Ah how much I'd like to see those bears having their asses pierced by bulls! I hate those who think that it's only the Bitcoin out there and everything else should be worth 0$.
It's like calling a US citizen accepting only US Dollars and calling everything else shit, or a someone who holds gold calling silver shit.

Of course there are scums and useless coins out there, but those who group Electroneum with the real shitcoints either haven't done their research or they're cluesly against every coin except their favorite one.

I feel you, I've started investing with small amounts when it was at 7€. Then when it corrected at 5€ it looked like a good entry point to double the initial small investement, but I still a small investement. While it was under 3€ I bought some big amounts and today I'm -39% ... I wonder why they keep pushing the prices of all coins down after so many months.

I'm confused with something... what's the difference of VCU1525 and BCU1525?
The BCU1525 is based on the Xilinx VU9P board and it's modified by a group (I think the OhGodCompany?) in order to consume less power and run better on mining.
But what is the VCU1525?

The fact that your posts are not deleted is proof that the Electroneum team allowing free speech.
Electroneum is aiming to create collaborations with other companies, do you think any company would trust a community driven project without a central entity?

After all, no one is forcing anyone to use the official wallet. Just use the paper wallet, the command line wallet (CLI) or make your own wallet. And actually... if FBI is after you then you better keep your funds on a wallet you control, most people don't have such a problem though.

Since FPGAs are programmable and also they can have their memory changed (at least some of the FPGAs I've seen use normal PC RAM), how can a developer make an algorithm that's FPGA resistant and not GPU resistant at the same time?
But most importantly, WHY would anyone do that? FPGAs are like GPUs but capable for anything except gaming. Sure, GPU mining is a bit easier at the moment, but you still have to find the right miner and set the correct clock speeds. FPGAs can be as easy to use in the future.
As long as they're open source and not closed like the ASICs which will be turned into useless heaters once an algorithm change or the manufacturer decides to release a faster ASIC, I don't mind FPGAs taking over GPU mining.

Using hashrate as a method of comparison when talking about x16r isn't really enlighting!
But your average payout per day seems very low, is it an average of the last week or so?

For comparison, I run a 1080ti and a 1070ti and getting 190RVN / day on suprnova. If you insist on the hashrate though, I'd say I am running at about 32-33 mh/s on average.

The fact that the uploader is trying to copy another person's work (and even the name?) is enough for me to recommend everyone to stay away from it.
After all, the ETHlargement is working and is as safe as it can get for a closed-source software, why would anyone try anything else?

Thanks for your reply.
I don't remember when did I update my signature but if you're certain then I suppose you're right.

As for the postcount, it's probably because of the difference in the timezone because you've counted 1 more post in one day and 1 less post in another day, but in total I got 9 post that week... and like that I've missed 2 weeks???

I had never come across any payment method with cryptocoins in the Microsoft store, if not for this thread I wouldn't know they were accepting Bitcoin in the first place.
So as the first post explains, they quickly moved it from a "payment method" to a "top-up method"!

I'm not bothered at all though, as newer technologies and clever ideas are surfacing from altcoins (and Bitcoin too I guess?) the transactions between fiat and crypto currencies will only get easier.
Also in theory, the more a coin will be used and the more coins that are available (mined), the steadier the price will get, hopefuly that'll make more companies accept them.


Forza Horizon 4, that alone will be my first purchase from Microsoft!

Is everything a manipulation to you? This seems like a normal price action to me.

Since RVN has a relative low amount of coins in distribution and the price had fell a lot the last days, it was normal to make such a jumb if only one person would buy a huge amount. What would come after that would be miners who were holding after the price drop selling some or all of the coins they had accumulated.

Guys I'm not finding myself in the spreadsheet on the week 3/7 - 8/7 even though you have me on the next week.
I've joined you for months now, since the previous campaign, and I've also updated my signature, did you forget me?

Also another thing which I just noticed, I was on holidays and I was not very active, but looking at the history now it seems you didn't count either of these two posts and I received no payment on 2th of June because I had 9 posts.
They were both in the correct subforums and they were not short posts.

It's within normal levels, it's nothing strange. Since for the first few blocks after going from GPU to ASIC the mining speed was too fast, the diff was raised higher than the optimal levels in order to normalise the faster-than-average blocks with slower-than-slower blocks.

