than ad revenue.  That fact leads me to ask, "Wouldn't you rather use a social network which rewarded you for your participation instead of a centralized entity?"


Exactly.  Nothing lasts forever.  Trends change, businesses change, and so do social networks.

maybe Synereo's niche use case will be crypto-tech community. similar to college kids for FB

Synereo is the new ripple.  Mostly controlled by devs, incredibly inflated market cap.  Current buyers are going to get destroyed.

Synereo has a more professional public image than most alt coins, like Ripple, and lots of coins still to distribute, like Ripple. That is true. The conclusion that current buyers will get destroyed doesn't follow though. Marketcap of 20M is still peanuts compared to the potential of elevator pitch 'decentralized facebook'. Even if Synereo fails I see it going a lot higher than 30k, so current buyers probably wont get destroyed but might sell for good profit.

Are users joining Tsu because of the revenue or because of the lack of ad spam? I presume it is the latter and an ideological motivation to support a social network that will stop spamming them and lowering the quality of the social network experience. The compelling niche in this case are those who hate ad spam enough to lose all their Facebook contacts, which frankly is apparently not most people.

I posit it is possible to remove that ad spam and do it in a more compelling niche that will have more users and thus more economies-of-scale to scale up and challenge the centralized behemoths:

You don't buy steel toe work boots to play basketball.

The community here wants to earn profit on easy P&Ds, not the arduous slough of using a new social network which they don't have any use case for. Why should a speculator waste his time trying to be a user of a social network when he can make 100X more money buying low and selling high by simply lying to fools in this forum. You would have to make decentralized social network use more profitable than lying.

Good luck on that.  ::)

Because of Greg Meredith's process calculus math  ???

Because they presold AMPs for vaporware and zero adoption  ???

Because they are doing an ostensibly illegal, unregistered investment securities ICO  ???

Math isn't marketing. Soon all my haters and doubters will learn a lesson about disrespecting experience.


Agreed. P&Ds work well here when we are in a positive market. If the market for Bitcoin shifts into selloff, then so will the altcoins.

I am not "miscorrelating" any thing here. Earning miniscule revenue for sharing isn't a compelling feature.

I haven't seen any compelling feature or niche articulated for Synereo. I've read a 50+ page Synereo white paper of technobabble about process calculi.

I think you are underestimating the compellingness of that feature.  People on social networks constantly "share, like, pin" things, events, artists, etc with their friends.  Who wouldn't prefer to earn revenue for their activity, regardless of how minuscule, instead of it going towards a centralized corporation like Facebook or Twitter?  Eventually over time, I imagine that it will add up to more than you think.




You don't think that at the very least being free to speak your mind without Facebook / Twitter censors is a compelling feature?

You apparently don't understand marketing. Let me try to teach.

The key motivation you are tapping into is the ideological desire to prevent that revenue from going to the centralized behemoth which then abuses the best interests of the users— not the irrelevant individual income. People are not going to be swayed as to whether to share or not share based on the offer of that miniscule income, and in fact it will be insulting to many.

So the users have the ideological motivation, but when it comes down to it, they prioritize what is convenient, efficient, and serves real needs they have, such as contacting mom and cousins on Facebook. That is the hurdle the the irrelevant income offer doesn't solve.


I think it is ideologically perking, but it is not a feature that users will give up their existing contacts and vested inertia in Facebook for.

Users have a finite cognitive and time resource which they allocate to the highest priorities in their lives.

This is where we differ.  You think people will perceive the income as irrelevant where as I do not.  Even if they earn enough money to purchase a few meals out a year, I think they will be motivated to join and retake control of their personal online presence.  Most people do not solely rely on Facebook to keep in close contact with their family members.  It is more of a causal liaison point for posting pictures and such.  Imo, changing over to another social network isn't that big of a hurdle for most users, especially when they will be transferring their information not only to a social network, but a social sharing platform which will host not only Synereo, the social network, but also a plethora of other online social software.



How do you explain MySpace losing market share to Facebook?

Please correct about Odnoklassniki being sucessful, it is totally uncorrect. Only old russian stayed on Odnoklassniki, everyone changed to Vkontakte (most succesful russian social network) and/or Facebook.

Their main advertisement point is the first point, actually. Which leads to a kind of "grassroots" ad spam, people posting the same thing over and over again, low quality/big quantity posts, generic comments, stuff like that. And there are sponsored posts, which are basically ads.

To be honest, I don't understand this statement. Maybe I'm missing some parts of the thought process, part of it might be a language barrier. Anyhow:
While this might be nitpicking, I think representing non-monetary value is a valid idea for blockchain tech as well; basically like stocks or shares.

Done. Sincere thank you. I am absolutely ignorant about the European social networks.

So are you telling me the model leads to more spam (low quality/big quantity sharing)?

This is where Synereo reputation model comes into play so that users who spam low quality will have lower reputation in the eyes of the target viewers. So thus this another evidence that Synereo's model of paying users to share isn't economic for users (because Tsu's users only find it most economic to share low quality/big quantity).


You would need to digest the Ethereum Paradox thread and perhaps a couple of other threads r0ach started wherein I and smooth commented. I am stating a technological conclusion that I believe we arrived at, which basically is that there is no decentralized block chain consensus that is secure (doesn't violate Nash equilibrium) with external data (external to the block chain). And without decentralization, we lose the permissionless, trustless quality that makes block chains worthwhile. Note it would help a lot if someone put that into a white paper. Perhaps on my TODO list, but I have a lot of work to do now.

Greg Meredith @ Synereo has a different model for decentralized consensus that isn't based on a block chain. It is based on (in my poor understanding) propagation within a process calculus that models the nodes. Note the AMPs use a block chain, but the other aspects of Synereo's model do not. Greg's model may have some useful applications notwidthstanding I think they have the marketing model wrong for Synereo.

Note I am not saying there might not be some way to redesign some of the aspects of Synereo's focus in order to improve the marketing plan. It is usually possible to redesign something, but that doesn't mean it is probable. The multiple reasons (biggest one being preselling AMP tokens!) I didn't choose to enter Synereo Hangouts and try to work with them instead of making my own project includes that I studied them enough to come to the conclusion that their culture of development, their various skillsets, and their existing inertia in the current focus would not be an ideal fit for what I want to do. For starters, there is no way I will be working with a guy who has himself spread all over the place (Casper, etc) and not laserbeam focused on my project. It doesn't mean I disrespect their abilities though.

As Guy Kawaski says, I have a very low tolerance for bullshit and too much blahblah (although one would wonder about that claim given the number of posts I have made in these forums).

No worries, I would be ignorant aswell about theses if I did not have a russian girlfriend

Seriously I've learned the hard way several times in my life with failed projects that humans prioritize their important desires and needs. That income is absolutely irrelevant and worse yet is an insult to many people (which is why ChangeTip must die (http://hackingdistributed.com/2014/12/17/changetip-must-die/)).


Afaics, Facebook is for sharing/interaction/feed amongst strangers, friends and family, with more emphasis on the first two than family.

If the "other online social software" has some compelling features, then they may adopt. I have not yet seen a list of these planned features and an ETA on their implementation.


