I often let my enthusiasm color my words inappropriately. I apologize for that and I thank anybody who gives me a "reality check" when I need it.


The transaction you quote, dated November 23, 2013, occurred after fundraising for NXT was declared over on November 18, 2013.  See:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=303898.msg3620732#msg3620732

On November 20, 2013 the BTC price was $482 and rising rapidly to the "all time high" you speak of, which occurred a week or so thereafter.

https://web.archive.org/web/20131120104851/http://coinmarketcap.com/

So the price of 1 BTC was around $130 when the NXT ICO started on Sept 28, $204 a month later by October 29, and was pushing $480 at the end of the ICO on Nov 18.  The peak of $1000+ came soon thereafter - but that peak was definitely AFTER the end of the NXT ICO.


As you wish.  

Good luck!

Sorry, the true number was much lower than my $220 estimate - and nowhere near "maximum price of all time".

The NXT ICO started on September 28, 2013:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=303898.0

Bitcoin price on October 3, 2013 was $130 :

https://web.archive.org/web/20131005112105/http://coinmarketcap.com/

By October 29, 2013 BTC had popped into the $200+ range that I remember for that time:

https://web.archive.org/web/20131029215827/http://coinmarketcap.com/

Facts.  I love facts.

Crypti spent a year and a half wandering in the wilderness trying to overcome problems with its 10 second blocktime Proof of Time algorithm (which failed) and then switch from a PoC/PoP/PoT reward system (don't ask) to a DPoS delegate system.  By the time the Crypti dev team took its final few months to implement sidechains and dapps (finally - a super great idea!) , the Crypti team was broke (both in purse and in spirit) and falling apart.  

Lisk is not the same plot.  It is going to skip 99% of the drama that ultimately killed Crypti.  

There is no such thing as a silly question.

Any dapp code that malfunctions is on a separate sidechain being run on separate servers operated by the dapp owner.  Malfunctions are his problem.  His problems do not affect either the Lisk mainchain or DPoS delegate node network.

Very interesting  data.  I have converted everything to current $415 BTC (yeah, I know, somewhat inaccurate, not "BTC price pop / price drop" adjusted) and added the most important one that you forgot.



NXT is in its twilight.  In mid-2014 it was valued ten times higher than it is now.  And those 21 BTC that started NXT were only about $220 each.

Duh.

64% of the estimated current ICO market value of Lisk is pure liquid cash.  Buy every single Lisk you can on an exchange that is priced lower than 0.64 of the launch price.  Those sellers will be literally giving money away for free.  With such buy pressure, there is no way the post-launch price devaluation factor will hit "two times" (0.50) or "three times" (0.33) what you can get during the ICO.

My opinion is that Lisk will pop and pop big because of the installed infrastructure on Day One, and all the publicity that is going to be generated by the approx. 4000+ BTC donation effort.  99% of the crypto world are not part of the ICO and has yet to even hear the word Lisk.  Soon they will, and they will want in.

Interesting but you have to take unverified Alexia results with a grain of salt.   They come up with these numbers by asking people to install the Alexia toolbar, so it is a self selecting group.  If only one person from a country with the Alexia toolbar installed in their browser shows up, and nobody from other countries, then the results get skewed like you see here.  Website masters can install Alexia software on their site to get much more accurate results.  That would be very interesting and valuable information.

@Max: I recommend you subscribe on this.  Splurge for the "Advanced" package;  I think you have the funds available for it.  

http://www.alexa.com/plans?ax_atid=c151db38-75b9-4c2c-8fa9-83ca6589ee4a

The balance in a voting account is not split among the people who that account votes for.  Everybody that person votes for gets the full balance of the voting account added into their vote total from all other accounts.

Yes, the whole network could be controlled by someone who holds a majority of Lisk.  This is equivalent to a 51% percent mining attack in Bitcoin.

Max, please correct me if what I have said here is wrong.  Also, please edit the phrase in red above to "At launch this 1% of votes would be 1,000,000 LISK (later more, due to inflation) or 100,000,000,000,000 votes." This change helps to clarify the big numbers are referring to "1%" and not "all LISK in the network".  I was a little confused the first time I read this.

In this situation, the solution is for the true owners of the Lisk to pull their holdings out of the exchange.  Once that Lisk is transferred from the exchange back to the true owners, the votes it was used for are voided.  

Now, if you have an exchange that doesn't give the Lisk back to its owners, then you've got a bigger problem than voting - you've got Mt. Gox.

That's a weakness that all blockchain security systems can't solve : out-and-out theft.

The real solution is to write a dapp that allows swapping of other cryptocoins in exchange for Lisk and so allow Lisk to become its own exchange.

A dapp is an app with a blockchain.  The dapp stores new information at blocktime intervals, and this information can be obtained from the dapp users themselves or obtained from elsewhere.  Once this new data is on the blockchain, it can be publicly viewed by everybody (not just the dapp user) and it cannot be tampered with or erased later and so becomes a permanent public record.  The individual that put data on the blockchain can prove they are the data originator.  The information stored on the blockchain can represent ownership of property.  The dapp program can monitor external data on the internet via APIs or webpage scraping, and can initiate an action (such as transferring Lisk from one account to another) if certain trigger criteria are met.  The blockchain is stored on multiple computers simultaneously and so is still available for access if one / many node fails or is shut down by outside forces such as government actions.

So the key to a good dapp is to think of an app that also uses the additional capabilities outlined above.  

Anybody got any other qualifiers to add about the capabilities / advantages of having a blockchain integrated into a traditional app?

