]in the long term it's a good thing, if BCX is successful he can show how the algorithm is insecure and newer currencies will have to use something else
if he's unsuccessful, it will prove that the newer algorithm is secure given enough hashpower
The same way Gox failing was a good thing, since it was insecure? And how exchanges should do something else? Yeah, the public doesn't think that way. |
|
|
|
If news of this gets out, I'm sure it'll do wonders for crypto's reputation in general.
Hacker destroys Iceland's crypto coin ... yeah, that will go over well... certainly make people feel comfortable investing in and using cryptos all over the World.
Some people unfortunately don't understand the consequences outside the small radius of their 20/20 hindsight. Sure, AUR might/will die due to their efforts - but due to the media attention this coin has gained, as a result the whole cryptocurrency cause will cause. At least the hackers are going to empty all their bags into fiat before AUR is pronounced dead, right? I'm not sure if many here realize how much exposure AUR got in Iceland. At first I thought it was a dinky meme coin, that nobody knew about ... like most alts, right? Then I read about Iceland's politicians having meetings over it. Then read where AUR was on the national news. It's a big deal there, from what I can tell. It's not like killing Taxi coin. |
|
|
|
If news of this gets out, I'm sure it'll do wonders for crypto's reputation in general.
Hacker destroys Iceland's crypto coin ... yeah, that will go over well... certainly make people feel comfortable investing in and using cryptos all over the World.
maybe you should stop supporting cryptocurrencies that have low difficulties and can be hacked and use secure ones instead then I don't support AUR personally, never owned it, never planned to own it. It still is the wrong thing to do, however, on a number of levels. Even if looking at it from a general viewpoint as cryptos go, it was the wrong thing to do. The general public won't think... oh, the difficulty was low and it could be hacked, so it deserved to be killed. They'll instead think cryptos are all vulnerable to hackers. Great news right after the Gox stuff. Maybe kill a couple of more coins, and kill some exchanges too, as a bonus. I'm sure people will be eager to embrace cryptos then. |
|
|
|
|
If news of this gets out, I'm sure it'll do wonders for crypto's reputation in general.
Hacker destroys Iceland's crypto coin ... yeah, that will go over well... certainly make people feel comfortable investing in and using cryptos all over the World.
|
|
|
|
ok well sorry then.
can we just carry on with the topic and not about me please.
i usually picture like an American presidential debate on forum topics..
that is my perspective.. i chose to post my view or an angle etc and then i hope other will do the same.
i am dead serious when i say if someone comes along and posts a piece of info that is compelling enough i will as always flip flop on my opinion on the spot.
i highly value everyones input and what makes me any degree of smart is the fact that i am willing to relearn anything and try and listen objectively to people.
so.. by all means convince me ..change my mind on this issue guys.
So long as we remain civil, I'd be happy to have an actual discussion. One thing that I find very odd here is how people use the word scam. Normally, I'd apply the term if a dev offered an ipo, then kept the money and ran off. Or if there was a premine meant for promotion, and the dev pocketed it. Those are scams. But very often people here shout out 'scamcoin', and apply it to almost anything. A meme coin with a reasonable 1% premine. Scam! The coin has no unique features. It's a bad idea, and probably a waste of a coin, but to me it's not a scam. Nation coins -- which to many here are complete scams. I will agree that the devs certainly could pocket the premines and walk off. But I disagree calling them scams until an actual scam is committed. By deciding to ddos pools/wreck the coin, it's the same as saying -- hey, my neighbor looks shady... he has a lot of nice stuff he shouldn't have... let's burn down his house just to make sure he's not stealing anything! So to me, the word scam is overused here. Where it does apply, however, and where it is a problem, is with exchanges. Junk coins, scamcoins, or whatever you want to call them, are not the reason btc has decreased in value. It was Gox. The more exchanges that go under and steal/lose coins, the less confidence people will have in crytpos on general. What did we lose in the past month or so, three alt exchanges in a row? Along with people's coins, and probably many won't bother investing in cryptos again. That is the real problem. |
|
|
|
you were free to address what i said but you chose to make this personal in the reply i just quoted.