MySpace was mired into a static page model and failed to innovate and most especially around the network effects of feeds, social updates, apps and games (which is precisely what I realized is the niche I need to go after to challenge Facebook in the long-term but the cases which require a decentralized protocol):

http://techcrunch.com/2011/06/28/sean-parker-on-why-myspace-lost-to-facebook/
https://www.quora.com/What-could-MySpace-have-done-differently-to-avoid-losing-to-Facebook/answer/Edward-King <--- read this
http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung/2011/01/14/why-facebook-beat-myspace/

Well, I think calling it an insult is a little severe.  Most people would welcome any money they could earn off their online participation.




The technology stack which Synereo utilizes and is built upon is an open source platform which any other type of social interaction software can use and build off of the existing softwares' userbase.



Facebook is in a similar but worse situation as MySpace was back then.  Not only does Facebook not see the need to adapt to a decentralized setup, but they are in fact, structured in such a corporate fashion that they are unable to do so.  Such a decentralized arrangement would cause massive, if not complete, revenue losses for any centralized social network, which would cause the entire corporation to go bankrupt and cease to be.

Synereo pumper of presold AMP tokens for vaporware, wants to attack me already:

You've got about two more weeks to use that lame retort before people will start calling you a blatant liar.

No adoption and no use case is vaporware.

Any one can write some code and do a testnet demonstration and claim they have created something. GitHub is littered with code that no one uses.

We'll soon see.

Some useful information here. I really don't know what's gonna happen though, really depends on interpretation, so I wont be surprised if the SEC goes either way (allow or crackdown)

https://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/holdsec.htm

What is happening in two weeks?

Synereo will release their beta.

nice will watch this closely.

Looks like the party has stalled, down to 16k now. Could go either way now

Yes, watching it closely and hesitating to buy a few more from the profit made when it did +500%.

Got to admire the type of people who are investing in Synereo's AMPs:

 I think it might stay at these levels until we see a beta version, then .... who knows .... if the software works and the GUI is user friendly we could top 100M USD almost immediately. I don't like to over hype things, but this time it feels a tad different. If the Synereo team deliver the goods it'll generate a lot of attention as FB is so dominant, and doesn't have any real competition in the engslish peaking world.

LiarBLATANTLY FALSE:

Cool it man! I mean facebook has by far the largest number of active users in the english speaking world, so for most people 'Facebook' is THE english speaking social network. I'm not claiming to be an expert in this area, and not trying to deliberately deceive, so calling me a liar is too strong. Ignorant I may be on many things, but not a liar.

My point is that in terms of what Synereo's beta portends to do (decentralized social networking), there is a laundry list of competitors already. So to say that FB has no competition from decentralized social networks is true but to say it has no decentralized social networking competitors is BLATANTLY FALSE.

You have given no justification for any feature that Synereo claims to have that would make the result for it any different than any of the other in laundry list of decentralized social networking projects. Thus you have provided no logical support to claim Synereo will get a lot of attention, when there are so many attempts before it (even which are ongoing projects).

Well the reason I am posting adamantly is because I has already posted (in this thread) that information about the laundry list of competitors to Synereo two times before you posted (and by now four times). And you are making a statement to pump up the value of AMPs to n00bs who don't understand that what you wrote is BLATANTLY FALSE.

I edited my post and changed "Liar" to "BLATANTLY FALSE". Apology for using the imprecise word.

Please, please read the thread carefully before posting claims that could influence speculators to acquire or dispose of AMPs.

Blatantly false is probably accurate. I'm a noob in this space (decentralised social networks), and i can see now there are many projects other than Synereo. I am excited to see Facebook face some competition though, and the attention economy features are particularly interesting, so any project attempting new monetisation models are worth a serious look. I will, however, quell my enthusiasm a bit more, I'm not by nature a 'pumper', and I have much more to learn.
cheers

The model of prioritizing shared content by reputation and hash tags is technically interesting. But afaics, that alone is not enough to drive any significant adoption in my opinion.

Afaics, there are some minor annoyances with Facebook, but for the most part uses are not complaining about Facebook feeds.

To drive a market adoption, you have to attack some real compelling need that some niche sector has.

IMO, the reason all the decentralized social networking attempts have flopped, is because they did not address some compelling need.

In the software industry, disruption comes from fulfilling some new market that others did not see.

Synereo has this thing they are calling "The Attention Economy". They are also using a new term "Social Contracts" to describe how users interact with each other. It sounds interesting.

You need to have a Synereo server to use the system though. I don't think many people will be interested in running a server to use a social network. They could rent a server but that will probably cost money. Current social networks are free.

Other P2P social networks do not compete with FaceBook in the ways that Synereo does.

Facebook uses complex analytics to curate your stream.  There is a deep science involved determining what you see. And while the choices made for you are not always to your liking the success of FaceBook is determined by how well they can capture your attention.  Other social network alternatives either employ no analytics, or simple ones to curate your stream.  What mechanisms there are tend to compromise your privacy. Synereo uses intelligent reactive programming techniques based on your choices in directing your attention to automatically give you the content you want without violating your privacy.  

In addition, Synereo provides economic scalability and equitable rewards to content creators, curators, and participants seamlessly.  

These things alone separate Synereo from the pack. There are many other aspects of Synereo that are revolutionary.  It is a platform, not just an application. We cannot put Synereo in the same bucket as the other simplified FaceBook wannabees.  

Synereo extends algorithmic certainty from the blockchain all the way down to the user interface with verifiable formal mobile communicating process calculus ensuring that personal rules as well as social contracts are obeyed with proven certainty by the whole decentralized network.  Social networking is only the tip of the iceberg of decentralized applications of the Synereo stack being developed and being planned for the future. Private social networks and email are the beginning of what may be the next evolutionary step of the internet that will be trustworthy from stem to stern.  Synereo puts a powerful decentralized user agent in the hands of all its users.  It enables sharing of rules that allow users to empower each other. It enables collaborative applications to evolve among users in a community.  Synereo is truly in a class by itself.

Users will run their own Synereo node and become part of the network or use a node they trust.  You will not need a server to run it and can profit from the use of your personal nodes use by the network.

jimscarver, that is a good summary and I agree with the technical aspects of your comments based on my reading of the 51 page Synereo white paper. However not all the details are in that white paper, as had been covered in discussion between the Synereo lead dev and myself in the prior discussion (linked upthread).

So there are a few counter points:

1. See my prior post as quoted by fartbags immediately above your post, which argues that any advantage Synereo might have in prioritizing relevance of content, it is very unlikely to spur any adoption. They should not raise funding until after they prove some significant adoption. A release of beta code is not significant adoption.

2. I still argue the AMPs and model of compensating people to share is incorrect and is just to justify selling an ostensibly illegal unregistered investment security ICO.

3. As I said, their specification is not complete and public and thus we can't really evaluate if the technical (technobabble) claims are true. There is no way I will be digging in their source code to try to reverse engineer such DD research.

4. I simply don't believe that sharing is the main problem. Humans work out cleverly how to game Facebook and achieve the sharing they want. Humans are more clever than any static algorithm. IMO, the main problems people need solved in the realm of social network and social distribution are ones that are not even on Synereo's near-term radar afaics.

When or where did this happen?

Sorry I have no time to dig for it. If you click through to all my posts on Synereo in about 4 threads total, you should find it in an exchange between Elokane and myself.

