|
There was a slight drop but there was nothing serious about it. The price has recovered quickly and this shows that most of the holders are not letting go of their coins. A strength that was seen with bitcoins a few years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
Ok that picture speaks volumes about Shadowcoin. So why is their development team not working hard to get it accepted in the darknet market place? Instead of comparing it to the others why not do the hard work and try to make it a winner.
|
|
|
|
U r basically asking How to scam in a way so that it appears legitimate?
Hehehe. That is another way of looking at it. @mandica. It is very hard to become a trusted entity in the cryptosphere because it is not regulated and the issuers of the ICO cannot be imprisoned. All you can do is do the best and honest job that you can. The FUD and the accusations will come whether you like it or not. So it is best to organize a simple ICO and get an exchange as an escrow agent. Poloniex will do a good job of this if they think your project is not a scam or if it is viable. |
|
|
|
Ransomware cases are mostly nuisances that disrupt and delay your work. Companies especially banks back up their important data daily or sometimes more than that. If a very massive attack was coordinated well that would affect 5 big banks at the same time then maybe it can cause a financial crisis of some sort. Banks have been raped beyond comprehension last couple years by online hackers who cleaned them out. Russian organized crime is lethal shit ! Banks do not get cleaned out. They do the cleaning out.  Do you seriously believe the "hackers" are winning? The reality of life is that the banks are winning they keep raking in the money "cleaning out" most of the population. If their angle fails and causes another financial crisis, no problem, let the tax payers bail them out again. |
|
|
|
I skimmed this and it looks like it's just a Zcash fork -- same distribution model, same protocol flaw (trusted setup), different mining algo. I think it's just a copy/paste.
We need to at least address the trusted setup, and any fork should reduce the founders reward (Zooko and co developed it)....
Anyone interested in doing a fork of Zcash to fix this shit that isn't just a copy/paste scam?
If this still has the trusted set up then this is nothing but another possible scam from the founders and developers. The trusted set up is still being questioned in the original zcash but their development team have not proposed a change for this "flaw". Maybe this is the strategy of the original zcash's team so that if someone decides to clone their project just like what zcoin did they will have to go thru the trusted set up making the clone a questionable coin.  |
|
|
|
|
Well nothing happened and the price is still ok. This is just some people waiting for it to fail and sensationalizing the hell out of the latest bug. To keep things in perspective, it is only a bug. Nothing the development team cannot fix. If everything fails they can always fork it.
|
|
|
|
@rizzlarolla. Please also check the patterns for these accounts. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=897152 and https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=897577These two accounts gave me a negative trust rating right after I warned campaign manager of Iconomi about the farmed accounts exposed in this thread, unless they remove it after reading this. True enough that proves that there is really a lot of click farming going on here. Also please take note of the dates registered of those accounts. Something tells me they are registering accounts none stop every month. |
|
|
|
|
Campaign managers should care and they need to have good quality with their campaigns because if not there is already a thread here that mentioned that the mods are already thinking of banning signature campaigns. Do you like that to happen? That would be unfair for the real posters here. So it would also be in our best interest to help the campaign managers protect their campaign from spammers and click farmed accounts.
|
|
|
|
To the campaign manager. I am helping rizzlarolla find spammers and the accounts that are made by click farmers. Please try to avoid becoming a victim of the click farmers and also avoid wasting the bitcoins of this campaign. This is the thread that is solving the actions of the click farmers https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1597201.0You will be shocked by the findings. The list is comprised of multiple pages in that thread. |
|
|
|
|
@Rizzlarolla. Are there more updates? I have been sending this thread to the campaigns that have members mentioned here in this thread. It is very laughable how some of the more experienced campaign managers are still accepting spammers and farmed accounts.
|
|
|
|
I think exchangers like poloniex, bittrex could be used as wallets because they tend to have more stable and up to date altcoin wallets than other altcoin wallet provider. Seen few days ago holytransaction was shutting down their wallet service but today it seems those emails are not from them and you can read here https://holytransaction.com/ so may be they will open up again and you can try their service to have altcoin web wallets. But i haven't use them personally till now, i store almost all my altcoins other than bitcoin in poloniex and bittrex. It will be a good idea for some of the exchanges to evolve and start to offer altcoin wallet services that makes the customer in control of the private keys. In Poloniex it might improve the lending of coins because customers will start to think that they are stored there anyway so why not offer them for lending. |
|
|
|
|
Is the code of Umbra peer reviewed and security audited? This should be the question that should be asked by the community starting now. We have seen that even a security audited code will also have bugs like the DAO. It very hard to trust a system in these times.
