It seems that you completely forgot that this is one of the most protected projects of the whole community, there is no reason to believe that the user's wallet is unprotected!
He's right! This factor is for many a key when choosing a project for investment! In this way, you can share with your colleagues a project for which there will be no doubt about security |
|
|
|
|
Of course, the project should not cancel all the achievements that they earned on the basis of communication with banks. Very influential investors have already opened their deposits in this bank
|
|
|
|
Where did you learn that the minimum purchase is 1 eth? On the site, I did not see such information. There is information about the course WU to ETH. So 1wu cost is 0.001 ETH!
The site has all the information on this project, including information on the value of the coin, and the number of coins allocated for sale, and the minimum and maximum contribution Does the project have the maximum contribution? This is something new! How did the developers design this section? And what is the sum of the maximum contribution to this particular project? I did not say so. I was talking about the hardcap project, which is 49000eth. I think that this is a huge amount for such a project, but still the developers have designated it And I also found information on the bonus rate of the project. This bonus is the capitalization of the contribution for a certain period? Or a discount for buying a token? |
|
|
|
Correctly, I will not trust the project until the end, until the developers provide a working version of their application and wallets, which in turn may be vulnerable
This is absurd! How are you going to prove the vulnerability of wallets? Only if you try to crack one of the user's wallets, and then point out the vulnerability of the development team Why should I do this? The team has their own testers who receive money for their work. Why should I help the development team, if in the end I do not even get a bonus? It's your safety! If you think that it is not enough, then you can try to improve it with the help of the development team, if you are capable of it! |
|
|
|
Where did you learn that the minimum purchase is 1 eth? On the site, I did not see such information. There is information about the course WU to ETH. So 1wu cost is 0.001 ETH!
The site has all the information on this project, including information on the value of the coin, and the number of coins allocated for sale, and the minimum and maximum contribution Does the project have the maximum contribution? This is something new! How did the developers design this section? And what is the sum of the maximum contribution to this particular project? |
|
|
|
Simplified systems to enter the service is always bad! This step threatens the security of our accounts, but in no way makes life easier for employees!
Do not complicate! How so, do you think that the whole system is simplified? But I think the change will only affect the interface and methods of systems I'm not trying to complicate anything, I'm experienced in these matters, so I'm sure that simplifying the interface always leads to simplified access to the open source code Access to open source code in fact is a security threat, I agree with you. But at the same time, think about how the developers benefit from having their project poorly protected That's it, the project team places emphasis on security and on high autonomy at stunning speed, so intermediaries are excluded in fact, this is possible even today, if the project team would allow data leakage and the information would fall into the wrong hands. Correctly, I will not trust the project until the end, until the developers provide a working version of their application and wallets, which in turn may be vulnerable This is absurd! How are you going to prove the vulnerability of wallets? Only if you try to crack one of the user's wallets, and then point out the vulnerability of the development team |
|
|
|
|
I am very pleased with the fact that the project team took such a step as it established many contracts with the banking system. English and American banks are the financial guarantor of the whole world
|
|
|
|
Simplified systems to enter the service is always bad! This step threatens the security of our accounts, but in no way makes life easier for employees!
Do not complicate! How so, do you think that the whole system is simplified? But I think the change will only affect the interface and methods of systems I'm not trying to complicate anything, I'm experienced in these matters, so I'm sure that simplifying the interface always leads to simplified access to the open source code Access to open source code in fact is a security threat, I agree with you. But at the same time, think about how the developers benefit from having their project poorly protected That's it, the project team places emphasis on security and on high autonomy at stunning speed, so intermediaries are excluded in fact, this is possible even today, if the project team would allow data leakage and the information would fall into the wrong hands. But this is just an assumption, in fact the developers of the project are the most qualified programmers and administrators who will not allow leaks from their servers |
|
|
|
A very large stock of tokens is allocated for sale. Now the project is pre-sale, right? I think you need to make a purchase now!
