|
Dont change the IPO method now that takes away credibility. Viacoin had a similar method and it did fine. This is what yall chose so let it finish, changing the terms would put me off. I plan on buying near the end of the 7 day period.
|
|
|
|
|
So if the coins dont represent ownership of a certain spectrum (they can't because of the difference between area/use) what exactly is the benefit of using HZ in trading? They aren't 'backed' so I just dont see the reason anyone would switch to using HZ or even be able to. Please explain.
|
|
|
|
|
whats with the 5-7 min block time?
|
|
|
|
|
Will there be a pool at launch?
|
|
|
|
So do yall have to get a license for Game of Thrones before launch?
no Do you need one at all? |
|
|
|
|
So do yall have to get a license for Game of Thrones before launch?
|
|
|
|
|
Looking to buy some BLKT please PM
|
|
|
|
|
At the very least Raxe.io you need to let bittrex know you haven't abandoned the coin and have things in development.
|
|
|
|
|
Now that we are restarting I strongly believe we should use BC's PoSv2. It looks like a huge improvement and they say it is imminent. Is this a possibility Bryce?
|
|
|
|
Bitsta - mind giving us an update on PoS?  This. We are 9 days past your estimate Bitsta. |
|
|
|
It's so quiet here lately.
Raxe, what's up with v2 wallet? Any updates?
We received word from Apple today about the viability of our app, I don't want to disappoint you guys we have to potentially go another route with it. 11.17
We found that your app facilitates the transmission of a virtual currency that is not approved for the App Store, or is not in compliance with all state and federal laws for the territories in which the app functions.
Specifically Distrocoin is not an approved virtual currency.
We encourage you to review your app concept and evaluate whether you can incorporate different content and features that are in compliance with the Guidelines.We are very disappointed over here and I understand Apples methodology so thanks to them for helping they are a great company. Sometimes it is worth resubmitting with a minor change. Take this from a game dev it depends who you get reviewing your app quite often. Keep submitting. |
|
|
|
In the interest of transparency, why are the actual Dev's for this coin still unknown? I could understand if this was like RZR, but for a coin that was started by Brian Kelly who appears to be on board with the whole notion of Bitlicenses, I find it very counter intuitive that we don't know the specific devs working on POS. What are the specific technical issues preventing POS conversion?
I agree. I am wondering the same thing. While switching from pure PoW to pure PoS on the same chain is difficult it shouldnt be this time consuming. The amount of time and false confidence on release dates makes me think this dev doesnt know how to do it specifically and it resorting to trial and error. |
|
|
|
This is just my personal opinion, but i think we should find the best working pOs code that ALREADY exists (blackcoin?) and straight up copy their code. Then, get weiner, yapp, and the devs to comb through the code, clean it up, check for bugs, and add improvements.
It's a little more complicated than that unfortunately  Since we're on a PoW chain we need to transfer everything over to a PoS chain, and I suspect that is what's so complicated. Well all you would need to do is fork some coin like BC, and start a brand new coin with it. That is easy. The harder part is taking a snapshot of this NAUT chain and having people transfer their balance. Not as hard as this dev is making this. I know devs that have done it multiple times. Interesting. Which devs are we talking about? I would like to ask the devs before I mention them but you should check out things done with PTS they do what I am talking about often. If BK wants to try this instead I will happily find the right people. Before that we just need an update on the progress to be honest. |
|
|
|
This is just my personal opinion, but i think we should find the best working pOs code that ALREADY exists (blackcoin?) and straight up copy their code. Then, get weiner, yapp, and the devs to comb through the code, clean it up, check for bugs, and add improvements.
It's a little more complicated than that unfortunately Since we're on a PoW chain we need to transfer everything over to a PoS chain, and I suspect that is what's so complicated. Well all you would need to do is fork some coin like BC, and start a brand new coin with it. That is easy. The harder part is taking a snapshot of this NAUT chain and having people transfer their balance. Not as hard as this dev is making this. I know devs that have done it multiple times. |
|
|
|
|
There is probably a point when we would just be better off starting a new chain. We could take a snapshot of the current wallets and just give people an equivalent amount on a new chain. We could also fork something with more features such as BC etc. The reason I say this is I am starting to have doubts that this dev will deliver. In two days we are a week after their 2nd estimated completion date. I have worked with devs and coin devs I understand that it takes longer than expected. But what is their reason? The reason seems to be they don't know how to do it.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah so the DGB devs are not doing this PoS upgrade I asked them. Who is?
|
|
|
|
I'm still a fan of NAUT but did anyone else find Bryce Weiner to be extremely irritating on his last David Seaman podcast appearance? He was pompous and blowhardy and unable to admit that he had been giving bad advice on Twitter, because he's a pundit, and his whole career is dependent on him convincing other people he's right.
But he's not. He barely seems to know what he's talking about anymore.
After that last episode I can't stand listening to either one of them now.
Sorry for interjecting the blatant negativity but I was just wondering if anybody else got a similar vibe.
These two guys who present themselves as authorities on an important subject matter don't actually understand the altcoin market better than anybody else. They just insist that they do in order to "make a living," quote unquote.
Yes Weiner is very full of himself. He doesnt have any real connection to NAUT though does he? |
|
|
|
|
Just remember that you need 51% of staking coins, not 51% of the total. Blackcoin made an improvement to PoS so once we see what type of PoS BK is doing we could vote to go for a PoS v2.
|
|
|
|
I am not sure if a no-rollback code (NRC) can be implemented...but it seems to me, even with that type of code a 51% can still occur.
The real problem that digital assets need to solve is how to eliminate the 51% attack Achilles heal. Satoshi may have solved the Byzantine Generals Problem, but he/she/they did so by imposing certain assumptions - the biggest being that one entity could not control the network.
As I see it, the infrastructure of NAUT should be built on these items:
1.) The blockchain is sacred - it should never be changed.
Ideally this needs to be dealt with at a coding level. Personally I'll take your word that you wont change the blockchain but we'd be missing the point of crypto and the reason it's valuable. If there was some mechanism that could prevent rollbacks of the chain, e.g. real world time & date stamping of blocks and then verification to stop any kind of chain rewinding/duplication. Perhaps a separate linked & synced sub chain used purely for validating dates in the primary chain. Not sure where I'm going with this just throwing it out there.. feel free to crush this idea with a dose of hard reality 2.) Compete with Economics - technical innovations can always be added, but human behavior rarely changes
I agree. technical innovations aren't necessarily a magic bullet. I like what doging is saying about NSF/premium bonds or other rewards for coin holders based on performance. We know most people like financial incentives for doing jack -that behaviour doesn't appear to be changing. 3.) Reduce single points of failure as much as technically possible, i.e., decentralize, decentralize, decentralize
So far we've seen more things go wrong as a result of exchange screw ups than coin architecture. IMO what the VRC devs did yesterday was a bad move and will kill their coin and others, but ultimately a good one for crypto in the long term as the code can evolve. I think I'll give satoshi a quick call and ask him what he thinks about decentralisation  You just mean change the blockchain as in rollback? Not sure that code would work for that because the dev could just remove that code when he decides that a rollback is needed. The real defense against it would be users use the open source code to make a new wallet supported by a different dev and the majority support that version. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