If you disagree then say so.. i'm not stopping you.
i caught you being a hypocrite and pointed it out.. You can post garbage but it's against the law to stop the garbage ?
tell me how that isn't a situation where you demand no rules until i want to stop your coin then you want rules..
then you ignore responding to any assertion i made and change the subject and go after me..
stick to the topic please.
The only thing personal I said was that you agreed with those who wanted to fork and wreck coins. I didn't say a word about you personally, troll or insult you. And I am not a dev. I haven't even been here very long ... I'd be considered a newbie by you, someone who needs protection from evil scam coins. And if someone posts what you perceive as a scam coin, you can stop them. Post about it, post in their threads, educate people. Also keep in mind that your perception of what a scam coin is, may be simply wrong too. |
|
|
|
I honestly think you supporters are so full of shit your eyes are brown lol and your going to get tripped up in your broken logic again and again i can assure you  I wanted to put it out there and see what you all say / come up with.. This is not a platform to push my own agenda or bicker with you all.
I will try and avoid turning this is into an argument fest lol Wink
Everyone is fully entitled to their own opinions and i value them all.
So much for valuing all opinions and not bickering, I guess? |
|
|
|
i am surprised but maybe there is far more shell accounts here than i realized and i knew there was a lot lol
one or two of these pro coin spammers could prob login to TONS of accounts to vote Sad Doubt that is the issue. If you look at the shitcoin killing thread, there were probably more people against it, than for it. There may be people who dislike junky coins, think there are too many, but do not think centralization is a good idea. Nor think many of the ideas in that thread as a whole were a good idea -- extortion, forking coins, and the thread itself was started by someone who makes their own shitcoins (hypocriticial to say the least). And I'm not saying you are for extortion, although more than once I believe you are fine with people forking/wrecking other people's coins. And I don't think anyone here has that right. Why should we let someone else decide for us if we want a coin, or don't want it? And that is why people vote no, and why I voted no. If you want to educate people about which coins are worth investing in, knock yourself out. It's a forum, after all. So if you all say there should be no rules then i have no choice but to assume you agree with molesting little children or raping women or or or.. Completely insane argument. Just let people vote, no need to say nutty things like that. |
|
|
|
Seems an abuse of the term developer. Usually they are far far from being developers. If they were developers they could develop something actually useful, probably useful to a lot of currencies/coins, way more useful than yet antoher garbage crapcoin they do not have enough hardware to secure nor, usually, any actual intent or even desire to secure it.
If you are a developer pick a secure coin and develop stuff for it. All the secure coins can also make use of it. There is no need for more coin types just for more actual things developed which actually make coins useful.
For example you could develop a secure exchange system, in which no-one's balance can be changed without their own private keys on their own machine signining off agreement with the change of their balance, like Open Transactions does.
-MarkM-
If you ask me if there are way too many useless coins coming out... yep, of course. As for saying there is no need for any more coins at all, I don't agree, as I believe it's usually easier to make a new coin if it has a lot of new features, than fork older ones (will vary of course depending on what is added). And it's human nature to prefer to put one's hard work on their own project, rather than someone else's coin. Junk coins will fade away on their own. Ideally big exchanges wouldn't even list junk coins, but we have no control over that. As to what is a junk coin... what is a scam... what is a good coin... again, let the market decide. |
|
|
|
How to fix this before a potentially great thing gets killed off?
