Emunie wont work, bts for the win
Very eloquently put and your arguments make a lot of sense. Thanks! |
|
|
|
jelin1984 has been on my ignorelist for like half a year. 0 contribution and only comes to ask dumb question á la "What's next?" or "Why price so low?". Or true gems of adive like "Need more marketing". Why do you guys even put up with that ? Imho the 2nd lowest kind of btt dweller. Hit ignore and live in bliss  |
|
|
|
I think the devs are idealogically against it. I am too.
No use getting in a tantrum if the devs and others have another opinion, many other Nemsters are busy building things......and these things are more important than ' mining pools ' .
If you guys think it is a good idea......then DO IT.............!!!!!!! nobody is stopping you.
You are wasting your time if you think we are all ' hung up' on CMC.......sure, would be nice to be on top position but theres a long way to go before that.
^This Creating a miningpool is imho one step back but if you think it's a good idea go ahead and do it. Nobody COULD stop you even if they wanted to. |
|
|
|
Why? If both provide a public record, are secure, provide consensus, what exactly is the difference?
The big difference between having a chain and having no chain is that there is no recognisable ordering of transactions in a chainless system, the 'current state' is all that matters. With a chain, you can see the ordering, which makes validating the state a lot easier. However, I believe emunie does have a chain, so this probably isn't relevant? Is there any such system in crypto land that really doesn't have any sort of chain ? Does a ledger (and I beliebe that's what emunie is using) not count as a chain ? |
|
|
|
someone is unhappy and just dumped a bunch, sometimes I think we will never be able to make any progress.
yeah it baffles me someone is dumping so low  in fact i find only one answer and its the XEM in DEV funds not to make themself rich but to create funding for their projects i really have to say if that is the case u do it just wrong dont sell on markets (and if then never below 50) make auctions on nem forum where people can buy XEM for like 50 satoshi a peace why genious developers and understanding of marketing and economics is never combined in one team  Did you find that answer on the blockchain or is that just a guess ? In any case, my gues is mobile app might have needed some funding. |
|
|
|
someone is unhappy and just dumped a bunch, sometimes I think we will never be able to make any progress.
progress != higher price at least not necessarily. |
|
|
|
who needs research when we can just assume willy nilly...
You mean like all the VNL shills assume that zerotime is actually safe ? It very well may be, I'm not saying it's not. It's just it seems to me that most people who follow VNL aren't all that well versed and just believe whatever john-connor throws at them. That's generally true for most bitcointalk members, not only for the followers of XY project and it also has nothing to do with the current topic. The starting point here was r0ach and his statement which he started with him admitting that he didn't even research it thus your argument is just as invalid as in a past thread ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1170906.msg12358760#msg12358760) where you stated Poloniex doesn't do code audits just because your coin was never audited. I have no coin. If you are refering to the only project I was ever involved in then you're wrong because that was audited by poloniex which is where i had the information from (as I told you in the other thread). You told me what I'm saying is not accurate because your project/code was only scanned for malware, read back the thread mate All I said was, that I'm assuming that they're only scanning for malware because that's what someone from poloniex told me. They also told me that because they sometimes can't scan for maleware they run those in VMs (which wouldn't protect against faulty algo now would it ?). I didn't state it as fact. I'm still of that opinion btw. Let's just agree to disagree and move on. K mate ? |
|
|
|
who needs research when we can just assume willy nilly...
You mean like all the VNL shills assume that zerotime is actually safe ? It very well may be, I'm not saying it's not. It's just it seems to me that most people who follow VNL aren't all that well versed and just believe whatever john-connor throws at them. You can say that about every coin and every community because people believe to what developers say. But you can check vnl's code and try to hack it. Apparently - easier said than done. Your post proves how easy it is to manipulate people. Why anyone should believe you, or me? I would rather believe a skilled person, who can deliever the technology(and it works), rather than some random guy at forum who can't programm. Indeed you can. I just used VNL as an example because binarygangster seemed to be supportive of it. I would rather believe a skilled person as well. How do you recognise such a skilled person on this forum ? |
|
|
|
who needs research when we can just assume willy nilly...
You mean like all the VNL shills assume that zerotime is actually safe ? It very well may be, I'm not saying it's not. It's just it seems to me that most people who follow VNL aren't all that well versed and just believe whatever john-connor throws at them. That's generally true for most bitcointalk members, not only for the followers of XY project and it also has nothing to do with the current topic. The starting point here was r0ach and his statement which he started with him admitting that he didn't even research it thus your argument is just as invalid as in a past thread ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1170906.msg12358760#msg12358760) where you stated Poloniex doesn't do code audits just because your coin was never audited. I have no coin. If you are refering to the only project I was ever involved in then you're wrong because that was audited by poloniex which is where i had the information from (as I told you in the other thread). |
|
|
|
who needs research when we can just assume willy nilly...
You mean like all the VNL shills assume that zerotime is actually safe ? It very well may be, I'm not saying it's not. It's just it seems to me that most people who follow VNL aren't all that well versed and just believe whatever john-connor throws at them. |
|
|
|
A non blockchain concept is purely for trash.