It is also copied to Reddit in the thread I made about the truth about Ethereum being banned from this forum (when I was temporarily banned):

https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/42rvm3/truth_about_ethereum_is_being_banned_at/

Be careful guys.  TPTB_need_war, aka Shelby Moore III, has the FBI on speed dial, and will, at a moment's notice, report you to the feds if you disagree with him.  He is also one-hundred percent, completely, certifiably insane.

Ah, well hearing about some of the advancements since the white paper was written from the CEO is a good place.

Just hard to see where you came to your views.

As far as such speculation goes, only time will tell.

http://www.webmd.com/schizophrenia/guide/delusional-disorder (http://www.webmd.com/schizophrenia/guide/delusional-disorder)

I wrote the specification is not public. The CEO admitted it. What is hard to understand.  ::)

---

Pyschopath DecentralizedEconomics has been put on Ignore and it has already been explained to him numerous times why and the evidence of his behavior is in another thread.

What happened?  Did the FBI block your number?

Thanks.  The whitepaper is not up to date.  There have been many advances but they are not private.  They have been unveiled in weekly hangouts, the blog, slack, etc.  There are efforts underway to update the whitepaper.

A better stream is just one reason synereo will be adopted. About 20% of my associates refuse to use facebook due to privacy concerns.  They and those who want to network with them will be drawn to synereo.  Artists and other content providers are unhappy they they do not get a fair share of revenue from facebook.  They and their fans will be drawn to synereo.  Many on facebook are disturbed by the constant changes in facebook functionality and want to be able to control of their interface and functionality.  I myself am pissed off that facebook removed the friend-of-a-friend scope forcing me to either restrict distribution to my immediate friends or make it public.  Putting users in greater control will attract adoption.  And there are those who simply want to get out from under the thumb of the media giants for political reasons.  They will draw their social networks onto synereo.
The AMP model may need tuning.  There are continued advancements in the mathematics and simulation results.  As it is we can at least say AMPs provide economic incentives for the participants to drive the attention economy.  My belief is that the attention market is huge and should not be restricted and controlled by linking it to some other currency. We would not for example tie the cost of beans to the price of carrots.  In order for the attention economy to be allowed to thrive it should be independent.  Selling AMPs, and providing them as bounties to contributors, is no more suspect than selling advance tickets to an event. Many of us, buy AMPs to support the development of synereo because we want to use it, not necessarily as an investment.
Attend the hangouts etc. and you'll be up to date. Transparency to the community is a major philosophy of synereo affirmatively executed.  Updates to the documentation are forthcoming.
Privacy and ownership of personal information, intellectual property and work product is not important to everyone.  Many are quite happy using facebook.  It undeniably provides a venue where they can can network in ways unimaginable a century ago.  They enjoy gaming the system.  But it is not a level playing field and society as a whole will ultimately lose  unless we take back control ourselves and change the game. Synereo is currently the only game in town that gives us that opportunity.  It is a decentralized incorruptible weapon providing us a defense against all forms of information war.  Even id you trust facebook, nobody knows what corrupt elements have infiltrated facebook. We cannot know what purpose our information is being put to. Any centralized power can and will be attacked and by the golden theorem will be subverted in finite time.  Synereo has no central point of attack.  It is prudent that we support it.  The justification is compelling and eventually the public will come around. Resistance it futile :-p

My comment on your views had nothing to do with your statement about hearing news from Elokane.  It was regarding your unverified claims and assertions elsewhere.  There's room for differing opinions, of course.

However, while we're on that line, the info that you speak of was and is public; not being in the white paper does not change that.  Nor is Elokane the 'lead developer'.

Small changes, but important as to the potential for misinterpreting what you've said.

I stated we don't even know how the attention model will work because there are significant changes which are not holistically specified in a holistic document. That is a fact. Go refer to the discussion between Elokane and myself for the details. For example, it revolved around my observation that they would need to structure rep different for different #hashtags, which is no where in the whitepaper.

Elokane is the according to a Hangout I watched, credited by Greg as having the original idea and code, and Greg developed math to model and augment/formalize Elokane's initial work.

I have no idea who is the leader now, or if there is even one leader.

You are greatly misinformed here.  The technology behind Synereo, Greg's SpecialK, the persistent distributed process calculus machine, had been proven in production for more than two years. They also had the distributed Splicious social networking app prototype of Synereo running on SpecialK.  I believe you know all this but continue to repeat that Synereo was vaporware.  Why?

Greg work in process calculus leading BizTalk was also a bases for business process orchestration standards including BPEL, the workhorse of Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) used by enterprises today.  Greg disowned BPEL when it deviated from his model limiting its application. But that its the best thing out there we owe in no small party to Greg.

Greg work on Casper with Ethereum is the tip of the iceberg of the blockchain research Greg is doing. He has devised architecture capable of thousands of transactions per second.  He is leading an evolution of the blockchain that is scalable, objectively fair, incorruptible and mathematically proven. Watch the hangouts, they are awesome.  Synereo is blockchain agnostic and it is not planned to have its own blockchain initially, the point of the research is that synereo is guarenteed to scale and will be able to offer blockchain innovations to users in the future.
You seem to have ignored all the reasons for adoption I have given. Privacy is important to many who would rather not use facebook who will insist their contacts use a private decentralized system nobody owns or controls.  Many users do not want a user experience that is dictated to them without the opportunity to branch their own.  Many do not want others to control their streams.

If everything was spelled out completely in the original whitepaper they would have had it already and not need any funding.  The whitepaper spells out sufficient justification for the approach, not every detail.  You are asking for a book, not a whitepaper.

If you are suggesting that the average person does not understand what synereo is doing, that's very true.  Its quite abstract and the average person or investor isn't going to see the real value it offers without a lot of research and theoretical mathematics.  Dumbing it down is one of Synereo's major initiatives currently along with autonomous governance, UX design, etc.  It's a BIG job but the community is committed and additional funding opportunities are presenting themselves.

It you have been following the hangouts or Gregs posts you should know the #tag or "filter" does control perceived REO.  A religious evangelist, for example might have high REO with respect to his community, but not mine, due to my #filters. Filters are #hashtags on steroids!.

In the Synereo model, @channel are addresses representing bi-directional channels, while #filters are composable general formal social contracts in a language of decentralized mobile communicating process calculus consisting of only @'s (objects) and #'s (code).  Once you see the whole picture is is gorgeous.  Everything is type safe and algorithmically verifiable. Program behaviour is formally provable  Greg is willing to answer anyone's questions.  Don't give up on synerio because it is not one of those shallow ideas that generate a lot of excitement but have no meat behind them.

But, I think you know most of this so I really wonder what your motivation is to disparage synereo.  You appear to agree with my arguments and then seem to ignore them.  If your point is that synereo will not succeed by tomorrow you are correct.  The beta will not be for three months. Adoption may start slow but I anticipate exponential growth. Resistance is futile :-p

You need not war with synereo, but thanks for keeping the AMP price low.
<snip>

I've seen something running on Greg's computer screen in Hangout videos. Is that what you mean? If so, how does that exhibit anything that I can significantly verify. Is there a website I can load now and play around with? How many users are on that social network now?


I have no idea what that does and how it has been used. I can't find concise explanations of the use cases and technology. Seems all like technobabble to me and I am reasonably astute in technology.