|
|
|
|
Ransomware cases are mostly nuisances that disrupt and delay your work. Companies especially banks back up their important data daily or sometimes more than that. If a very massive attack was coordinated well that would affect 5 big banks at the same time then maybe it can cause a financial crisis of some sort. |
|
|
|
You are putting too much thought in the issue. "Tainted coins" and "fungibility" are an overused concept and some people think it that it will affect the "value" of their bitcoins. People put too little thought into this. Forget the block size debate if you don't even have a payment network where buyer and seller are safe. It's not about the value of my Bitcoins I have since long considered them more like digital gold than currency anyway. Take this example you buy some Bitcoins from X and the next thing you know the police wants to know where you got them who you bought it from who you are etc etc they want to dig into you like really waste your time and well whatever it is they do. Perhaps they make you give up the seller to prove your innocence who turns out to be some madman? Now maybe this doesn't concern you but tell me for somebody wanting to use Bitcoin as a currency like actually buying goods outside DNMs why would you? This design for a payment network is reckless and I wonder for somebody buying and selling actual goods for Bitcoin how many troubles they encounter over a year and how many times they worry over who is paying them Bitcoin and where it comes from. Do you really think that the authorities will act in such a way without it becoming an issue too? That would be reckless on their part also. In what was the concept of protect and serve in the police system will now be thrown out the window. But how can you call this design as reckless? A public ledger made for all to see your transactions is not a reckless design. In fact it should be used by all the governments around the world so that its citizens will be aware where all their taxes are going. Transparency in bitcoin's design is not reckless. But the people enforcing the law will be. Like say you buy Bitcoins that are unbeknownst to you tainted and you cash them out and the FBI track you down 2 years later. They'd get a search warrant for your property with ease, harass your family and embarrass you infront of your neighbors while treating you like a criminal. And it would likely take time before they know they're barking up the wrong tree. Your time and your distress for buying a tainted Bitcoin. Ok. So kindly explain to me where bitcoin's design became reckless there. Because all I see is your FBI story that does not prove or show the recklessness of the design and it only shows how the FBI could harass and embarass you. Already told you in the text you edited out You mean this? In the ideal world you describe this design is not reckless but it is not an ideal world so it is reckless. It does not even say or prove anything. It only says bitcoin's design is reckless according to your statement and according to you. So what if the world is not ideal, it does not make it automatically mean that bitcoin's design is reckless. If the world was ideal there wouldn't be any tainted coins nor any criminals. But it's not ideal and there are tainted coins and criminals. You can read about these problems for others here https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4v28jl/how_have_fungiblity_problems_affected_you_in/Ok. So kindly explain to me where bitcoin's design became reckless there. Because all I see is your FBI story that does not prove or show the recklessness of the design and it only shows how the FBI could harass and embarass you.
Let's say you have a crossroad with no stoplights. And for arguments sake it is the deadliest crossroad in the US where people collide on a monthly basis. Well you as an architect take no responsibility for this crossroad and insist that the design is not reckless and refuse stoplights.. it is always the drivers fault. And who can prove anything else it is not the absence of the stoplights that is killing them but another car! Right? Come on man. Your comment is short sighted and is coming from a closed mind. Let me ask you this, was the invention of the car reckless? They had no stop lights and safety measures for cars back then. Or was the invention of the airplane also reckless? Flying is going against our very nature as land based beings, a small mistake will kill you and the other people you crash into. You speak as if the world does not evolve and change. Change is everywhere and it is happening everyday. Just because you think bitcoin's design is "reckless" does not mean everyone else is thinking the same as you. Many people very much smarter than you think its design is brilliant. |
|
|
|
|
@c789. Can you please explain the trusted set up even further? I get the general idea but why is there a need to do this and how exactly are they going to start the "trusted set up"? Is it as simple as typing down a few option in the console and then signing it with the golden key? Also what happens with the golden key? Can it be used to secretly change things in the protocol again?
|
|
|
|
A better comparison would be with the internet bubble of the early 2000's. Everyone was saying there was a new economy taking over and they all set up their companies and got their IPO's in Wall Street despite not having any cashflow or revenue. Everyone thought the party will not end. But it did. Where are most of those "companies" now? They are dead. But their founders made millions from pumping and dumping their companies' stocks.
Sound familiar?