Are you guys announcing new coins in this thread? On a social channel maybe? Or is there a place in your site which I've missed and where I'm able to see the latest coin additions?

So far I've checked the history of this thread and I don't see any announcements whatsoever.

I was expecting to find a question about what iOS device you're using in their registration form, will the app be available to every device?
I have the latest iPad Pro, but will it also work on iPhone 5 for example?

But very few who have (1) a working product, (2) constant updates on both the software and general community updates, (3) conferences, some of them educational, sponsoring events and generally a good marketing team.
The only issue I see is that some alternatives came at a better timing and "grabbed" the attention of people before ARK started.

So GPU miners are holders and ASIC miners are dumpers? I don't believe it's that simple.
The only thing that I was afraid of was that there would be less ASIC miners than GPU miners, but seems I was wrong, the numbers from the main pools show about 40% increase in miners (my rough estimation).

I think that when there are less miners and the rewards are shared among less people, then since everyone gets higher rewards of a single coin it is more likely they'll sell a big amount of it.
For example if I mine 500$ in ETN everyday, I'd like to exchange about 50%. But if I mine 50$ in ETN everyday, it's easier for me to hold through bad days.
But instead of having less miners, we have more miners after the fork!

Therefore even though I was initially against ASIC miners, I find this a wise choice from the developers. It's also remarkable how quickly they announced and then forked successfully.

The same amount of coins will be mined every day, this is the reason the difficulty is going up and down. When a lot of hashpower is present, the diff goes up and it's harder to mine new blocks, but since you had the extra hashpower in the first place you get a steady amount of blocks.
The problem is when a lot of hashpower comes for a few minutes when the diff is low, the ones controlling this hashpower get quick rewards and when the diff goes up, instead of keep mining the owners of the hashpower leave, therefore the ones staying to mine cannot mine at the speed they should because the diff is too high, but when it gets lower the bad guys with the big farms return for a few minutes and this is repeated.

This is the problem that was solved by going back to ASICs. The supply stayed the same, if anything changed with the supply is that it's flowing more "steadily" now.

It's funny how we (yes me included) were expecting less miners after the fork and "centralisation".

etn.spacepools had 2700-2800 miners before the fork, now they have a little over 2500.
electroneum.hashvault had 280-300 miners before the fork, now they have 500 (lol?!)
nanopool doesn't offer historic data so I don't know how it changed.

So far though we're only 4 hours or so after the change and the ASIC miners are still increasing (aka coming back). Very impressive if you think how close the change was from the announcement.

So I guess the GPU farms were centralising the coin
But let me throw one more thing out there... those of you guys who talk about conspiracy theories (Electroneum team accepting a deal from ASIC manufacturers lol), think about the possibility that the GPU miners were boycotting the coin before it change to the anti-ASIC algo in order to push it into changing faster. Maybe those big GPU farms were the reason the price was driven to the ground?

In that case the coins will be shown in Cryptopia when the deposits in Cryptopia resume.
You can understand that if you think of how the blockchain works... once your transaction is complete, it means that it's written in the blockchain. If an exchange is has paused deposits, then they have just stopped "scanning" the blockchain. Once they resume "scanning" the blockchain your transaction will be read and your Cryptopia balance will be updated.

I'm also against going back to ASIC mining, the reason being that everyone can GPU and CPU mine and therefore everyone can get engaged with Electroneum, initially as miners and later as users/investors/traders/HODLers/whatever.

BUT...
This time we're the ones to blame and not the dev team. Maybe not "we" that read this thread, but those we used to follow Electroneum and for whatever reason stopped.
If enough miners would support the blockchain we wouldn't have to run back to ASICs. It's thanks to those who are unable to look a bit into the future and only act on what is the price RIGHT NOW that we will not have enough miners until the price rise and auto-switch software point those lazy miners to Electroneum.

But would the price ever rise if the blockchain continued to be unsteady? I don't know, and obviously the developers are not willing to risk it by waiting to find out when their plans are to sign partnerships.
It's very possible that some of their partners demanded a higher hashrate in order to proceed with agreements. At least as a businessman this is what I'd demand from a possible partner: stability.

Maybe the best possible solution would be a change in the algo which would change the way the difficulty is updated, in such a way that we get quicker difficulty change. Wouldn't that render the strategy of mining with a big farm for a few hours and then leaving useless? Is it impossible to make such a change?