Here's some links worth reading about initial Ethereum dapp projects:

http://www.coindesk.com/7-cool-decentralized-apps-built-ethereum/

http://bankinnovation.net/2016/01/here-come-the-ethereum-dapps/

And here is an attempt to define dapps in a general, theoretical sense:

https://github.com/DavidJohnstonCEO/DecentralizedApplications

I don't understand your comment at all.  Lisk has a method to add blocks to its blockchain, and adding those blocks gives a reward to the person who did it.  Those rewards cause inflation.  In Lisk we call our block addition method "DPoS forging".  This is a different (and far superior) method than "mining".  

My point is that "not mining" does not equal "less inflation".  Max could have set the DPoS forging rewards to a level that would have a higher inflation rate than Ethereum mining.  Fortunately, he didn't.

Lisk inflation is MUCH less than Ethereum inflation, and that is one more significant point in favor of Lisk.

Nobody knows yet.  

It is more important to get others to vote for you with their coins than to vote for yourself with your own coins (although you can do that).  Others will always have more coins and votes than you do.

Once again I am coming in here as the sheriff of facts to set things right.  

The spreadsheet pictured above comes from a time that is well after the ICO started.  The big accounts you see are XCR that has been converted to Lisk consolidated into Crypti accounts controlled by Lisk.  There is really nothing special about this spreadsheet as far as I can tell.  It certainly does not seem to be evidence of a "scam", just routine operations....

It just so happens that the hour before the Lisk ICO started, I made a spreadsheet snapshot of the Crypti distribution.  It lists the top 1000 accounts.  It accounts for all 100M Crypti except for 207 Crypti spread out in the few remaining accounts.  Wanna see it?  OK, here you go....

Spreadsheet Of Crypti Ownership At The Start Of The Lisk ICO

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NGbNRRTsXBCU7iZ0q_Mpqn7Gh8l7ZnBsHoHmc32KQyQ/edit?usp=sharing

Here's a photo of the top 35 accounts in Crypti at the start of the ICO:




No.  The top 7 individual accounts at the start of the ICO contained 9.34+5.11+4.04+3.84+3.68+2.29+2.00 = 30.3M Crypti, so 30.3%  not 40%.  

Why does this even matter?  I don't even see the point these trolls are trying to make.

Bottom line, here are the facts about Crypti at the start of the ICO.  There is nothing to hide.

Currently a little bit more than 15% (and falling slowly).  See post #2744 on page 138.

I'm  too lazy to post all that on every page...

Even if everybody jumps ship from Crypti to Lisk on the very last day of the ICO, the total % of Crypti involvement will be well under 25%.  And be sure to read my links in the post above on why Lisk is NOT a "Crypti Bailout".

Here's the tabular inflation comparison of Lisk with Ethereum.



Max has a really frontloaded inflation schedule (but still way lower than Ethereum!) to motivate community members to set up the DPoS node network ASAP.

Then he drops the inflation rate very quickly once that DPoS community node network is well established and has some run time under its belt.

I believe Lisk is the first coin that will couple forging rewards with DPoS voting.  This is a double edged sword.

In my original conversations with Max I noted this means that the forgers will get additional votes to keep themselves in power and the importance of community votes will decrease over time.  I still think this is something everybody should think about and be aware of.   The amount of this effect depends on whether forgers hoard (to stay in power) or sell (to cash out) their earnings.

I think Max is being influenced by the Crypti experience, which was very slow to transition from Crypti Foundation launch nodes to true community nodes.   He wants to come up with a strong motivator for many people to put up nodes quickly so Lisk is truly based on community nodes.  The forging rewards are his solution to this problem.

BOTTOM LINE : CUTTING LISK INFLATION MEANS REDUCING INCENTIVES FOR DELEGATES TO RUN COMMUNITY NODES

Um, can I just repeat what I said above?

LISK HAS MUCH LOWER INFLATION THAN ETHEREUM

Go back a few posts and check out those charts....

ANOTHER REASON LISK IS BETTER THAN ETHEREUM :

MUCH LOWER INFLATION !!!

Lisk going from 100M to 115M means 100/115 = 1.15 = 15% inflation in year 1
Lisk going from 115M to 127M means 127/115 = 1.10 = 10% inflation in year 2
Lisk going from 127M to 136M means 136/127 = 1.07 = 07% inflation in year 3
Lisk going from 136M to 142M means 142/136 = 1.04 = 04% inflation in year 4
Lisk going from 142M to 145M means 145/142 = 1.02 = 02% inflation in year 5




Hey, everybody, if you want to post this over in other forums, the link to this graphic is:

https://i.imgur.com/P408Go2.png

"If we assume that Ethereum sells 40,000 BTC worth of ETH in the pre-sale, and if we assume that the average price is 1500 ETH/ BTC, 60,000,000 ETH will be created in the genesis block and assigned to purchasers. Every year, in perpetuity, 18,000,000 ETH will be issued though the mining process.  Taking into account both creation of new ETH and loss of existing ETH, in the first year, this represents a monetary inflation rate of 22.4%.  In the second year the rate drops to 18.1%.  By the tenth year, the rate is 7.0%.  In year 38, it hits 1.9%. And in the 64th year, the level of 1.0% is reached."



https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/04/10/the-issuance-model-in-ethereum/

Currently around 3880 Lisk, but that number will drop as more investors show up.   When this happens, the value of Lisk will go up also, to keep your holdings value equivalent to 0.2 BTC.