Wow, was it really that close to a cascading collapse?

Jabo38, you realize From Above is not Come-from-Beyond right?

From Above is just the euro version of Spoetnik.

And on another topic, where's my NEM stake? 

Absolute bullshit. No way these existed in 2013.

If you want one with scrypt you can fork this: https://github.com/MarkPfennig/pfennig

It might have just stayed as BitMonero and died off like many other CN forks.

I can't believe how badly Bytecoin people messed up their chance to lead the market. Their greed overcame any sort of common sense.

InstantDEX isn't a 'coin' it's an asset on the NXT AE for a decentralised exchange.

Swarm is a Counterparty asset.

Both happen to be very legitimate projects that are attempting to add significant value to the crypto ecosystem. They're much more important that almost every shitcoin listed on CMC.

I don't know too much about Swarm, but in general the community would be a lot better if people realized that supporting actual businesses that are attempting to develop the crypto economy is far better than chasing whatever the latest pump and dump is this week.

How are Python and C considered in the same bracket? Python is one level of abstraction above C. The reference release CPython is implemented in C itself.

Maybe there should be a 2.5 generation for C above assembly but below higher level languages.

There are lots of people working on things for GMC now behind the scenes.

Also there was a major technical issue that had to be worked out as a priority. Now that everything is stable and working on the crypto level people are moving their efforts back to building things on top of GMC.

Yeah, I've noticed the Bytecoin scam team is trying mount a bit of a comeback and lure in unsuspecting people who are probably not familiar with what actually happened.

Definitely a good time to get this thread out again to hopefully save some people money.

Not that I can see. I think he was just using that as an example.

We definitely could have done an IPO back then which would have raised significant funds. It probably should have been done.

VIA did a 600+ BTC IPO right at the same time with exactly the same starting point as BTM, an scrypt client updated to the latest Bitcoin release. Even raising 1/6th of what VIA raised and it would have been a completely different situation. Multiple people were requesting an IPO and pledging BTC.

Syscoin did a 1500 BTC IPO and they couldn't get a blockchain working for weeks. It was a much different time and people were more than willing to invest upfront in projects that they felt had potential.

Mark wasn't interested in any sort of IPO or other coins at all. I even suggested that we launch a pfennig fork as a side project that we can use to develop new technologies on which could eventually be folded back in to BTM after they proved stable(this was probably in July or early Aug). But Mark didn't think it was fair to create any thing other than Bitmark as he thought people would lose money on it in the long run, and he didn't want to be involved in anything like that.

What NXT devs post here other than CfB?

jl777 is a dev, but building on top of the NXT platform. He's certainly not doing any NXT core dev work if it's all in Java.

I don't see how either of their postings could offend anyone. jl777 just sticks to his own project's threads anyway. And from what I can tell CfB just makes fun of TaunSew all the time(he brings it on himself ).

Sharkfund isn't SuperNET. SuperNET probably owns some Sharkfund0, but they are separate entities. Just want to clarify that.

Unrelated in the sense that there was unlikely to be any sort of organized pump executed. Related in the sense that this was probably the first bit of interest in Bitmark from the crypto community at large. We would still joke many months after the fact about how some of these supposed pumpers that we feared in August ended up joining our community and staying and contributing in a very positive manner. At the time it was common to see quite a few serious traders who normally just float around to whatever is getting the volume with the sole intent of getting in and out with a profit actually believe in the concept of Marking. Lots of people joined the community and participated.

In September the amount of interest in BTM and Marking was at a level far beyond anything a handful of traders could have manufactured by themselves. There was interest from all sorts of directions including a fair amount of academic interest from multiple people.

So basically what I'm saying is that what we perceived as a pump group in August had very little effect on the eventual whirlwind of interest that happened in September. They may have been some of the first outsiders with wide social connections in the crypto community to take an interest in BTM, but they certainly weren't responsible for all the over exuberant inflow of capital at that time.

I tried to temper peoples expectations, as BTM being a PoW currency natually comes with inflation. And at it's heights would have been minting 14k BTM a day(ignoring the network issues). Which would equate to somewhere around 14k USD at certain points as BTM was floating around USD parity for a little bit. That's a huge amount of demand that would be required to sustain the prices we reached around the peak.

I think the main reasons that BTM shot up as much as it did was that very few people had any desire to sell their BTM as people were expecting Marking to begin to take hold in the near future. So the supply of BTM on the market was small and the demand was high. None of what happened was due to any one individual or group manipulating the market. There were a few whales buying up lots of BTM and most of the ones I know still hold their BTM.

I think a lot of coins have been forking Blackcoin for PoS for the last while. And I'm not sure but I'd assume that Blackcoin is a modified fork of older Peercoin/PPCoin.

Eh, that was August well before the period in September when BTM had it's big run up. The whole thing ended being blown out of proportion and what actually happened was some of the people we feared as 'pumpers' just ended up becoming valuable members of the community.




Yeah, no one knew about WOLF, but it was also many months before BTM and from Mark's explanation on slack it seemed to come to a reasonably amicable conclusion well before BTM was launched.

I forgot to copy Mark's explanation about what happened on slack, and slack removed the text from my view when I remembered to do so. But I asked schnoetzel to save it and I think he was able to do so. If he sees this and wants to dump it here or on a pastebin or something that might add some clarity for people here.

He wasn't really ever officially involved in GMC as a developer or anything, he was mostly attempting to get other people working on building value in to it and then have the GMC that BTM community members held fund BTM development. In theory it sounded like a pretty good idea and I thought that it was going to benefit BTM development a lot and enable funding for multiple devs.

After reading his explanation on slack I tend to believe that he's telling the truth when he says he was only developing BTM since launch. I don't really view him seeking out funding sources to be a negative at all, and actually at the time I thought it was commendable that as the lead person of BTM he was going to get things done one way or another even if he failed to meet previous milestones and had to pay other developers to get things shipped.

GMC got badly messed up with multiple forks and needed someone to come and fix the blockchain and the client. and Mark did that together with a GMC dev recently. He ported it over to Pfennig and fixed up whatever needed to be fixed.

I don't know about any other projects that he's supposed to be involved with. What's the evidence for all those ones you listed? So far the narrative lines up with my experience, but I'm willing to consider any possibilities.

It's the right one, they just have to update the name to GameCredits.

Well yeah mining is a ridiculous waste, but I'm not necessarily convinced that delegate pay is better than 0 inflation with fees going to the appropriate people. Maybe it is, we'll see how it goes, but any sort of downward pressure on an asset drives potential investors out. The only thing 99% of people care about is whether or not they think whatever they buy is going to appreciate over time. At least with zero inflation you know objectively that any downward pressure is a result of individuals selling rather than inflation.

Not saying either system is clearly better than the other, but I can certainly see potential investors being turned off by any sort of systemic downward pressure. Bitcoin is the worst for that of course, and people only seem to be realizing just how bad it is over the last year or so.

I keep reading people blaming this system for the price decline. I guess time will tell whether or not the delegates are providing more value than they're taking.

Things are still moving along behind the scenes. People will still be working on the project, but it's understandable that some portion of people who invested have decided to sit out for now at least. When there's some tangible progress I expect that many of them will be happy to return. Medic is getting things restructured and reorganized here now so it shouldn't be too much longer before things get going.