I really don't care for MSC since it obviously is a flawed concept and has no real intrinsic value.
Can you summarize the reasons you think that? not quarreling here, just genuinely interested. i can't see any "obvious" reason. MSC is based on an idea that you can stuff arbitrary information into a bitcoin transaction. However, it does not leverage Bitcoin's main capability, that is, the ability to prevent double spending. You can use any protocol (http, smtp) to enable MSC. The use of Bitcoin's network is more hype than substance. That’s an opinion, in my opinion, not an obvious “flaw” that can be logically argued. For your premise, that “Bitcoin’s main capability” is in its “ability to prevent double spending,” you are correct, MSC does not leverage this capability yet. But that doesn’t mean that it won’t in the future. We’re just beginning to scratch the surface of what effects “conditionality” can have on trustless transactions on an open, secure ledger. Time will tell, but more will come. If you’ve got any ideas, let us know. We strongly believe that our critics will be our strongest influence in making the Master Protocol become more advanced with more useful features. The more masterminds the better, so please continue providing your feedback, and consider contributing to the effort by offering your criticisms in an actionable way. Thanks, Craig If MSC does not leverage Bitcoin's double spending prevention, then I don't see any point in using it for moving money around. MSC probably has its own consensus mechanism to handle this, but like I earlier opined, it doesn't have to ride on the Bitcoin protocol. Anyway, this is a SafeCoin thread, so we best stay on topic. |
|
|
|
I really don't care for MSC since it obviously is a flawed concept and has no real intrinsic value.
It just facilitated the biggest/fastest crowdsale in history exactly as it was designed to do, and protocol-wise it performed perfectly. Your definiton of “flawed” and mine are vastly different. Craig Any exchange could have enabled the same crowdsale thing. In fact, the BTC purchases as you can see, does not require MSC to raise funds. Just ask folks to send money to and address, compile all transactions in a spreadsheet and then dole out the funds. My definition of 'flawed' is from the technical perspective and not the marketing perspective. |
|
|
|
I really don't care for MSC since it obviously is a flawed concept and has no real intrinsic value.
Can you summarize the reasons you think that? not quarreling here, just genuinely interested. i can't see any "obvious" reason. MSC is based on an idea that you can stuff arbitrary information into a bitcoin transaction. However, it does not leverage Bitcoin's main capability, that is, the ability to prevent double spending. You can use any protocol (http, smtp) to enable MSC. The use of Bitcoin's network is more hype than substance. |
|
|
|
Also does any one feel MSC gets a free ride of BTC?
Yep. The MSC folks got a free ride. Meanwhile they continue to gripe that they didn't have the chance to buy up everything. SafeCoin looks pretty well thought out and a sound technology platform. MSC, IMHO is a complete hack and not worth my investment. Anyway, the reason MSC got a free ride was that Dave Johnston of BitAngels has vested interests in MSC succeeding. I really don't care for MSC since it obviously is a flawed concept and has no real intrinsic value. |
|
|
|
I just don't know if we have any legal action we can take against bit mine. But they made sure to tout that they were backed by money of some sort. So I wouldn't be surprised if it was a logical extension.
I would like to know how we can get Bitmine to support the product now that AMT is virtually non-existent. |
|
|
|
IF I had to take a wild guess here, I would say they are looking to fulfill all the orders left, get the miners to people and I presume get working miners to those with failed ones and then close up shop. I might explain why they are "sold out". Legally speaking it would be insane for them to cut and run at this point. They would get nailed very quickly. I don't think that is their move considering how messy this has been. I am sure they are not criminal masterminds or we would not even know we are being scammed until it was WAY too late. All said the signs are there. I think one of two things. They are going either restructure (which happens) or just get out of the mining business once they have met all their obligations. This is just a normal part of how businesses fail in the US.
No defense here just realities of how things go. They will either come out of this better or go bust. Considering the situation though, its not looking good. I think the best thing is to just have the community support each other at this point since there is no real technical support here besides us helping each other out.
I think they took the playbook right out of BFL's playbook. AMT is taking a gamble that BTC will rise in value. They unfortunately started selling miners in the November/December time frame. They don't have money to refund because that is tied up in flawed hardware and the profits are all but gone because the BTC that was paid was not converted up front. So they are now trying to balance on the legal tight rope by shipping miners (that are unfortunately not working). |
|
|
|
Few important questions I didn't find answer for- I didn't see anywhere development timeline. When we can expect working version. For what features the money will be used?
- Will the average user (not farmer) be able to visit maidsafe hosted sites without installing any client on his PC?
here is a bump for couple of questions hoping to get answered  another one I'm not from the team, but let me attempt. - No dev. timeline. Of what business is it to you to care how the money is spent? - Of course a client will need to be installed. I am not certain though if safecoins need to be paid to keep storage. |
|
|
|
when you think about it maidsafe is like a bot net, except you knowing install the bot net, and it pays you to do it.
It is a distributed storage network. Unless you are a farmer, then you don't participate in providing storage. Just like a person with a bitcoin wallet doesn't participate in mining. From the point of view of a user, it is like dropbox but isn't owned by a single company. Unlike the BitTorrent P2P network, storage nodes get paid coins. |
|
|
|
I crunched some numbers on the IPO, assuming 17000+40% for BTC and 3400+40% for MSC, and I'm not getting quite the same limits as announced here.
At this time we have total donations of:
MSC: 94237 = 448 570 425 Safecoins
BTC: 6132.88 = 145 962 544 Safecoins
The Safecoins going to BTC investors will come from the Safecoins bought by Maidsafe using their loaned MSC. The sum of transactions from the Maidsafe address which has so far donated 32 925 MSC=156 722 146 Safecoins.