Ah more technobabble. I already listened to several Hangouts and it was always handwaving. Let him write a technical paper that I and other mere mortals can understand. He hasn't done that.


Bwahahaha.  ::)


Customization is a potential compelling feature. But you've still got to hurdle the chicken-or-egg dilemma of users not using a social network where their contacts aren't already there. They need a compelling reason to use even if their contacts aren't there.


That sort of funding is best raised in an ongoing crowdfunding (not for tokens) and/or private investing from angel investors. By publicly offering an investment security, there will be more demands to make full disclosures.


You just admitted that this is technobabble being sold as an investment security (you even mentioned the price going down so you are insinuating it is for investment). Not good. You could get Synereo in legal trouble by admitting that.

Precisely my point is don't go selling investment securities to people they can't understand.


Good, but again generalized statements/goals are not verifiable technology specifications.


I have no idea what is provable and what is gameable. I don't trust his magic wand technobabble. It needs peer review. He needs to be able to teach the math to all of us in a way we can reason about it ourself and verify if it is gameable or not. I don't have time to go learn all the foundational research on process calculi.


Have I not explained my stance now?

Yes, you admit you are against Synereo because you do not understand it.  You do see some merit but doubt there will be strong adoption.  You raise the specter of potential legal issues with what is emerging as best practices in the crypto DAO arena.  You begrudge the founders of a truly revolutionary idea a share of the action.  They are not the least bit greedy in my book and are creating an environment that algorithmically trickles wealth down to the participants for the attention they generate, not to their pocketbooks.

You have been pointed to what you can do with synereo for almost a year but keep insisting there is nothing there. Why? http://blog.synereo.com/2015/08/12/top-5-things-you-can-do-with-synereo-now/

Where do you get all the time for all this nonsense?  Are you trying to keep me busy to slow Synereo progress?  It seems to be a destructive activity with no up side.  How is it that you do not have better things to do?

Because they have only provided hand-waving (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand-waving#In_mathematics_.28and_thus_some_formal_logic.2C_philosophy.2C_and_theoretical_science.29) technobabble and no specification that could be peer reviewed by anyone here.

The rest of your post was a combination of disingenuous drivel and more hype to pump some technobabble. Good luck.

Again you are speaking nonsense. There is ample material for review and comment at http://blog.synereo.com/ and the basic information at http://www.synereo.com/learn-more/, in the weekly hangouts and on the slack.

While I agree completely that more formal up do date publications would be nice, there are some pretty awesome innovations weekly and no paper submitted for publication would be out of date before it came out.  Greg's academic credentials are beyond question and there is more formal definition behind synereo than 99% of the decentralized applications out there.  Greg has done some recent papers http://www.mathpubs.com/author/Lucius+Gregory+Meredith have much more meat than the "hand waving" you characterize. I consider Greg's time better spent on developing Synereo which is why the community is taking on expressing Greg's abstract mathematics in terms you might understand.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand-waving

I tried to extract the details from those various resources and was unable to. It is hand-waving technobabble. You can continue to lie to readers. That is your prerogative.


Formal paper won't help us to vet it. We need a layman's explanation of the math. And pretty awesome technobabble hype is hand-waving.


Okay you can delay the inevitable wherein it will be shown to be a flawed technology. That will not help you.

There is a huge gulf between abstract theory and practice. Every homebuilder knows this. Greg will be cut down to size by reality later.

Synereo has no technology because both Bitcoin and Ethereum currently do not scale to the capacity Synereo will need. They are waiting for Ethereum 2.0. They are also working with Ethereum to create Ethereum 2.0.

$AMP is super over priced and has always been. Unfortunately there is big money involved in cryptocoins. They make deals in the background and manipulate markets to ensure they establish a free position while others are unable to obtain many coins.


This is the new scene. If you like the idea of Synereo "Social Contracts" combined with Ethereum "Smart Contracts" then you may want to check out the DAO that is starting to take off. They plan to use both technologies (once they are released)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1365958.0

Jim, you might as well not waste your time on this guy.  He likes to make a lot of outlandish claims, but in reality, he knows nothing.  He's full of hot air and not a rational individual.  Anyone with any common sense can tell that he's not stable.

Sure it is.  That is explained across several sections in the white paper.
2.2.2
2.2.7

and more in 2.7 - within pi-calculus.

One thing that might help, is to understand how other terms are used instead of the perhaps more familiar "hashtag".  It is just a content identifier.  You will find this represented by other terms, like "channels", "syntactic entities", or terms specific to pi-calculus like "persisted queues", or even the word "network", as this does not apply to "gods-eye" perspectives here - so these sub-groups are most typically defined by a topic, or keyword.

Content delivery is one of the true innovations of Synereo; it is baked into it deeply.  REO functions with it, and based on it.

Has no technology?  And I suppose the Sun has no Helium?

We not need the scalable blockchain to launch Beta, and introduce several unprecedented features into the market.  So there is no "waiting", only building and creating.



Complete rubbish.  The price of anything is subjective.  If you think something is overpriced, fine.  But please refrain from simply badmouthing other people's work for other reasons.  It's really not cool.

There are no "background deals", or you would not have heard of them.  There is no manipulation whatsoever.  Synereo does not pay attention to short-term speculators, or daily price. 

So in short, Greg is using a private language for technobabble.

That is sure helpful for peer review.  ::)


An ICO is inherently manipulation (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1434851.msg14559828#msg14559828).


I need to bow out of this debate now because I have important work to focus on. Don't expect further replies. Good luck.

Lol... once your position becomes untenable you abandon the conversation.  Hilarious.

Well, if you don't understand something, maybe I can help?  You are the only one saying it's "technobabble" - which just means you don't recognize it.  I understand it just fine.  Content management, including "hastags", is sophisticated, and thorough in Synereo.  Your "hashtags" are not left out, even though that concept does not appear in Twitter-language form.

And yes, you will find the same expressions in peer-reviewed papers, textbooks, etc.



Again, your opinion is yours - but we're not having a one-on-one conversation here; you are broadcasting.

A link to your opinion does not justify, or excuse your claim.  You think all "ICOs" are manipulation.  No one else does.


Best of luck to your project.

I am confident they are ILLEGAL if publicly marketed to USA investors.

And no those weren't just my opinions. You will always try to distort what I wrote. How about you just state what you think about Synereo and stop trying to tell readers what I said. They can read my posts to see what I wrote.

Greg @ Synereo is avoiding explaining all the specification and technology to us in terms we can understand. No excuses you can make for that which are valid. He is selling AMPs and not giving us information we can verify. That is an illegal prospectus. If Synereo didn't sell AMPs to the public, Greg et al would have no obligation to explain the technology in detail to us in terms we can understand and verify.

Edit: it is rather useless if I go expend my scarce time to become an expert in process calculi so that I could find game theory flaws in Synereo's process calculi approach to their hyped Attention Model feature. Because it would still be an asymmetric information market for the investors, as then they would be required to trust either my conclusions or Greg's (Synereo's). The only solution is for Greg to do proper disclosure by explaining the technology in terms that all AMP investors can understand. They have the time to produce a very exquisite website and consume hours every week on video Hangouts that do hyped handwaving on technical details, then they should also have enough time to explain the technology in sufficient detail that we can analyze without requiring us to become one of the few process calculi researchers on earth.

TPTB_need_war will never admit that he really isn't that smart.

