Whatever you do, don't put this on yobit, that is where coins go to die. I'd rather have to wait for it to be put on a strong exchange.

Nice!

Can't wait to see what else comes out

I had my crack at it

Just to let everyone know there has been an update on their announcement page stating the ico is over and that they are going ahead with their "goals". Not sure what to think of it but it is interesting to see them updating.

My question is what does it mean if it is actually going to be released and they only collected almost 300btc out of the 800 they were asking for?

Yes, I used to sell at the wrong time all the time. After a while I realized the best way to sell is not in one large sell order but multiple sell orders. Like for instance if you think a coin could go up a lot in the near future you can sell 1/3 at a reasonable profit, 1/3 at a slightly better profit, and 1/3 at a gamble at around the highest price you've seen it at within the last week or two. That way the worst that could happen is that you still have 1 to 2/3 of your coins and you will never miss out on big pumps.

Not a strategy for a dying coin as you don't want to hold it, but most coins will work with this.

earn btc. then if you want alt coins trade some btc for it.

From Philip at space.stackexchange

"
A satellite itself which is on an orbit high enough to not interact with the atmosphere is essentially maintainance-free. Without atmospheric drag it won't need any course corrections to maintain its orbit. It just stays there indefinitely.

Now about it's operation: This really depends on what the satellite is doing. Do the instruments need regular instructions from earth? How difficult is it to come up with these instructions? Does it send signals back to earth? How much effort is needed for analyzing its transmissions? How strong is its transmission power and how much data does it transmit? Is it OK when it can only be reached from time or does it need constant contact to a ground station? When the latter, do its orbital characteristics allow to use existing ground stations or will it be necessary to build and maintain new ones? Are we talking about one satellite or a satellite system consisting of multiple ones (in that case you could likely reduce cost-per-satellite significantly through synergy effects)?

Depending on these factors, the cost can vary between zero and several million per year.

One random figure I could find: The European Galileo and EGNOS navigation systems together are estimated to cost 800 million Euro in maintainance per year after completion. These systems consist of 48 satellites. Does that mean one satellite of the system would cost 16.7 million per year? Unlikely, because you would need almost the same number of operators and ground equipment. Would it be possible to do it cheaper when it wouldn't be an EU government project hampered by countless political factors? Likely.
"

And remember, maintenance of free software, which is the approach taken on a lot of projects now, would cost millions if not billions if it weren't maintained by a base of hackers and programmers that do it out of their own love of computers. So yes, maintenance would be much cheaper for a decentralized satellite system.

Well you wouldn't want it to be a soft sell, ham I rite!

It's a bit of a hard sell....

I found the truth! Ethereum has 6 triangles in its logo. 666 is the sign of the devil. There is a mountain that looks slightly like a pyramid on the building on the front page of their website... just like the pyramid on the back of the one dollar bill. The building itself is reaching up to the sky as if it is reaching for the alien overlords. the building looks kind of like the twin towers. ETHEREUM IS THE ILLUMINATI. ETHEREUM DID 9/11. ETHEREUM CREATED THE 2008 STOCK CRASHES! The people need to know.

Wait, what is that black van outside my house. Oh my god they're here, they found me. Tell my story! Let the world know before it's too la.....

Well, technically, if it were to reach the market cap of bitcoin within 5 years it could actually send about 28 satellites for around $500 million each. And that is a higher end satellite since some smaller satellites can cost around $1-40 million. And that is factoring the prices of today. If we were to partner with somebody like space X within 5 years the price could be cut to around half that. If we used more satellites that were smaller I don't see why it couldn't actually happen. You could even say the market cap of a DSStoken would be 1/2 or a 1/3 of bitcoins and still then you would have the ability to construct a reasonable system within a few years. Not to mention if you partnered with others that would invest into it the amount of cost for the DSS organization could fall to around 75% or 50% as you would find many companies interested in it.

Just as a thought, think of the efforts by both google and facebook in trying to create a free internet through various means like balloon systems and solar powered aircraft. They both spent money out of pocket for an idea that didn't even have much backing. Now if you create a network of millions of interested people who would push money into the project along with companies the ability to do something like this is very feasible. It just sounds crazy because everyone always thinks space is unreachable. But if you really want to make your mark on history you have to be slightly crazy and bold.