This means the total remaining Safecoins to be handed out to BTC investors are:
156 722 146 - 145 922 544 = 10 759 602 Safecoins
This is equivalent to another 452 BTC. In other words, the total BTC accepted for investments should be:
BTC total: 6548.96
Another interesting observation: only 35% of the fund-raiser was funded through BTC, the remaining 65% going to MSC investors. Of those 65%, a whopping 85%, or 248 million Safecoins, went to 15 adresses.
Thanks for the calculations. As I understand, Safecoin closed the MSC offering by buying out all the allocated coins. So I gather that 15% of safecoins acquired via MSC is being resold for BTC. I am certain there are all kinds of insider dealing going on with MSC and the BitAngels folk. I however am not too concerned considering that the selling price doesn't appear to be extremely inflated. What I find pretty cool is that this could start up an arms race to build storage farms rather than ASIC farms. |
|
|
|
Saw Zenithcoin on coinmarketcap, tho'. "Doing quite well" is an interesting way to describe Zenithcoins performance.
24hour trade volume of $7.....I am impressed. Still, 134th is better than it's usual position at 220th or lower. Good pump, mate.
I am just the developer of ZenithCoin, it was sold months ago to a new owner. The new owner has some very promising plans. So when I refer to 'doing quite well', I refer to the deal making that is going on behind the scenes. |
|
|
|
maidsafe does a dropbox approach rather than i2p/freenet, Eg easy to use, plus if i grok it right maidsafe can be built upon, eg apps etc....
It's like CleverSafe ( see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleversafe ) however it uses a crypto-currency to pay providers for hosting storage. Folks comparing it to I2P and FreeNet are way off the mark. With Bitcoin, miners are paid to secure the validation of transactions. With SafeCoin, farmers are paid to provide storage. Imagine all that money and energy spent to secure bitcoin and instead used to provide value in a storage network that is private. The value proposition is plain and simple. If you don't get it, then you don't get it! |
|
|
|
It's their money? Whats wrong with you guys, wtf? Even if they would transfer the whole money to an exchange, who the fuck cares? There's no point in holding 5000 BTC on a wallet
Folks, the only thing investors should care about now is if your address is properly recorded in that google docs spreadsheet they have. |
|
|
|
Safecoins are a completely separate currency? Not running on top of Bitcoin?
Yes. Runs on its own network and some equivalent of a block chain. In this IPO round, appears that $6-$7 million was raised. (It could actually be less if you factor in price of MSC after the sale). So the float is miniscule relative to other alt-coins. And I am guessing the IPO is over? No. Still needs to reach 7341 BTC. |
|
|
|
Safecoins are a completely separate currency? Not running on top of Bitcoin?
Yes. Runs on its own network and some equivalent of a block chain. In this IPO round, appears that $6-$7 million was raised. (It could actually be less if you factor in price of MSC after the sale). So the float is miniscule relative to other alt-coins. |
|
|
|
what the ROI for IPO investors?
It should be atleast 40%140% - at least Wondering if I should back up the truck on this one. Still, 600 BTC left to buy before it closes. In a week, this thing is going to get a shit load of press. I wanted in for serious. I only ended up with 100MSC investment. I am trying to buy more now. Got some PM offers - but not with good prices. 100 MSC? So was that like 20 BTC? Decisions, decisions, decision... back up the truck here? |
|
|
|
Mastercoin is supposed to be at .2 all month during this fund raiser. It is a real shame that it is back down to .1. That 'fix rate' trick failed miserably. It made a very tricky market in the few days up to the launch - and then everything was bullshit. I lost a lot of money because of that bullshit move. Mastercoin can't play those games and expect no consequences. That price fixing royally favors those in the 'know' and screws honest people just trying to operate within the rules.
I am responsible in part for Chang losses. I told him all would be right with .2. I sure didn't know Irvine would close MSC funding and send the price back to .1 in the middle of the night. That was one expensive lesson. I hope Chang didn't lose as much as I did because he was rightfully apprehensive when I told him to have faith in Mastercoin. No more price fixing schemes which backfire to serious financial losses. I call bullshit!
I agree, the non-market rate for MSC was a bad deal. However, it was known prior that a limited (not unlimited) number of Maidsafe coins would be exchanged. Once that limit was hit, then all bets are off. Nobody could have predicted the massive demand for this. The non-market rate for MSC actually accelerated demand since people realized they could acquire maidsafe at 1/2 the BTC price. Of course, BTC purchasers aren't too happy that the MSC folk got a sweet deal. In short, sticking to a 50/50 distribution between a MSC and BTC buyers was fair. The big mistake I honestly believe is including the MSC folks in the deal. But that's just how the world works, BitAngels have a stake in MSC so they leveraged it in this situation. |
|
|
|
Why would I want to pay for their decentralized internet? Haven't people heard of I2P? Why would anyone pay for Nxt? Haven't people heard of Bitcoin? Because NXT has a completely different feature set than bitcoin and is designed to be a multi-currency payment platform where Bitcoin is more suited to be a crypto-commodity. What advantages does Maidsafe have over I2P? Because Safecoin has a completely different feature set than I2P and is designed to be a multi-purpose P2P platform where I2P is more suited to be a commodity P2P. |
|
|
|
what the ROI for IPO investors?
It should be atleast 40%140% - at least Wondering if I should back up the truck on this one. Still, 600 BTC left to buy before it closes. |
|
|
|
Why would I want to pay for their decentralized internet? Haven't people heard of I2P? Why would anyone pay for Nxt? Haven't people heard of Bitcoin? |
|
|
|
But essential AMT is just an assembler of parts. And they don't appear to be too great at doing that either.
That was my gamble. I thought it wouldn't be too difficult to fail in this. But apparently, it has been a complete disaster. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
