yeah whats up with that supply of 793m ? its 1eth for =100 bnt was it not? This would imply a 39m token supply . Or did I get this wrong? why are the tokens 20x what they supposed to be !%?

It looks like they only want Far East Asia people to invest this project. They are looking for Chinese and Japanese community managers, they are Korean. The world is bigger than Far East, don't forget.
If you want to raise more money you should focus on big population countries/languages. Good luck.

After ICO there should be a raffle for a free trip to Jeju Island. Good luck BOScoin.

What we are trying to make is the trust contract. Unlike Ethereum, trust contract is not Turing-complete, but decidable. We are not trying to make a digital contract that could run any program, but rather we are more focused on trust and reliability of digital contracts. So that affects the design of our blockchain, and we end up applying ontology on the blockchain.

Why not PPC or BTS or even BTCR ? Why XBC ??
Is there any article people saw and decided to invest in this ?

Since that announced, I got interest in this coin! But the amount of 10 Billion's justified why? Simply for practicality? So the BOScoin mission isn't to be the new Bitcoin (Gold) but the new currency (Fiat)!?

Given the number of storage-oriented projects in the decentralization/peer-to-peer world, it may seem surprising that one of Golem’s remaining unsolved issues is the resource-sharing mechanism. Unfortunately, what works for storage does not necessarily work for efficient file transfer. We’ll offer a more detailed explanation of this in a separate blog post, but what is clear for us now is that this area still needs a lot of research. For example, while IPFS has truly brain-melting long-term potential, we are having some difficulty in getting it to play well with Golem’s model. Meanwhile, we are working on concurrent solutions, which is one of the reasons we have not scaled up testnet just yet: At present, we have not decided which will make it to release along with IPFS. Certainly this will be subject to heavy debate and testing, so if you are a testnet user, don’t be surprised if some data is lost in transfer over the next few weeks — you have been warned!

Recently many people asked questions about the calculation and supply of Siacoins. Many people actually have misconception of Siacoin’s supply and calculation. I am reposting a post about Siacoin’s supply I wrote couples of months ago and hope it is helpful to some poeple.

In Sia FAQ - "The number of siacoins created each block is (300,000 - height). The genesis block has a height of 0. After height 270,000, all blocks will have a reward of 30,000 siacoins. The current number of siacoins can be found at explore.siacoin.com"

Right now (March 26th, 2016) the Sia block height is 43,049. So it will need about another 4.3 years((270,000-43,049)/(144365)=4.3years) to hit the 270,000 block height to start the 30,000 coins constant rewards. In about 4.3 years when sia hits the 270,000 block height, there will be about 44.55 billion (((300,000+30,000)/2)270,000=44.55 billion) siacoins available in the market. From there, there will be about 1.57 billion (30,000144365=1.5678 billion) of siacoins coming out from the mining every year constantly. So in 5 years from today, there will be about 45.6 billion of siacoins available. In 10 years from today, there will be about 53.5 billion of siacoins available in the market.

I think Siacoin's inflation is not high. 5 years from now, the inflation is about 3.4%. 10 years from now, the inflation will be about 2.9%. 20 years from now is about 2.2%. In the long run, the inflation will be about 2% for long time. So in the long run, the inflation rate will probably be lower than the Sia network growth rate besides the lost coins.

In return, Sia gets a robust and secured network and Sia can focus on the long term growth of its business and ecosystem. Siacoin’s value eventually will depend on people's expectation on the growth of the business and ecosystem on Sia network. So once the market figures out the proper marketcap of Sia, we will see the real price of the Siacoins.

In v1.2.0, Sia will implement a host Proof of Burn mechanism in which hosts have to burn certain siacoins to show that they are real and sincere for business to counter the sybil attack. When Sia network is getting mature, the estimate annual burned siacoins can be 0.1% to 0.5% of total available siacoins. The burned siacoins will offset the inflation in the long run. At some point, it could result in a deflation of siacoins.

Here is also a Siacoin’s supply chart (by the courtesy of siapulse.com) - http://siapulse.com/page/market

In addition, research has indicated Bitcoin will be unstable when its block reward ends in the future - http://freedom-to-tinker.com/2016/10/21/bitcoin-is-unstable-without-the-block-reward/ and http://randomwalker.info/publications/mining_CCS.pdf . Sia won't have this problem in the future.

"So perhaps designers of new cryptocurrencies should make the block reward permanent and accept monetary inflation as inevitable. Transaction fees would still exist, but merely as an incentive for miners to include transactions in their blocks."

If @marcus_of_augustus is right the play is to buy bitcoin now. It takes time after approval for paperwork etc for COIN to be listed on BATS. I have seen estimates of about a month soonest after approval.

tau is not neural net. we'll reach skynet once we implement a neural net over tau (easy) and train it (hard).
the direct training of tau is not by machine learning methods but more like "rule based AI" methods

indeed an important motivation of tau, is to bring the power of AI to everyone altogether (and by everyone altogether), rather to be held by centralized entities

I think with LTC and other older coins potentially adopting segwit FTC is in a great position. BTC miners aren't going to switch, the high fees are too profitable and I don't see them wanting to risk messing around with a more complicated code. Their refusal will force us to wait until solutions to scaling and such happen without hard forks. But solutions will come, and one day they'll be running the same BTC core with DAOs and millions of transactions per second. Today BTC isn't being used for commerce anyways, its being used for investment and international transfers- neither of which require a faster network.

Looking 10 years from now. BTC is worth a ton and scalability is solved without hard forks. No one remembers segwit, unlimited or whatever else except that certain older coins adopted them and permanently changed. Whereas FTC not taking any of these hard forks can remain using a simpler code, and then adopt bitcoin's non-fork solutions when they come. Which coin will you want at that point? FTC which stuck to bitcoin's simpler method, or the old coins that adopted betamax?