One of the most dogmatic and short-sighted comments ever  Sorry but its true, the blockchain is not efficient, but it's transparent and free. Sorry when it comes to money, i`d rather have a transparent , non counterfeitable system, that is free of control, than a 1 server database that is efficient, but ultra corruptable. non blockchain != 1 server database |
|
|
|
can you define too large ? Is that also something the users vote for ?
Yes So, we are not trying to compete with your coin, we are just trying to attain $50-60 million market cap so that we can stop inflating the coin supply and pay our developers and start burning coins. Are those votes a one time thing or are they going to be happening regularly ? I don't have a coin so I'm really not trying to hate. |
|
|
|
we're saying that BTS is going to be the first coin with zero inflation that pays miners, developers, and users (through burning coins daily) simultaneously. If there is another coin doing that, then please let me know so that I can buy some.
Could you explain "and users (through burning coins daily)"? Users burn coins but somehow get paid? Miners will get paid to secure the system, accept transaction fees, and if their salary gets too large, burn the difference (and or send some to the dev fund depending on the ratio that the users vote for) can you define too large ? Is that also something the users vote for ? |
|
|
|
I guess this brilliant system was also devised with constant 100k TPS in mind? Otherwise you're not gonna get enough fees to pay everyone and their uncle.
Also saying BTS is the frist to pay miners solely from the tx fees is just so utterly wrong. Is that another lie the bts marketing has been telling you ?
we're saying that BTS is going to be the first coin with zero inflation that pays miners, developers, and users (through burning coins daily) simultaneously. If there is another coin doing that, then please let me know so that I can buy some. And no, they do not need a certain TPS rate to accomplish this level of profitability. Your other post made it sound like it was doing something else. No, noone is doing that. We'll see how profitable it's going to be though. |
|
|
|
I guess this brilliant system was also devised with constant 100k TPS in mind?
What system? the "system" of paying that many people from tx fees. |
|
|
|
By burning coins instead of creating them, BitShares will become the first profitable crypto because its miners do not mine new coins but get paid only out of transaction fees which are also used to pay devs, and burn for shareholder "dividends"
Thank you for this gem. I requested password recovery on BTS forum but hasn't received the letter even after 10 hours of waiting. Now I don't need to post my question regarding micropayments on their forum, the answer is pretty clear. I guess this brilliant system was also devised with constant 100k TPS in mind? Otherwise you're not gonna get enough fees to pay everyone and their uncle. Also saying BTS is the frist to pay miners solely from the tx fees is just so utterly wrong. Is that another lie the bts marketing has been telling you ? |
|
|
|
NXT and NEM are both good choices.
My vote is for the NEM blockchain platform with Proof-of-Importance, EigenTrust++, delegated harvesting and m-of-n multisig.
I dont get why is that so sophisticated to have that algorithm. It may prove to be useful later, but at the moment they dont have lightweight client, which is a big down for me. That couldn't be less true. In fact, every NEM client is a lightweight client, because you can hook it up to ANY node. See this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW4ftmOzfPkHmm i didnt know you can do that. But still it doesnt come close to NXT in terms of features and usefullness. Features - yes. Usefullness - debatable. Adoption is the key. Once bitcoin's flaws become apparent, people will be flocking over to NXT or NEM. Bitcoin was just a beta project essentially a proof of concept piece of software that took off with no future proofing in mind. Its worse than the problem we have with running out of ipv4 addresses. I agree about adoption being key. That means that tech is less important though which also means that BTC - a mere proof of concept indeed - is still very much in the race. There are so many bagholders now that are pushing it despite all flaws that in the end it doesn't really matter how flawed it is or isn't. All that matters will be what crypto has the backing of people that can actually push it into mainstream and right now BTC still seems to have the best chances there. |
|
|
|
NXT and NEM are both good choices.
My vote is for the NEM blockchain platform with Proof-of-Importance, EigenTrust++, delegated harvesting and m-of-n multisig.
I dont get why is that so sophisticated to have that algorithm. It may prove to be useful later, but at the moment they dont have lightweight client, which is a big down for me. That couldn't be less true. In fact, every NEM client is a lightweight client, because you can hook it up to ANY node. See this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW4ftmOzfPkHmm i didnt know you can do that. But still it doesnt come close to NXT in terms of features and usefullness. Features - yes. Usefullness - debatable. |
|
|
|
Yeah, I could do with changing these socks.....but Graphene still won't work as advertised, even with clean socks on.  It will work. In a world where delegates have over 30 cores and a 30MB/s (yes, that's a capital B) connection. |
|
|
|
...
Nope, this whole 32 cores thing is new to me.
See above, BTS have been shilling 100k TPS for months, with no mention of needing enterprise level hardware.
I even pointed out that the hardware requirements for 100k TPS would be huge, but as usual I just got stonewalled back.
There was this https://beyondbitcoin.org/bitshares-dev-hangout-bytemaster-bitshares-2-release-date/ TLDR (at least what I've taken from it): The system could reach 100k TPS under lab conditions that aren't going to happen in the real world. Of course that doesn't sounds as good as just reaching 100k TPS period . |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
