The profit of IPO of NXT is great while the risk come with this. Who can ensure its success? Afterall, the code are written by Java. Though there are many functions which will be realize as said on whitepaper,it is still uncertain that if it can be recognized by others. Though new coins were not so many as now, the number is not small, so hard to avoid good and evil mixed up. Who knows that if NXT is a fraud.
Yes, all the technology is there but still very few people seem to believe it. I didn't believe it at first either back in late 2013/early 2014. It's certainly not a fraud though, as NXT technology is reality, not promises. |
|
|
|
Too few people hold too many tokens.
Why do you say that? I don't see any evidence of that. There are a a few people who seem to hold a few percent each, but from what I can tell the distribution has worked out to be pretty decent. Especially when compared to other alts. And considering Satoshi's million, even more so. |
|
|
|
Is it fair to say InstantDEX, BTCD, and SuperNET are his biggest projects to date?
Are any of his software projects out of beta?
MGW was completed more or less a while ago. Not sure what the official status is in terms of 'beta' or not, but it's been working for a long time. InstantDEX is in testing too. Anything that's in beta though is pretty good though as a beta release generally refers to something that is feature complete. There are a lot of projects that he's involved with. Last year most of the criticism was that he was taking on too many projects and that there was no way he would be able get anything done on them all. But SuperNET kind of took all of the individual projects and combined them in to one meta project. He's pretty much completed his end of the bargain for the large majority of the projects, there's still a lot of testing that should be done by others and such though. He just does the coding. All the other stuff like marketing and such is up to others. |
|
|
|
|
Did anyone actually buy in to the scam though?
I mean it wasn't even a cryptocurrency.
|
|
|
|
How is dash/darkcoin labeled as premined but not bytecoin?  Good question! |
|
|
|
I cant launch spendbbr.com until we have more market liquidity. xmr.to can make regular market buys without moving the price much because of much greater xmr trading volume.
Hopefully as Supernet integration nears more attention will return to bbr and trading volume will provide more liquidity for us. Right now buy or sell orders moves the price too much to make spot pricing (for all but trivial amounts) without huge margins impossible
Feel free to send me ideas for bbr economy building projects that will help to build liquidity. Specifically we need merchants, especially those who care about privacy. Remember our minimum mixin and other features makes bbr unique from other cryptonote coins
Looks to me like BBR is in a bit of a holding pattern while people wait to see what happens with related projects (e.g. Louisd'or, Supernet). Until then (and without inside knowledge or other news) its a gamble to buy (or sell) BBR in significant amounts at the moment. If I'd have to hedge I'd say it's more of a gamble to sell, given we're at ATL prices and (bar the lack of communication) all the fundamentals of the coin are still in place. My appetite for risk is quite high, so I'm accumulating as usual (albeit more slowly). Perhaps you're right about Louisd'or, but I can't see any reason why people would be waiting to see what happens with SuperNET. Recently, every other post here mentions Supernet - I think the implication being that incorporation into Supernet will increase the demand for BBR. I don't know enough about Supernet to comment on whether this is a valid assertion or not, however it certainly appears to be playing a factor in the thinking of some. It's going to be at least a little while. Still lots of marketing and derivative projects need to happen over time to begin to build a decent sized user base. The main thing I meant by my other comment that you replied to was that at least technologically, there's nothing to wait on with regards to SuperNET since it's all moving along well. Nothing holding BBR and its community back from getting more involved if they want to. What happens with Louisd'or is a big question mark, but at least that concern is separate from anything related to SuperNET. |
|
|
|
I cant launch spendbbr.com until we have more market liquidity. xmr.to can make regular market buys without moving the price much because of much greater xmr trading volume.
Hopefully as Supernet integration nears more attention will return to bbr and trading volume will provide more liquidity for us. Right now buy or sell orders moves the price too much to make spot pricing (for all but trivial amounts) without huge margins impossible
Feel free to send me ideas for bbr economy building projects that will help to build liquidity. Specifically we need merchants, especially those who care about privacy. Remember our minimum mixin and other features makes bbr unique from other cryptonote coins
Looks to me like BBR is in a bit of a holding pattern while people wait to see what happens with related projects (e.g. Louisd'or, Supernet). Until then (and without inside knowledge or other news) its a gamble to buy (or sell) BBR in significant amounts at the moment. If I'd have to hedge I'd say it's more of a gamble to sell, given we're at ATL prices and (bar the lack of communication) all the fundamentals of the coin are still in place. My appetite for risk is quite high, so I'm accumulating as usual (albeit more slowly). Perhaps you're right about Louisd'or, but I can't see any reason why people would be waiting to see what happens with SuperNET. |
|
|
|
|
Yes, Paycoin is cancer and Cryptsy is incredibly stupid and greedy to have any level of involvement with them.
|
|
|
|
I understand that Cryptsy has the best legal council available. They are unlikely to do anything that would expose them to high risk or unnecessary liability.
In terms of reliability, they are one of the most stable and reputable cryptocurrency exchanges on earth at present.