I tried to buy coins now, but nothing came of it. I referred to the bad connection and did not try to buy them any more. But I can be wrong and maybe it's not a bad connection at all Most likely you are mistaken. You wanted to buy a lot of coins? The fact is that the project team added a limit on the minimum number of coins to be purchased Really? And how many coins are considered the minimum quantity to purchase? I did not want to buy so many coins, there was only $ 100 in my wallet! The minimum amount is 1 ETH! Maybe that's why you did not manage to buy coins. Be careful next time, because that's the problem! |
|
|
|
Simplified systems to enter the service is always bad! This step threatens the security of our accounts, but in no way makes life easier for employees!
Do not complicate! How so, do you think that the whole system is simplified? But I think the change will only affect the interface and methods of systems I'm not trying to complicate anything, I'm experienced in these matters, so I'm sure that simplifying the interface always leads to simplified access to the open source code Access to open source code in fact is a security threat, I agree with you. But at the same time, think about how the developers benefit from having their project poorly protected That's it, the project team places emphasis on security and on high autonomy at stunning speed, so intermediaries are excluded This is true, but only as long as access to the interface is not open to general use! Quite soon the project team will have to add classical authentication methods It is not true! Tell me, how do developers intend to hack into physical multisig wallets of platform users? This is impossible without an extensive hacker attack! |
|
|
|
A very large stock of tokens is allocated for sale. Now the project is pre-sale, right? I think you need to make a purchase now!
I tried to buy coins now, but nothing came of it. I referred to the bad connection and did not try to buy them any more. But I can be wrong and maybe it's not a bad connection at all Most likely you are mistaken. You wanted to buy a lot of coins? The fact is that the project team added a limit on the minimum number of coins to be purchased |
|
|
|
Simplified systems to enter the service is always bad! This step threatens the security of our accounts, but in no way makes life easier for employees!
Do not complicate! How so, do you think that the whole system is simplified? But I think the change will only affect the interface and methods of systems I'm not trying to complicate anything, I'm experienced in these matters, so I'm sure that simplifying the interface always leads to simplified access to the open source code Access to open source code in fact is a security threat, I agree with you. But at the same time, think about how the developers benefit from having their project poorly protected That's it, the project team places emphasis on security and on high autonomy at stunning speed, so intermediaries are excluded |
|
|
|
|
A very large stock of tokens is allocated for sale. Now the project is pre-sale, right? I think you need to make a purchase now!
|
|
|
|
Simplified systems to enter the service is always bad! This step threatens the security of our accounts, but in no way makes life easier for employees!
Do not complicate! How so, do you think that the whole system is simplified? But I think the change will only affect the interface and methods of systems |
|
|
|
Most of all in the project I like the fact that despite the high security of transactions and electronic wallets - there are no unnecessary controls and intermediaries!
perhaps this brings the project to another level. Compared with traditional systems. In which a lot of attention is paid to the issues of enhanced authentication, the development team did without it Yes, but no one canceled authentication, the only difference is that for this project authentication is much cheaper and it's much easier to pass |
|
|
|
|
Most of all in the project I like the fact that despite the high security of transactions and electronic wallets - there are no unnecessary controls and intermediaries!
|
|
|
|
It will be better if you become acquainted with the specifics of these projects yourself. At the moment, links to the largest of these resources are available: https://www.evencoin.io/future-projects/Wow, thank you! In fact, I'm surprised that these projects include, among other things, BitRecharge - Book flights, Hotels & Holidays internationally using multiple crypto currencies |
|
|
|
In addition, the system with the sale of tokens also greatly burdens the system and increases the number of operations and procedures included in the list of settings for the system!
Therefore, the system is complicated by additional factors and therefore should be adjusted by professionals or by means of special management! |
|
|
|
But do not forget that in addition to influential and large investors, there are also private investors who make up a significant market share. Including these investors are able to collect a hard cap of the project!
You're absolutely right! Despite the fact that many investors are reading the analyst these days, the availability of an article on a well-known resource adds significance to the project |
|
|
|
|
He is right, I have not previously observed this tab on the project site, apparently it appeared there relatively recently! Very interesting, I'm going to read the information about the projects
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