Unless exchanges become more reliable, cryptos simply won't get greater public acceptance. People like to say crypto problems/falling prices are due to scams... and yes, if you mean exchanges 'losing' money ... but as far as coin devs scamming people, I really doubt there is any correlation to falling prices or 'killing off' cryptos. Let the market decide which coins live, and which fade away. Solid12345 made a great post in that shitcoin killing thread, probably the only one even worth reading ... will repeat it here -- Quote from: solid12345 on March 26, 2014, 03:27:53 AM
This is what I find hilarious about this whole drama. All the naive Aspies who spew venom at Altcoins are in the same exact boat, a shadowy mysterious developer who won't reveal himself, distrust by the general public that what they are running is a pyramid scheme, attacking alts for "having no infrastructure" or "wide merchant acceptance" when neither does Bitcoin really (sorry but a shitty little wordpress storefront selling giftcards and GPUs doesn't count as "wide" merchant acceptance in my book), and a majority of the coin wealth owned by an elite few (the top 1% of bitcoin holders hold 80% of them, and here we think a 1% premine for a developer is greed).
Mark Karpeles and Charlie Schrem did more to betray the trust of crypto in the eyes of the general public then anyone and they were "one of the boys" around here and put on a pedestal. Most people who even have the vaguest idea of what Bitcoin is have no idea what Litecoin is and certainly have no clue about alt coins, so to blame alts for the state of crypto is disingenuous.
I think what really upsets some of the "old guard" but that they won't admit to, is they are upset that many noobies are not wanting to pay the $500-$1000 "tax" to buy a bitcoin and join their elite club and instead are gambling on these penny stock coins hoping to get rich. Well guess what fellas, you created this madness when you yourselves speculated Bitcoin from dollars and cents to $1000 a coin almost overnight (Litecoins rise was even more meteoric and questionably boosted in only days) What did you think would happen but attract a new breed of investors looking to get rich quick like you did?
|
|
|
|
And the reason you want it to be forked has nothing to do with wanting to increase the price of the coins you already have?
Or is that more than somewhat cynical?
I want the price to remain at least stable. I'd be lying if I didn't want the price to go up, but changing miner rewards alone won't make the price leap up a gigantic amount (or at least I'd think). Right now, there seems to be more coins than demand, as has been noted by others. I was just thinking aloud as to the obvious... as to why aren't the devs doing something about it. |
|
|
|
The only thing I'd be worried about is the sheer ease to attain the coin right now. The demand will really have to shoot up for it to maintain a solid price increase for more than a few days time. Remember, back when it peaked during the meteoric rise...I believe the daily trade volume was around or damn near 500-700btc's. That's a LOT of market activity. You look at the big boys like aurora, and they constantly have at least a 100-200k+ daily market volume. But my biggest concern is the supply vs. demand. There are simply a lot more coins available than demand right now, and it's not even close to being at an equilibrium.
You are completely correct in that Payu and the devs need to take a good look at this and think about implementing a fork and perhaps some kind of algorithm switch to stop the bleeding. The price has seemed to stabilize a bit and (at least for the time being) found a bottom at around 300 satoshi, but I think forking and switching algos could only help to eliminate the mining dumpers who are minting thousands of this coin daily and dumping them on the market. It did help Spain coin a bit with the same issue.
Just food for thought.
Yeah, I do agree it should be forked now. But the point I meant was, if being somewhat cynical, maybe it's not being forked now so Boxxa/AP can scoop up tons of maza on their own, mining. Then they fork after news comes out and prices go up. They end up with a lot of maza they otherwise wouldn't have if they changed miner rewards right now. Or again, they are simply incompetent -- that works as an explanation too. |
|
|
|
|
Has the dev signed up any merchants, online or not, who accept the coin in Hong Kong? Is he in the process of trying to? Any other exchanges too? Bittrex is... well, insanely small volume for any coin.
Any news coverage whatsoever?
I initially posted over here because I found the faucet idea interesting. And then our insane troll popped in...
I'm more anti-troll, than actually pro nation coins. But if it's going to be done, some infrastructure is needed -- even a small amount. Just wondering if this has anything planned, or is it a meme coin simply with a Hong Kong logo?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted over at cryptocoin talk just now ... not sure if we need to update that info in this thread or not. Same username there, as here.