Maybe that's why it's important to know that the managers of these are not in the US, and in this case, neither is the company.
However, regardless of either of our ideas, if they were truly as "illegal" as you state (out of context), then there would be action being taken, and I don't see that going on.  (not to say that there are not scams, and intentional fraud, etc - a small %, like in every industry)

Also: citation?  If it's illegal, it has a link stating so clearly.  Of course, you've employed circular reasoning by using the term "investment", and begged the question.  Crytpocurrency is neither a currency, nor an investment in the eyes of the law.




Greg never avoids explaining.  In fact, I've never heard him not add an invitation for more explanation if needed, to what he says in hangouts.  There are other class-like videos with more in depth info as well.  Analogies are a great tool to broaden understanding, and taking the workings of something like BitTorrent can give you an idea of how content distribution works on a decentralized basis.

Ask an informed question, and you'll get an informed answer.  Ask a vague question that expresses your lack of mental investment in a subject, and you'll likely be directed to some reading material.  Some amount of personal responsibility needs to be taken.

Investors regularly rely on the opinions of experts, including 2nd or 3rd opinions by independent parties.
Otherwise, we'd have no inventions like smart phones or computers, and we'd never had landed on the moon or mapped DNA, simply because "everyone could not understand it", so no funding.  Innovation and breakthroughs are by nature, beyond the reach of complete understanding by those not intimately familiar with the components already.

Details of USA Securities Law is covered in the following thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.0

Making AMPS publicly available for sale to non-accredited USA investors makes the unregistered investment securities illegal even if issued by foreigners.

Greg Meredith will have a difficult time arguing that he was not promoting this, and he is a USA citizen. In my opinion he is taking a huge risk.


Verbal handwaving is not technical explaining. It is clever marketing to fool n00bs, but I know better.


I have stated what is needed. When the appropriate technical documents are made available, which expert programmers such as myself and smooth can understand and verify without needing to become process calculi researcher. We need sufficient technical detail so that we can verify if the system will do what he is claiming it will do.


Please don't reply to my post with more diversionary bullshit. It is getting very repetitive.

Lol, yes these dorks (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iALtgkpIDRU#t=550) are going to dominate by requiring bloggers to learn Github.  ::)

Then @ 26mins we have Greg Meredith (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iALtgkpIDRU#t=1557) raving about recruiting an economist and hiring a former Ethereum developer who talks about Oleg's monad blogs. As if this focus on eggheads has anything to do with wide-scale adoption of a social network.

At @30min, Greg admits (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iALtgkpIDRU#t=1813) that the "Lively Gig" team has stated, "Synereo doesn't know what they are doing".

At @38min, Greg points out (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iALtgkpIDRU#t=2352) that there is an insoluble problem in that the value of AMPs will be siphoned off to ETH or BTC units. And he admits Synereo can't scale for 18 months, because current block chain model won't scale and will need to be replaced.

You must have a lot of time on your hands... you've posted the same comment in three Synereo threads.

https://i.imgur.com/rCBJYAs.jpg

TPTB is one special little flake. His time is allegedly extremely "precious" (his words, not mine), yet he keeps stalking crypto-communities with his weird convolution of crypto-anarchist social justice warrior and yet stockholm-syndrom induced fetish for US securities laws. He is an obnoxious paranoid troll trapped in the body of some wannabe Satoshi who happens to have a higher IQ than the average forum user and thus impresses many of these kids. That`s pretty much it.

The Synereo devs want your opinion as to whether AMPs should remain on the Omni protocol during Beta testing or switch over to the Ethereum blockchain.  Go over to the Synereo thread in Altcoin Discussions (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=995987.0) to let them know what you think.

Again, you coming to some imagined conclusion in your mind is not law.  Even if you're speculation turns out right, your claims are still wrong.  If a court case or new law sets a new precedent, future cases can be brought, but not from the past.

Alt currencies are not investments in the eyes of existing law anyway.



If you are the guy who doesn't get it, and almost everyone else does, then you should look in the mirror first, before claiming the teacher is "handwaving".

It's just a baseless claim, chosen so others are not supposed to be able to argue against it without their own instructor certified level of understanding.


It has been in commercial operation for a couple years.  Your approval is not needed.
Also keep in mind that he works from a computationally correct basis - this is as good as proof of concept in this context.  In order to 'verify' it, you need to learn those specific maths.  Without that, you cannot verify it for yourself, and everything said about it will be above your head.


So, again, please cease and desist with the negative misinformation and claims.
Ask your father for a refresher on Libel & Slander.

:)

With that strawman statement which does not address the points of the Howey test, you obviously do not comprehend the thread that was provided to you. You probably didn't even read it or read it carefully.


No one understands the details including yourself. For if you did, you would explain it here in sufficient technical detail so as to be unambiguous statements.

You are BS and you know it.


You are referring to components of the system such as Special K or Microsoft's use of process calculi, but the devil is in the details. This usage of some components of his research has no bearing on whether any of this is applicable to Synereo. Without the details, we can't tell you exactly why you are wrong.

And you certainly don't know the technical details either.

Any way, I don't have more time to waste on your nonsense.


Sue me in the USA (which is the only jurisdiction which you can enforce on me). Hahaha. So we can go in court and talk about selling illegal unregistered investment securities. There is nothing slander nor libel in demanding proper disclosure with all the technical details explained so that laymen investors can evaluate if this AMP token is a worthwhile investment.

Any way, this is all a waste of my time because Synereo will fall and JAMBOX will not. And JAMBOX isn't selling and hyping tokens. Talk to me again in 6 - 9 months. Until then, any thing other than technical details from you is hot air.

Lol, Synereo with a $9 million marketcap and only (http://coinmarketcap.com/) $0.016 million ($16,000) of probably fake (insiders buying from themselves) daily volume. You snakeoil salesmen having a hard time getting fools to buy this fake market cap now.

Stop wasting everyone's time with your ridiculous allegations.  Nobody takes you seriously.  Your stupid "Jambox" will be a total failure just like you are.

Notice how when you start with the fact that AMPs are not an investment, you don't have an argument?

The technical details have been made available anyway, and every week, you have a chance at asking Greg whatever question you want.  If you read the explanation, and don't understand something, you have to come and ask questions.  You can't just say it's someone else's fault that you haven't learned.



Of course it has bearing, it's a content delivery network - that's what it does.  They are not simply components, they are the foundation, and the tech stack that does the work.

You need to learn at least enough to be able to voice your specific questions, if you have doubts.

Ad hominem attacks are not going to get you there.

An AMPs investment security that is not "worthwhile" is still an investment security.

I'll be quoting this in the thread for future SEC investigations since you are disingenuously misrepresenting the facts to intentionally promote an unregistered investment security to n00b USA investors on this forum.


Provide a link to all the complete written specifications written in terminology and explanation that non-process calculi experts can analyze. This has not been provided.

Handwaving in video Hangouts is irrelevant and is the way you disingenuously mislead the n00bs speculators here.

Face it dude, you aren't going to win a debate about truth with me, because I am on the right side of truth and you are not. And I am smart enough to unweave your manipulative words.


I mean of course in the context of my prior comments that SpecialK may have no bearing on whether this Synereo system as a whole will function without game theory failure as a whole. One can't apply what is true about a component as evidence of what is true about an amalgamation of components w.r.t. to game theory. Duh!