Also realize these are network satellites. They would never cost as much as sending a heavy, highly priced piece of equipment like a telescope.

We need to create a DSS token and fund a decentralized satellite system. That would be awesome.

 Less scams, more innovation. We need to go balls deep and create some really crazy shit. It's almost 2020. Someone's talking about an ai built off of the blockchain technology. That is the kind of thing we really need. Innovation. Not more virtual money.

Who's with me?

Jesus, everyone is so focused on exchanges. I understand why but does anyone hold there coins anymore or do they just throw them for a little btc the second they get a chance? I'm going to wait at least a few months to sell anything. I'm more interested in the platform more than anything.

You also have to think of the fees when orchestrating a ddos attack. The reason I bring it up is that the only people with the ability to pay miners for ddosing a site are corporations and states. So basically you would be facilitating anonymous corporate espionage and censorship. You would be giving an incentive to corporate greed and censorship which is the exact opposite of what the crypto community wants.

A strong cyberwar system for the people would be amazing but it is hard to keep control over it and you are creating a system that would compete against states in defense(or offense in this case), which the crypto community cannot naturally fight and could lead to a witch hunt within the community.

I like how majority of the speculation comes from the point of view of investors and usually they don't understand everything behind a project. I invested a small amount into eth and have been holding it for some time. I originally planned to start making dapps with it since the premise of ethereum sounded good. But after a while and some real digging I found that not only is it an unstable environment and dangerous to consumers, it also uses a brand new programming language(although heavily borrowed from javascript). This means that the whole project, from dapps, contracts and everything else promised has to be worked on from the ground up. So when you see projects like lisk(javascript) and MAID(practically any programming language can be used) you can start to realize that eventually eth will hit a wall and bottleneck if there isn't enough interest. No api's or really any other projects to work on top of makes for a horrible environment for developers and will mean less functionality for the user.

Whoever told them to use a new language from the ground up should be slapped. No one has even really showed interest in solidity. Eth has about a year or two before the others crush it with their larger base of programmers. Sad, but inevitable Mr. Anderson.

If it actually comes out without any major bugs, I'd say probably at 1/2 to 1/3 of zcashes market value. Also. The rush to dive in if it turns out to be real may raise it close to zcashs price. But this is all speculation on something that might not even exist.

It means how many times someone has contributed to the code. So basically from that list you would say for instance ltc has been updated 16 times. Dogecoin has been edited or updated 0 times. So basically Monero has a very active base of programmers.

Yes, very small amount that I won't miss. I am more angry that people can have great ideas and not follow through. To be honest it was the first ico along with ark that I participated in. I hadn't been in the crypto world for about three years and back then an ico didn't exist. All we had was dogecoin, mooncoin, and a whole slew of coins to mine. Simpler times man. Now you have to trust anonymous people with your money and have to rely on them to deliver.

I have to say the Ebitz ICO is a strange one. They have not released any information since the end of last month, but the site is still online. There is activity outside of this forum but not much anyone can go on. Plus you got a team(individual?) that had been defending the coin from the start. Usually people would just shrug off accusations if they know they've been caught but they really tried to defend themselves.

Either it is a scam, or this forum is too harsh and jaded to trust anyone that doesn't distribute information daily. In a way I wouldn't blame them if they were legit. Being accused so harshly wouldn't be the warmest of welcomes. I guess we'll just have to see. I'm pretty much 80% sure it is a scam, but that 20% is still holding some hope.

ETH is the best one at the moment, at least in potential. Everything else is trying to push against its tide. I think etc would be a much bigger contender if it relabeled as ether cryptic and established a contract network with encryption enabled up front. They could partner with zcash as a base asset like eth uses btc as an asset in their contracts. Then they would have established the only fully encrypted network. Though as it stands right now, an encrypted network has slow transactions.

Heh, beat me to it. If they deliver on their ideas waiting a month or two is not a bad thing. We don't need another team to come out with something that isn't even in beta yet.