I do think this will be an interesting crypto experiment. In a way, it's similar to a nation coin distribution... just that we are the nation, and it's a lot of coins per person.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Security? We have team of experts monitoring server all the time, firewalls, ddos protection and more magical things goign i nthe background making sure everything is secure.
I have a feeling that with all of the failed exchanges, 'more magical things goign i nthe background' may not exactly reassure people. It's also not typically the phrasing used by professionally secure sites. |
|
|
|
One thing that's evident from this debacle is that there is no lack of suckers willing to spend their coins in the stupidest ways imaginable. Especially if it's an exchange offering the latest shitcoin. So yeah, unfortunately there is a good chance these idiots will be running an exchange, maybe even with the same name. The only hope is that their own greed and stupidity will end them sooner or later.
You know, after I posted, I remembered OpenEx. Didn't they fail once, come back, then fail yet again? So you may be right, I guess. I just have no idea how they plan to payback everyone. That would be the only conceivable way to recover even somewhat at this point, I'd think. And I also think that with any new version of the exchange, their volume would have to be way, way down compared to what they once were. We have OpenEx, CoinEx and now CryptoRush all going down. Someone new will simply step in and take their place. If somebody simply started a new exchange, with real money and real employees, I think they'd clean up. Even Cryptsy is pretty junky, from a professional standpoint, compared to what you'd expect. |
|
|
|
Read the thread better, you obviously fail to understand that I am by no means pro-BCX
LOL. By the way I have nothing against Aurora at all
~BCX~ is the Hitler of the altcoin world, randomly hating hard on everything that doesnt fit into his likings
That was my impression at first, then you stated this in that same thread: You misunderstand my thread. I am in favor of the Fuhrer BCX Guess you were being sarcastic or something. Anyway, I do think the pic is rather tasteless, regardless. |
|
|
|
Yeah I don't know who he's talking to either. I'm a holder of 800k mzc and haven't sold 1. Just trying to have a discussion that the price needs to be corrected since its pointless to have the Lakota's adopt this currency if it's worthless. It needs to have a much better value assigned to it in order to bring to the tribe and say, "this 25 Mill premine is for all the people and it's current value is X dollars." As it stands, why would the tribe adopt it if they know each member will only get a couple of bucks? So price does matter and should be the foundation of getting this accepted. How it's distributed and what good it can do should be only after a realistic price has been established. So you can't make plans to build schools, roads, new stores, etc... when their premine is worthless.
+1
I've really wondered why the devs just don't fork the coin, reduce miner rewards and therefore increase price a bit. Or at the least, keep it stable. I'd think it'd make it much easier for Payu to convince the tribe to accept the coin, as well as build up a little infrastructure as far as merchants go. Then I thought... maybe it doesn't matter as much as we think. If Payu can get the tribe to accept it, gets a ton of news coverage (like that CNN rumor), the price should shoot up on its own. And if they then change miner rewards, price would be stable at that high point, and the giveaway might actually be worth something. And as of right now, the devs can mine away themselves and stock up on tons of easy maza. I guess that could be one feasible explanation, maybe? The other would simply be incompetence. |
|
|
|
This exchange is going to be fine guys. https://twitter.com/TheCryptoRushIt will probably take the new CEO more than 15 minutes to get this mess sorted out. (he's good, but he's not that good. lol) I am not entirely sure who in their right mind would trust that exchange after what occurred the past 2 days. I guess someone who never reads forums and has been away for a week or so, might still use it? It's always been a super iffy exchange to begin with, so beats me who would keep large sums there. Only reason I ever used it at all, for small trades, was either arbitrage or giveaways where I was too lazy to download a million wallets. |
|
|
|
I've had a miserable time with Cryptorush the last few days. They keep saying it is DDOS attacks. I hope, if so, that they can work out an effective defense, because I'm close to abandoning them - or would, if I could get in long enough to process withdrawals. Very frustrating.
Read today's threads about Cryptorush, if you haven't already. I suggest abandoning them as soon as possible. Most people can't get btc out, but instead need to convert to an alt, then withdraw said alt. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