There is nothing ad hominem in my statements. I speak only to the facts (and the lack of written non-technobabble, non-handwaving facts providers by Synereo) of the matter.

That's questionable.

I see you and the other idiot SynereoCommunity are good at mindless ping pong:

The bottom line is very simple here: this is not a debate, and if you have a specific question, the answer will be provided.

Once we have something uncovered, that you understand, and have a counter-argument for, then we could have a debate on it.

Hint: explaining quantum mechanics in a sound byte is not an explanation at all, it's just a few comfort words that make people feel lees secluded from that knowledge.  Understanding comes from study, and the more complex the subject, the more you have to learn before you can even compile a legitimate question.  Asking for a non-expert explanation, to be used as supporting evidence, is futile.  You seem to want to hover around the expert level, seeking to "disprove" something, yet demand laymen's terms, free of expertise, so that you can understand.  This is your contradiction; are you seeking to learn, or disprove?

I haven't seen any questions here that show you've tried to learn & understand.

I have explained many topics much more complex than process calculi in laymen's terms.

Stop making excuses.

Or continue making excuses. I really don't care. Synereo is going no where. We'll compare results a year from now.

Sockpuppet accounts now?  Rly?  Is this an expression of your multiple personality disorder?

Well, well, well, TPTB_need_war has been vindicated!

Hello! This is Greg Meredith (full name Lucius = light, Gregory = vigilant, Meredith = watcher of the sea; all of which means Lighthouse).

i don't frequent this forum, but i know that a lot of misinformation has been spread here. i want to take some time to lay out the case for your involvement, get you informed and show how you can help.

First of all, the Chain architecture that we promoted during the sale was agreed by Dor, Ed Eykholt, myself, and many others of the team. When the first draft of the architecture was produced, Dor insisted that it be renamed the Synereo architecture. This is a matter of record, and Ed Eykholt will testify to this.

Second of all, the architecture was part of an overall organizational plan that always included creating a non-profit company. The point of this company was to protect the commons. The RChain, itself, can be the basis many social applications, from jobs applications to dating applications - not just social network applications.

Moreover, it constitutes an alternative VM to the EVM, that runs on the blockchain. So, it's effectively a global scale smart contracting system with very specific features that would improve upon the EVM and provide scaling as well as correctness. Both of these come from embracing concurrency. They are talked about in our article on the rholang contracting language and how it prevents bugs like the DAO bug from ever being deployed /https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sGlObhGhoEizBXC30Ww4h1KHKGkmcy4NiCKitIBqiUg/edit?usp=sharing (http://our article on the rholang contracting language and how it prevents bugs like the DAO bug from ever being deployed /https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sGlObhGhoEizBXC30Ww4h1KHKGkmcy4NiCKitIBqiUg/edit?usp=sharing)!

So, this is technology that rightfully belongs in the commons and should be protected as the commons, and so Synereo made the determination, just like Ethereum did, that we should and would set up a non-profit to protect that for all, but especially to ensure a vibrant ecosystem of applications that would create additional value for the attention economy. Thus, starting RChain Coop was not Greg splitting off, but Greg following the plan, as even MalthusJohn of the Synereo team, has repeatedly stated in the Synereo slack channel quite recently.

The claim that on RChain the AMP is devalued is also inaccurate. The whole idea of the multi-coin approach of RChain where eventually other coins can be exchanged for phlogiston (which plays the same role as gas in the EVM), is that it begins to piggyback on the other coins distribution network, while concentrating social value of the AMP in the attention economy layer. (See the architecture document. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xmRvAjJEQ72-sR9luS34TG0BOpPn_6ztZjYBFCByKxo/edit#heading=h.lr5urui9mldf  (http://See the architecture document. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xmRvAjJEQ72-sR9luS34TG0BOpPn_6ztZjYBFCByKxo/edit#heading=h.lr5urui9mldf)). The salient point is that AMPs alone are useful in the attention economy. Thus, if a dapp developer makes a dapp that uses a different coin, to make it social, using the service level contracts of the attention economy, their dapp is also tethered to AMPs, and thus, the other coins their dapp uses becomes entangled with AMPs. This greatly increases the reach and ultimately the value of AMPs.

These are all very positive developments. Regarding the less positive developments, Dor has stated on this forum that our differences prior to the sale were not major. This is false. Here's a letter from Eric Blomquist stating the time frame around when our differences were becoming problematic.

"... I can so comprehensively empathize with both your position and with Dor's position. The ugliness of your relationship that Dina and I so consistently experienced and foolheartedly thought we might be able to assist with while we were still in New Zealand (in March/April of this year) was laid bare for all to see publicly yesterday. Mediation and meditation has failed, your suggestion made in the middle of University Ave in Palo Alto this summer to split the endeavor should be heeded. What are you waiting for?"

The only reason i went along with the sale was that Dor gave me verbal and written assurances that my requirements for governances changes that would prevent the mess we are currently in would be addressed in a timely manner. There are eyewitnesses that have already testified to this on video. He didn't follow through. We went into mediation, and he still didn't follow through. So, i went public.

Dor, pretending to act on behalf of all of Synereo, has proposed a funding level for RChain that constitutes failure to deliver on its promises to investors. It is not a workable budget as the video'd budget reviews expose. (See the RChain youtube channel.) i made a counter proposal that Dor censored from the announcements channel of the Synereo slack.

Make no mistake. i will work on and deliver RChain and the attention economy to the community, regardless of what happens between Dor and myself. i owe this to investors and to the community. The issue here is that Dor is not deploying the funds in a way that matches the promises made to investors. Dor is lying in public and Dor is censoring the debate. Ask yourself, is this the sort of ethics and culture you want in your decentralized social network? This is what happens right at the very beginning before the existing alpha code becomes beta and you start having sensitive information in the network. How will it be later?

This is why i am making all this public. First of all vigorous debate is good! Second of all, scrutiny and diligence on your investment is good! This is why i have made it a point to hold weekly meetings in video show the work we are doing, give team updates and answer questions from investors. Its why the code is open source, and everyone has been encourage to download and try out the alpha. My work has always been very public and scrutinized, and the core algorithms peer reviewed in high profile conferences. So, focusing attention and making people really take a look at their investment is great! But the most important point of all is one of ethics. Is this the social network of making a quick buck, of trading AMPs on inside knowledge of how things are going inside Synereo, or is this the social network that belongs to the people? Because, if this does belong to the people, then censorship and pivots from promises to investors have no place in it.

Moving forward, if Dor does not want to accept the amendment to the counter proposal i submitted, and at least devote half of the funds investors wanted to go to RChain to the effort, then i suggest we split the coin, following Vlad Zamfiri's quite excellent and well thought out proposal.

How can you help? Reach out to others in the community and help them get informed. Reach out to shareholders, andy@synereo, James and Gigi at NFX, Simon Dixon at BttF, and Dor. Let them know your preferences. State in a clear and loud voice what you want for your network.

If you have any questions, i am always available. Don't hesitate to reach out. i'm leithaus on by synereonet.slack.com and rchain.slack.com. i'm here to serve.

Peace,

--greg

"Make no mistake. i will work on and deliver RChain and the attention economy to the community, regardless of what happens between Dor and myself. i owe this to investors and to the community."