1) Where is Bitcoin in this comparison? 2) Some of the companies born in the early 2000s boom were legit and they are big today and their founders are rich naturally, and their investors are rich too - those that didn't sell after the first big dump. You can't skip doing due diligence on companies or cryptocurrencies and expect good results. Like your comparison, it does not concern only bitcoin but all of the coins and projects in the cryptosphere. I also agree that some of the companies during the early 2000s were legit. In the cryptosphere comparison, it is bitcoin that is legit because it has proven to be. I am sure you already know this. While the other coins and projects have not proven to be legit. Not even Ethereum itself. Why is this? Because they do not have any revenue and cashflow. Some even argue that it is all a giant bubble ponzi. A million people using Bitcoin is a drop in the bucket of 7 billion. I would be cautious to say it has proven to be legit. Legit in what sense, and other coins not legit in what sense? As I said the only legitimacy is numbers and only because Bitcoin was there first, but it's a transitory kind of legitimacy. Myspace can can tell you all about it. If you compare that with NXT then it is even way way worse. It would be like a penny stock company shilling their "products" to set up their pump and dump exit strategy. I would also advice people to be cautious because it is not yet proven to be legit. Like you said the cryptosphere is always evolving so each coin or project will have to churn out gimmick after gimmick to stay relevant. |
|
|
|
You are putting too much thought in the issue. "Tainted coins" and "fungibility" are an overused concept and some people think it that it will affect the "value" of their bitcoins. People put too little thought into this. Forget the block size debate if you don't even have a payment network where buyer and seller are safe. It's not about the value of my Bitcoins I have since long considered them more like digital gold than currency anyway. Take this example you buy some Bitcoins from X and the next thing you know the police wants to know where you got them who you bought it from who you are etc etc they want to dig into you like really waste your time and well whatever it is they do. Perhaps they make you give up the seller to prove your innocence who turns out to be some madman? Now maybe this doesn't concern you but tell me for somebody wanting to use Bitcoin as a currency like actually buying goods outside DNMs why would you? This design for a payment network is reckless and I wonder for somebody buying and selling actual goods for Bitcoin how many troubles they encounter over a year and how many times they worry over who is paying them Bitcoin and where it comes from. Do you really think that the authorities will act in such a way without it becoming an issue too? That would be reckless on their part also. In what was the concept of protect and serve in the police system will now be thrown out the window. But how can you call this design as reckless? A public ledger made for all to see your transactions is not a reckless design. In fact it should be used by all the governments around the world so that its citizens will be aware where all their taxes are going. Transparency in bitcoin's design is not reckless. But the people enforcing the law will be. Like say you buy Bitcoins that are unbeknownst to you tainted and you cash them out and the FBI track you down 2 years later. They'd get a search warrant for your property with ease, harass your family and embarrass you infront of your neighbors while treating you like a criminal. And it would likely take time before they know they're barking up the wrong tree. Your time and your distress for buying a tainted Bitcoin. Ok. So kindly explain to me where bitcoin's design became reckless there. Because all I see is your FBI story that does not prove or show the recklessness of the design and it only shows how the FBI could harass and embarass you. Already told you in the text you edited out You mean this? In the ideal world you describe this design is not reckless but it is not an ideal world so it is reckless. It does not even say or prove anything. It only says bitcoin's design is reckless according to your statement and according to you. So what if the world is not ideal, it does not make it automatically mean that bitcoin's design is reckless. |
|
|
|
Who is stupid enough to fall for this? If he really did sell his house to go buy LTC then who is stupid enough to follow a hillbilly? |
|
|
|
Well, there is no doubt that we are in some kind of bubble. I don't think it is a financial bubble, I think the Bit-/Altcoin/Blockchain market hasn't even left the hangar yet. But we are in a "new projects" bubble. There are projects sprouting left and right, and while this is good for Blockchain tech as a whole, only a very small percentage of those will survive. Will NXT/Ardor be one of them? Maybe, maybe not. That's not really the point. The point is to find th right time to exit the boat, befor it capsizes  Your final sentence is the ultimate truth. What is laughable is that there are many people acting like they are very idealistic when it is very much clear that all of them are thinking of the same thing. That is to "find the right time to exit the boat before it capsizes". |
|
|
|
A better comparison would be with the internet bubble of the early 2000's. Everyone was saying there was a new economy taking over and they all set up their companies and got their IPO's in Wall Street despite not having any cashflow or revenue. Everyone thought the party will not end. But it did. Where are most of those "companies" now? They are dead. But their founders made millions from pumping and dumping their companies' stocks.
Sound familiar?
1) Where is Bitcoin in this comparison? 2) Some of the companies born in the early 2000s boom were legit and they are big today and their founders are rich naturally, and their investors are rich too - those that didn't sell after the first big dump. You can't skip doing due diligence on companies or cryptocurrencies and expect good results. Like your comparison, it does not concern only bitcoin but all of the coins and projects in the cryptosphere. I also agree that some of the companies during the early 2000s were legit. In the cryptosphere comparison, it is bitcoin that is legit because it has proven to be. I am sure you already know this. While the other coins and projects have not proven to be legit. Not even Ethereum itself. Why is this? Because they do not have any revenue and cashflow. Some even argue that it is all a giant bubble ponzi. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
