No Itod, pinkman12345 is not a fudster.

However (s)he would be mistaken in thinking that we find the decision whether to put up a buy wall a tough one. Not sure where that idea came from.


Can I ask you, Itod, to post constructively in future? Your post are almost always denigrating, and there's no need for that.

Great work sir!

Me too.

Hello all

Just to report that XSTerminate on Windows sometimes crashes instead of deleting a post.

Has anyone else experienced this?

Any fixes most welcome.

rdnkjdi, did you forget you were banned?

Do not post here.

You've also continued to sidestep the questions regarding your use of multiple accounts in perpetrating the smear campaign against us.

Do not reply to this message.

You may have failed to notice that the post that you quoted does not assert that DHT isn't true P2P; it asserts that Kademlia - and whatever else Bittorrent uses - isn't.
If I happened not to add, for completeness of expression, that some DHT is serverless, that doesn't mean we're now using a method that isn't true P2P.

With respect to DHT, being serverless is what counts as far as I'm aware.
With respect to inter-node communication, using a P2P protocol and not RPC calls is what counts.
Lastly, it'll benefit you to recall that Dan has proposed a hybrid DHT-mesh.

Huh? We never claimed that DHT isn't true P2P.

What we did claim, however, is that RPC calls aren't a true P2P protocol. I think you got confused there.

(Also, we will use serverless DHT.)

Banned.

Don't post here again.

- The protocol that XCurrency nodes use to communicate. It's end-to-end encrypted and completely serverless.


- The protocol that all Blocknet-enabled nodes will use to communicate, across different blockchains.


- http://telehash.org/


- Distributed Hash Tables: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_hash_table


- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_networking


- We have released regular PoS wallets for holders of Blocknet tokens to use.
- This is only for the interim period between the ITO and the launch of the Blocknet's technology.


The OP should do this adequately, but I can put it in a sentence if you like: the Blocknet makes the features of every altcoin integrated into it a service rendered to every participating coin. That said, it's not directly consumer oriented; it's an infrastructure. The apps/wallets that developers create will be consumer-oriented.


You can start with this post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=829576.msg9296247#msg9296247
And then move onto this post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=829576.msg9306600#msg9306600


Dan Metcalf's identity is public, and so is mine: http://xc-official.com/the-xc-team/
When the foundation and team is formalised, you can expect more people's identities to be made public (though not necessarily everyone's).


Yes, the marketing has been prepared before the technology. The terms of the ITO entail funding first, code later. Presumably anyone not happy with this proposal didn't buy Blocknet tokens.

The Foundation (which is not formalised at present) only holds ITO funds - in escrow, at a BitGo multisig address.

When it is formalised, it will still only hold ITO funds.

Soon after being formalised, it may further seek to hold BLOCK.

If it holds BLOCK, these funds will be distinct from the BLOCK that Foundation members already hold. BLOCK held by individuals is categorically different to BLOCK held by the Foundation, which would be held collectively (i.e. in a multisig address).

In my opinion it's only confusing to those who would wilfully confuse matters.

You come across as if you've forgotten my (numerous) expressions of interest in the Foundation to (a) owning BLOCK and (b) using a buy wall.

You also come across as if you're unaware that the Foundation has not even been formalised yet. Give us time to put everything together. Only then would it be appropriate to form the judgements you've formed above.

Scamichyst: banned for assaulting the community with your opinions. Try coming alongside us next time - with a new account though.


For the record, the Foundation (as a general entity) is not invested in BLOCK as it only holds ITO funds at present.

However its members are free to hold BLOCK personally, and as far as I know, we all do.

Yes it is.


No.

What I've been doing all along - especially with my reply to Reebokass - is providing information.

It's just not the information the community expects or necessarily wants (though I know some will be relieved to see me trying to dismantle the prior mode of interaction between me and the community, because it caused so much undue strain and emotion.)

In my post above, I'm supplying higher-order information pertaining to the way we interact. It's information that's as relevant to XC as any other information.


As always, I will continue to provide information of the normal sort regarding releases, news, etc.

And for the time being, I will also provide higher-order information about how the community and I are interacting when it seems to me to be pertinent.

My remarks above are not a foil for anything.

I will release information as and when I have it. I will not delay to do so either.

I will also generally refrain from posting hearsay and speculation regarding update-related news.

But if you really want something to go by, I can offer a vague scrap of info: the strain we were all put under during the smear campaign has created a minor backlog and the TOR sticks were affected by this. They can be expected to ship very soon but I don't know when.

Indeed it appears hard to see through the mist (but thanks for sharing my music). See, in my opinion the following has the things precisely backwards:


To construe me as putting myself in a superior position by telling someone to read up on my post history is, I think, wrongheaded.

I would be putting myself in a superior position if I were to continue to support the expectation that the XC team will respond to the community's every question, concern, and worry.

Why? Because doing so supports and enables a dependency upon me to provide information and support.

But I'm not some infallible/impartial/ideal source of information. It is unethical for me to enable activity that would treat me as such - and to do so would wrongly put me in a position of superiority.

So what I'm implying with the way I post lately is that I do not want the community to put me on a pedestal on this way.



(By the way, my reply to Reebokass's post had more to do with him agreeing to stop posting mopey, negative remarks - something he's entirely failed to put a stop to. It wasn't a general reply to the community; it was a reply specifically to him.)

Maybe we just wanted to see if you'd post another mopey, negative remark.


(On a more serious note, read my post history. I've posted at least twice on the status of things at the moment.)

The Blocknet will be largely new code, since it's for a rather different purpose to what XC is for.

However at present the plan is to adapt XC's Xnode protocol (end-to-end encrypted P2P protocol) for the XBridge. It'll be used in conjunction with Telehash in a hybrid DHT-mesh architecture - and it will be completely serverless.

The interim wallet is PoS. I'm currently unaware of how often the final tech will actually need its own blockchain, since the idea is to network nodes of different blockchains together. These chains are a resource and it makes no sense to either duplicate them in the Blocknet's own chain, or to use a new chain when the old ones may suffice. However if it needs its own chain for anything, it'll almost certainly be a PoS chain.

Dan Metcalf and I have made our identities public.

There's no whitepaper, but there is Dan's (and XC's) reputation of delivering the goods, on schedule, since its inception.

That's incorrect. Funds are stored in a multisig address, in escrow, so Dan does not control them.

In due course we'll be releasing details on the board of people who will jointly have control over funds (the funds will still be subject to a third party auditor as well).