That part sounds like an important statement that could restore a lot of faith in AMP. If you meant specifically the SYN community.

Best to post here more often. A lot of ALT coin investors get a lot of their information from here.

I like the sound of we'll give it out to the commons for free I just hope investors realised this was going to be the case upon investing.

This post you've just made I think will at the least help some to gain some new insights. I presumed the Rchain was to be your property alone not free for all.

Would it not be better to say Rchain will be the sole property of synerio but that other projects can use subject to approval and perhaps tiny license fee? Then you would more likely get the funding needed from synerio?

Or are you saying that all that use Rchain will already be contributing to AMPs value in some way. Even dating sites using it etc?

Perfect!
a few developers doesnt seem to give the right attention to BCT and this is a very important place to any crypto. Like it or not, a lot of investors come from here and will search for information around here.

Dev teams should really be more active around here. that could avoid this hole crash in synereo price

Following up on Greg's recent post.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1424386.msg17108811#msg17108811

There will be an RChain project hangout today at 11:00 PST: https://zoom.us/j/2522161381 (https://zoom.us/j/2522161381)

A correct link to the Synereo RChain Architecture document, version 0.8 draft:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xmRvAjJEQ72-sR9luS34TG0BOpPn_6ztZjYBFCByKxo (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xmRvAjJEQ72-sR9luS34TG0BOpPn_6ztZjYBFCByKxo)

Synereo Slack: synereonet.slack.com  Join via http://slack.synereo.com (http://slack.synereo.com). 
RChain Slack: ourchain.slack.com  Join by sending request to lgreg.meredith <at> gmail.com with "Request to join RChain Slack" in the subject.

wasnt greg who said it wasnt possible to deliver Rchain with the current money raised?
I just dont know any more what is FUD and what is real.

Yes, Greg claims it will take $10M USD and five to ten years to produce workable code.  The best part is that he wants all the AMP holders and Synereo LTD equity investors to fund him while debasing and devaluing our investments.  The guy's a complete nut job.

Greg, I want you to know that we are all here for you and Christian to get help with your drug problem.  There is hope.  Once you get done with all the litigation filed against you by your investors and the SEC, we can work on getting you the shock therapy that you so desperately need.


What misinformation?  It's a legally provable fact, one that you've admitted on video, that you committed gross malfeasance against AMP holders and Synereo LTD equity investors.


Listen up nitwit, the reason people gave you money was because they expected a return on their investment.  Nobody gives a crap about your stupid, hippie "non-profit company".  You want to "protect the commons", but don't give a damn about protecting AMP holder and Synereo LTD equity investor value.  You know, those people whose money you want.  You were and still are an employee of Synereo LTD.  You do not get to decide "who" owns your work.  The company and its shareholders decide what happens to it.


The ONLY plan you should be following is the one to increase shareholder value.  Newsflash, you do not get to take money from people and use it to fund your own personal vision.


That's your opinion.  It's my opinion and the opinion of many other investors and AMP holders that your "multi-coin approach" will debase and devalue our investment.  It is also our opinion that your proposal for RChain is unfeasible.  Your current code doesn't even work in a truly decentralized manner.  Why should we believe that you can deliver on a much more complicated vision?  Do you actually think that people believe that you care about their money when you hold them as financial hostages via your actions, because you have a personal disagreement with Dor and the rest of the company?


That's a bunch of bullshit Greg.  You went along with the sale with the full intent that if you didn't get your way, you would make all the investors pay, financially, by destroying the value of their investments, until everyone gave in to your demands for control of our money and the company.  If you had so many disagreements with Dor and couldn't stand to work with him, you should NOT have gone through with the sale.  Period.  Dor, who is the CEO, has the right and responsibility to change his mind about governance or anything when it comes to protecting shareholder value and guess what?  You have to abide by it or you're fired.  You have NO legal power to unanimously declare that you're going to "follow your plan" which entails leaving, starting up another company, and attempting to force us all to fund you with what is tantamount to financial blackmail.  This is called malfeasance, fraud, and malintent.  You are solely responsible for it as it was your actions alone which led to this outcome.


Who do you think you are?  When you sold shares, YOU became an employee for the SHAREHOLDERS.  You do not get to dictate or demand your own funding levels.  You work on what you are told to work on and you deliver or you are FIRED!  You do not have the right to go public with internal personal disputes or disagreements with the intention of harming your shareholders just because you do not get the funding you want or "think you need".

You are the one airing your personal grievances in unofficial channels with people who silence and kick/ban others.


You made it public in an attempt to force our hand to give you further funds by putting everyone's investments in jeopardy from your actions.  You're not fooling anyone.


You're NOT getting any more of our money.


It's very telling that you posted this in this old thread and NOT in the official, unmoderated Synereo thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=995987).  I guess you didn't want to show your face in there, because everyone is screaming for your head, so you come here and try to get some support.  You won't even face those who you've caused financial harm.  You're a real piece of work.

You've got less than 96 hours to commit more acts of malfeasance against your former supporters and investors until you're gone.  Nobody likes you and nobody trusts you.  You are solely responsible for the financial damage that has been done to US, AMP holders and Synereo LTD equity investors, and you have committed these acts against US when you were a "board member" and "chief officer" responsible for looking out for our best interests.  I know and you know that you are personally liable.  I'll state it right here and right now that I WANT YOU OUT ON YOUR ASS ASAP!

So, he wants a lot of money and a lot of time to MAYBE deliver the product someday? what a great deal..  ::)

Yeah that doesn't sound great but let's get down to the details.

1. Synerios team right now minus greg sounds like nothing special right? which celeb math stars, conceptual designers, coders with proven production track records do we see here. How many coders or designers on the team understand enough to code out and produce the Rchain?

2. 3.5 M or whatever left is not a massive amount really. I mean many projects on here have TONS more than that.

3. Who will replace Greg? who? not we expect there are a ton of people like him for 100k per year. I don't believe there are. If there are why not start soft recruiting them now then? I

At this point it looks like Greg is essential right?? but then what about these points....

4. who understands the proposed Rchain design for real? which peers in gregs domain have said this is the best way to go to achieve what synerio is after?

Did greg ever answer these points by DL ( i don't support steam at all and would never invest in that one)

http://bytemaster.github.io/2015/08/08/Review-of-Casper-Ethereums-proposed-Proof-of-Stake-Algorithm/

5. It would be great for some known skilled brain boxes on Gregs level to actually put their weight behind the usefulness and realistic production possibility of Rchain.

6. Synerio must have enough investor advantage with Rchain to justify the financial risk of funding the R and D.



To me it just seems we need a few simple steps to get going with this project again.



1. A second opinion on Rchain's usefulness and realistic costing in time and funding.

2. If it really could spiral to 10M and that is confirmed by outside evaluation of the project costs then Synerio must be given assurances that Rchain would give them a fair investor advantage over those that will get to use it for free (various possiblities to ensure this may exist). I do not think that investors of any project would fund if they were not given clear advantage over others that can use the product. To me that is quite reasonable.

3. If the funding can not be guaranteed or Greg will not guarantee clear investment advantages to synerio then it's game over for this direction for synerio. Even though Greg stated on this forum yesterday he will complete Rchain for the community ( I guess he means synerio not the crypto community at large since he said it would not be fair on investors...that would only make sense if he meant synerio investors) whatever happens between him and dor. I mean how can he say that if DOR gives him no funding?

