Far from me to give people investing advice but I really can't see this project going down, there's only up so you might not be late.

I missed this Ann and only now I've heard of this project.

After reading the whitepaper I'm going to go ahead and call it a scam (not that in 7 pages anyone seem to care if this project could even work, people just seem to just blindly trust the project showing exactly what's wrong with ICOs).


First off, you can't possibly run already existing games in a decentralized manner. Running interactive games is not just 3D rendering, the game has to practically fully run on the "mining" machine including resources like CPU/RAM/storage.

And you can't run the majority of games multiple time (online DRM, 1 account/instance) so multiple miners running the same game for one player is impossible.

So it's already centralized in a sense that 1 miner = 1 player. And if that miner has issues the player will lose progress. The gamer would also want to play games on his account which would be hard to hide from the miner who would be running the game introducing security issues.

Streaming like Nvidia Shield or Steam Link works because they do so locally. The nvidia shield for example requires "50 Megabits per second – Recommended for 1080p 60 FPS quality" (source) which is easy to get on your local WiFi which probably have 70-100 Mbps speeds. Now players would need 50Mbps internet connection and miners would require 50Mbps per game they "mine". You could say 720p 30fps is enough but even old hardware can achieve that without latency and having to pay for it. And don't even dream about 4k...

The whitepaper argues that most people can't play games with the highest settings but most people also doesn't have a stable 50Mbps internet connection. So the video feed would have to be compressed which means a maxed out game will look like it's on low settings. An uncompressed video feed would require very fast (as in high bandwidth) internet. Steam's average download rate is 33.6 Mbps currently in the US including gamers with their own gaming PCs who also tend to afford faster internet.


The whitepaper also says such delusions as mining would be
• 2-3 times more efficient than any altcoin mining add opportunities;
• More stable in the short, medium and long term than cryptocurrency mining;

Which is just nonsense they can't possibly know.


And even if the impossible could be done and more computers could collectively stream the same game in a decentralized manner for 1 person playing, one miner having a lagspike or any short issue would surely create visual glitches and redundancy would make the cost unfeasible. But again, you can't render current games in real time without the whole game running so it's a moot point. Shit, some games can't even use more than 1-2 CPU cores or use SLI ffs...


And of course if this already existing proprietary platform would really exist, you wouldn't need an ICO. This project just smells like just another scam ICO seasoned a random interesting topic.

This won't work and it's just another topic used to profit from the ICO scamfest.


It's not just rendering, it's basically a streaming service > a computer rendering the game but sending the screen output to another device.

Sort of like Nvidia Shield or Steam Link except it's not done locally, but remotely so that means that people using the service would need very fast internet and even then it would have huge latency (compared to local network).

The whitepaper argues that most people can't play games with the highest settings but the video feed would have to be compressed to a degree which means a maxed out game will look like it's on low settings. An uncompressed video feed would require very fast (as in high bandwidth) internet.

The nvidia shield for example requires "50 Megabits per second – Recommended for 1080p 60 FPS quality" (source) which is easy to get on your local WiFi which probably have 70-100 Mbps speeds. Now people would need 50Mbps internet connection. And don't even dream about 4k...

And miners would also have to have that much upload speed per game they're "mining" AND they'd have to have the other specs of a game met (CPU/memory/disk space) so it doesn't scale at all.

And most importantly, you simply can't render games in a decentralized manner (there's no way to break rendering down to chunks in existing games) so only 1 miner could render a game for someone else playing. That miner could stop anytime losing progress for the gamer. The gamer would also want to play games on his account which would be hard to hide from the miner who would be running the game.

The whitepaper also says such delusions as mining would be
• 2-3 times more efficient than any altcoin mining add opportunities;
• More stable in the short, medium and long term than cryptocurrency mining;

Which is just nonsense.


And even if the impossible would be done and more computers could collectively stream the same game for 1 person playing in a decentralized manner, one miner having a lagspike or any short issue would surely create visual glitches. But again, you can't render games in real time without the whole game running so it's a moot point.

GPU mining doesn't have to be super profitable and it'll still be here for years. And maybe not everyone and their grandmonthers will mine (as it is/was the case this year), but plenty of people will.

ASICs are different, they're strictly just rigid investments and no ASIC owner just want to support coins while some GPU miners do.

Ideally, there shouldn't be big GPU mining farms, but everyone supporting the network mining with their computers here and there.

Sure, that's not how it works but at least most people with a computer have a dedicated GPU that can be used for mining while not many people own ASICs - and unlike GPUs, ASICs have no other use.

Ripple I think is a way overpriced centralized crap.

And it has a 2309 times the circulatin supply of Bitcoin (38,343,841,883 XRP) and a comparably low trading volume which means its market cap number is skewed and easily manipulated.

They probably run fine... until the first power outage or whatever failure causing downtime.

If they stop working for an hour or so they'll cool down and when you start them up next the condensation will likely cause issues.

Yes, because a new wave of ASICs for X11 (Dash) are rolling out:

Bitmain D3 15Gh/s (3500-35000 pieces)
PinIdea 17Gh/s
iBelink 10.8Gh/s
Baikal 0.6Gh/s
Innosilicon 30.2Gh/s

And it will keep rapidly increasing since many miners haven't even received their order yet.


Eth has a different hashing algo so comparing the hashrate/difficulty to Dash is pointless.

I hold 500k, I like the coin.

Though I don't follow it closely these days and I don't follow any coins on facebook/slack/twitter.

Yes, but sites like this are very hit and miss. Most people either love or hate them with few in between.

It's a weird coin that just got added to Bittrex for fuck knows why.

I mean, I couldn't even figure out what algo it uses nor its premine.

Coins never kill/replace each other. Otherwise we'd only have a few coins and not hundreds of them.

2014 called, they want their premined scams back.


At least it's not an ICO but... Dash is still to this day get attacked because of its flashmine (rightfully so) and to think that in 2017 there are still some people thinking a coin with 20% premine is viable is just crazy.

I mean I spend BTC wherever I can I still can't buy many things with it. So if BTC is that far from widespread adoption, it's not much of a surprise that altcoins are in an even worse position.

But many altcoins don't even have the opportunity of widespread adoption.


For example, if there's a company behind an altcoin it's already crippled as it has to bend to the will of the country their company is registered in. So it will never be used for purchases worldwide because people would have to trust that country not take measures killing it anytime they wanted to.

Thing is, with proper crypto you don't have to guess because cryptos should be trustless, transparent and decentralized. ICOs are none of that.


Early bonuses on ICOs are literally like casino bonuses; they're there to attract people who don't know any better.

Selling something the "devs" created for absolutely free, out of thin air 14% cheaper isn't something that should convince people to buy in and gamble.

I've been looking around a lot for a reliable mining hosting company but maybe not hard enough as I haven't found anything.

Though I was looking for one located within the EU.


I haven't even find one that would allow full remote access to my own mining rigs. Just a specialized mining OS and only mining the top 2-3 algos/coins. So that's already a no go for me.

But then again, if someone has access to cheap electricity and the space and cooling to host miners, why would they host miners for a few bucks (they can't ask much or people will host themselves) for others instead of just buying their own miners?

Doesn't make much sense.

Not that I would trust any hosting company with more than a few rigs not to disappear with my hardware...

You can never be 100% sure to download a miner that doesn't have a malware in it.

But even legit miners are marked as viruses because people used them to secretly mine on other people's computers.


I'd just advise not running mining software on your work computer or computer that has valuable things on it and conversely, don't store anything valuable on your mining rigs.

So you're trusting a random number with no transparency on a website?

Oh wait, you're just spamming your referal link