I highly doubt their lawyers were made aware of this. Five minutes of googling Paycoin and they'd be all over them telling the to get as far away as they can. |
|
|
|
Outside of paycoin completely, this is a topic worthy of extensive writing. As time permits, I think I will write a paper on it (although it may take a bit of time). This is a great philosophical discussion that I think should be addressed now rather then later because of the nature of cryptos. And it should be a discussion where many of the leaders of the crypto community should interject and give opinions on all sides. This should be a major topic of discussion for all communities, because it could influence future laws on how cryptos should be regulated (ignoring the fact that there will be people here stating that cryptos shouldnt be regulated, but we all know it will happen, starting with BitLicence).
As a matter of fact, this should be moved to the general section instead of the alts section (even though it was derived from the Paycoin discussions).
It's always interested me how little discussion this topic has received over the years. So many people completely dismiss it, but in many cases it could be the rational decision for the majority to support such measures. I think some people think that it means immediate death of the currency and or loss of confidence if such actions were to be taken. |
|
|
|
|
Actually the distribution seems to have turned out pretty well for NXT from what I can tell. Lots of people interested in NXT it seems and a steady stream of new interest in it since launch.
1.5 years of open market trading has seen a lot of NXT change hands.
What I've learned over the years anyway is that the most important thing with crypto distribution isn't how many people it gets distributed to, but instead who adds the most value to the economy. Either by funding projects that add value or using their funds as an incentive to work to grow the ecosystem. Incentives matter.
Distribution happens naturally anyway via an open market as the market cap grows. Eventually the goal is to have more money coming in than going out. At this point the only way that's likely going to happen is by people building services and business on top of the platform. The only major problem NXT has now is that hardly anyone really understands what it is or what it can offer people. That should begin to change gradually over time though.
|
|
|
|
Possible reasons that ESMA focussed so hard on Nxt are that most of the other 2nd gen crypto-platforms are either based on the BTC blockchain, Nxt clones, not actually launched yet, or centralised corporate projects. As the ESMA are interested in securities, it's only logical for them to choose to look at the most established Asset Exchange/crypto securities platform. Nxt AE has been running for almost one year now, and the Nxt community has put a lot of hard work into it and the rest of the Nxt eco-system. This hard work is starting to pay off.......  "2nd gen" is such a silly buzzword. Sorry but there's nothing second gen about all those post-BTC coins, you would think that by 2nd gen those new coins improve BTC, but they don't. It's just a different proof of work, with dubious results vs the PoW BTC uses. Are you familiar with the NXT technology platform at all? It's completely new and built from scratch with lots of improvements and features over Bitcoin. It improves Bitcoin in some sense by offering people access to a decentralised asset exchange through SecureAE or MGW. But it's not built on top of Bitcoin like some of the other Bitcoin 2.0 projects like Counterparty. |
|
|
|
lets just assume it was a scam... how might it play out?
It's not really possible for a fairly mature decentralised technology like NXT is to be a scam. It could have been a scam in 2013 when BCNext was around. But he actually followed through. Bernie Madoff ran his scams since the 1960s and was only thrown into prison as late as 2008, so much for the thesis that time disproves something being a scam. I didn't say that time alone can disprove something as a scam. It's the nature of the technology that its decentralised and thus not really possible to be a scam at this point since it actually exists and functions. Could an individual attempt a scam in someway related to NXT as a technology? Maybe, it wouldn't be easy but having some rogue coder insert something malicious is theoretically possible(as could happen in any project). But of course that's incredibly unlikely in an open source project with multiple developers reviewing code. I guess in that sense any project including Bitcoin or even Linux could have someone attempt to scam people in that way. But even if that happened it still wouldn't mean that the decentralised NXT technology itself is a scam. It's simply not possible for it to be a scam when it already exists and is functioning in a decentralised manner. |
|
|
|
lets just assume it was a scam... how might it play out?
It's not really possible for a fairly mature decentralised technology like NXT is to be a scam. It could have been a scam in 2013 when BCNext was around. But he actually followed through. I'll admit the first time I heard of NXT and read up on it I dismissed it as 'too good to be true'. Oops. |
|
|
|
|
I thought UtopianFuture was TaunSew?
|
|
|
|
So I'm sure I understand, James is asking for donations to help finish SuperNET?
no Can you sum up for me what James is asking for? It's just a formal procedure for the sake of transparency. The funding committee sign messages indicating their approval to release funds for the project. |
|
|
|
Anyway, what I've got above is mostly applicable to whatever codebase you're forking from, assuming it is ultimately something that originated with a bitcoin fork. You may have to find the respective functions living in different files with earlier versions, or they may be slightly differently structured, but adapting things is pretty straightforward.
And I haven't kept up with Litecoin; aren't they lagging behind Bitcoin in features these days? Did stealth addresses, deterministic wallets, etc, ever make it into Litecoin?
I believe there is an adaptation of Electrum for Litecoin, so yes for deterministic wallet. |
|
|
|
Aren't most altcoins forked from Litecoin nowadays rather than Bitcoin? OP's tutorial could probably be useful for someone who just wants to learn the basic ideas behind forking a coin but an equivalent tutorial for Litecoin might be more useful for most people.
No one should be forking from Litecoin in 2015. Or 2014 for that matter, but I'd give them a pass since it was so common in 2013 and before. |
|
|
|
|
Decentralised torrenting!
Wow, it's 2001 all over again!
|
|
|
|
None of those things are 'coins'. They're assets. At least Gems and NXTventure are. I think Ethercoin is supposed to be a token that represents ether, but who knows if it's legit. I know Gems and NXTventure are definitely legit assets though. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