There is still at this point possibility to go forward with greg on board. Mediation needs to be stepped up and both need to give and take. I think Greg needs funding to a reasonable level perhaps more than he even asked for but there should be a full ledger and he must guarantee a return to investors by giving certain and clear advantages to synerio or even sole ownership if costing realistically 10M or higher. On his proposals I didnt really see any wages for him in there?? I guess that is so that he just gets a huge payout from his AMPS?? this makes sense but it's got to be worth his while. I'm sure " a reasonable level " could be ascertained by some simple polls on here really. Although people with such skill don't usually work for peanuts do they??

Rchain must work and must give investor returns - whilst rewarding greg WELL so he has some motivation to complete and paying for expedient production. If it is feasible after a certain period to release for the commons use after all of these have been satisfied to a satisfactory level then I see no real harm in that.

I am going to break my vow ONE TIME ONLY not to post publicly again until my project is ready for the public announcement, because this Ethereum/Casper/Synereo shit has been going on for a long-time and so many of you readers are SUCKERS because you do not understand the technology.

You are so easily fooled by credentials, hype, handwaving, and loads of other bullshit.

So here it is my final public post for next couple of months:

https://medium.com/@shelby_78386/alex-in-your-other-draft-https-medium-com-aleksandr-bulkin-7d4cb4933261-5cmhyc151-13062e0b422a#.eis9mxp0h

Gonna throw in my 2 cents here as you've been bombarding me with PMs :)

RChain, at least as a ledger architecture and partial scalability solution, will work.  I know this because it's almost identical to the "block tree" architecture that I developed 3+ years ago to drive the eMunie ledger.

I say partial because while it does improve transaction throughput by allowing sub-trees of blocks to be in varying states of consensus at the same time, there is still an limit to how far it can be pushed.

In testing my implementation we were able to process to ~500 - 750 tps on a network of around 100 nodes before things got a bit "wobbly", and we could probably have approached 1000+ with a larger network before the overheads creep into diminishing returns as it doesn't scale linearly to network size.

The consensus model being used also plays a large part in how much load can be sustained.  Back in those early days we were using a POW variant just to test the concept, and that itself played a part in dictating the limits of our proof of concept due to the tradeoff between block times and security.

I never tested out a POS based consensus model as I ended up scrapping the architecture as it wasn't sufficient for what I wanted to achieve.

However, I would suggest that a POS variant would allow transaction throughput to be increased somewhat thanks to faster block times being possible, but again there will be a limit where things start to get unstable and duct tape is required (or centralization).

Realistically, a block tree/RChain type solution should ultimately yield transaction throughput matching that of VISA (2000-3000 tps).  My own similar implementation was a proof of concept for the most part, but there were certainly areas and techniques that could have improved performance had I stuck with it, but don't expect it to get anywhere near 10,000s tps without some degree of centralized consensus.

As for Casper, I can't really comment.  I've only briefly looked at it and quickly concluded it wasn't interesting enough to warrant my time understanding it.

Is amp a 100% proven scam now or just a lot of fud?
Figured id ask here as its the proper place to ask.

AMP pricing as far as I can determine:

                             sats      BTC      USD

ICO spring 2015........2200.... 250.....$0.005

ICO fall 2016...........33000... 600.....$0.200

Dec 11, 2016..........  6000... 750.... $0.045

The only real bagholders are the recent ICO buyers (like CoinFund)...
And, frankly, AMP still looks expensive for what is basically 18 months of vaporware.

The bigger problem = idea that the world wants complicated blockchain based "social networks"...
Steemit has contracted by 50% in 6 months... people are choosing Medium, FB, Twitter, Reddit, etc.
Because they care primarily about simplicity and pageviews and influence.

I do - 500% on them, but I believe in a brighter future)

But its not a proven scam

Correct?

Gone:

https://blog.synereo.com/2016/09/05/meet-rchain-the-first-scalable-blazing-fast-turing-complete-blockchain/

Archived copy:

https://web.archive.org/web/20161018221037/https://blog.synereo.com/2016/09/05/meet-rchain-the-first-scalable-blazing-fast-turing-complete-blockchain/

I just want to know if its a scam, if it is im selling, if not im holding.

As per my knowledge, AMPs/Synereo is not a scam. They had some problems in the core team. Especially with this "Greg" and since he is out now, everything should be alright. Price per AMPs will take sometime to recover and get back to the all time high. I have invested into AMPS and holding it.

Its not scam but a lot of people lost their faith in the project. I hold my AMPs but I am not sure if it can manage to recover.

How much money did people lose on it, if it was just a little then its not a really a scam, but if they lost millions and the devs are responsible then someone needs to get taken to court.

What's going on with the internal debate? Is it still being hashed out or is there a direction going forward?

Greg was fired and we are waiting for the new news in January. Till then we all in a holding pattern.

lol
is there anyone buying this? after see this drop from 33k to 6k i would never put money in this...

i had some hope for AMP, bought some at poloniex right before last ICO, but after all that mess in their team is just impossible to trust in this project

Well upthread (or maybe it was the other thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1707479.0)), I suggested they perhaps replace the Rchain research with Tendermint/Cosmos or DPoS, but I've just blown up the security of everything scalable that isn't PoW (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg17207137#msg17207137). (or you can invest in a whales-rape-you system (https://steemit.com/crypto/@heiditravels/crypto-tips-proof-of-work-vs-proof-of-stake#@anonymint/re-dantheman-re-anonymint-re-heiditravels-crypto-tips-proof-of-work-vs-proof-of-stake-20161211t201538564z) if that is "secure" from your perspective)

So all these social networking experiments are D.O.A., including Synereo, Steem(it) and clones such as Ark. Nothing is going to scale securely to social networking volumes until I release my new "Bitcoin killer' blockchain technology. Sorry. These are the facts which will be clear to everyone when my whitepaper is published.

Bruce Wanker and I are laughing (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1524467.0) at you stupid fuckers who invest even after I warned you all not to (go read my posts in this thread, click my signature below to see my former usernames) and even told you that it was all technobabble bullshit. Ditto Steem(it) which I warned about. But I guess I understand that I warned similarly about Ethereum yet some speculators got very large returns on that technobabble delusion. Ethereum seems to have a long half-life because it will take a while for everyone to realize that Vitalik really failed and Casper is flawed. I was warning it was in Ethereum Paradox thread since last year. But these realizations take time to play out, because n00bs don't understand the technology. My whitepaper is going to be very educational, because I explain all these technological issues in simple English terms comprehensible by anyone with a reasonably analytical mind. 27,000 words thus far. Because I want once and for all, that you speculators (and the world) will better understand all this. Including understanding at a generative essence level what Satoshi invented as it relates to prior art in Byzantine Fault Tolerance and how my invention changes everything again. I want you to understand this not from a technobabble level, but really understand. I can't explain it all in a short blog or forum post. The whitepaper is 27,000 words and growing. That is what it requires to explain it holistically.

ofc people are still buying, they are trying to get their buy in price lower so then need a smaller pump to get out in the black. Im not doing it but im sure others are..

So - is this coin formally dead now, or are they still going to try to somehow get to launching after X number of years?

I like your point.