So your response to "show me coins that have had a large fast ramp up without a big correction", is to point to two coins that have been in the midst of a large ramping up the last few months. That's brilliant.

I think this applies in this case

Some of the best crypto developers in the world have not been able to solve all the problems (speed, scalable, decentalized, secure, immutable are just a few of the core requirements of any crypto "killer") with crypto currencies so someone with limited programming skills certainly isn't going to do it. Sorry, but that's just the plain truth.

Soooo.. online subscription services like newspapers have been struggling for a few years now... and someone thinks creating a new service where you pay to read an article is the way to success.. Bravo!!!

Doesn't matter if all the coins end up in one wallet or not, you can see the deposit and withdraw addresses you used. i.e. there's a record of it. If I remember correctly the last one I heard about they sold whatever coin it was they had stolen for Monero and transfered that out. After that I think you can just send the coins to some other address and now no one can see it.

The fact that you immeditely turn to a personal attack says you're full of shit with nothing of value to say... Again though, show me a bunch of coins that have had a fast ramp up like ETH that have not corrected down a large amount. Can you? Or are you just a mindless shill spreading bullshit.

When bitcoin corrected in 2014 it dropped almost 90%. When coins correct they usually drop 70%-80%. Show me what coin hasn't gone through a fast ramp up like Etherium that hasn't then had a major correction.

In all the instances of people stealing some coins that I've heard of, they've all used exchanges to convert to something else. They seem to plan it all out ahead of time so they can get in and out as fast as possible so they can lower the risk of getting shut down at the exchange.

@Op. Jeez. You really don't understand anything about the USAF at all. You have to run specific code for that and it's not being done by core. At this point, just run the code code. If you want to support seqwit2x (which just does segwit and "maybe" 2M down the road assuming nothing else happens), then run that code when it's available.

Especially given some of the large dumps that have been happening.

The more I hear about these sorts of things on this coin the more confident I am in my initial assessment that it's nothing but a means for some of the scammed investors in the original coin to get their money back. There was nothing new about the coin, just modify things a little, call them something else and get the hype train going to drive the price up. And when looking at the history of the dev who went from just being a no name investor so suddenly calling himself a crypto developer it was obvious that it's a coin to stay away from. I might as well call myself a crypto dev with all the code I've written to do a variety of crypto related things lol.

The thread was about minecraft.

The "major prizes and contracts made" etc are no different. greedy traders that are going to hype it etc. The coin itself has nothing special about it.

I think for people saying things like "if core was any good", they actually mean if core listened to what the community wanted.

In terms of the potential for a split afterwards, if core believes that the community are the ones that "vote" on what code is bitcoin, then why would they continue with "their" code that was rejected.

I'm really confused by your "forcing someone's hand" comment. It just looks to me like the community is doing what they need to since core didn't seem to want to listen to them but instead wanted to build their own vision of bitcoin. Is that the way it's supposed to be? IF (and I think it's a big if at this point), the 2M hard fork actually happens, it will be very interesting to see what many of the core devs end up doing as that will let lots of people know what they really believe in.

Watching people run around thinking Mojang/Microsoft are actually involved with this is pretty funny. Just goes to show how many people are just sheeple that believe anything they hear. Digibyte purposely kept things vague in order to raise the price and get people to put money into the coin. This is nothing more than them running a server where people can get some coins. It has ZERO to do with mojang/microsoft. Frankly, given the history of mojang and servers, I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't have an issue with this when they eventually become aware of it.

Found this on the reddit


After reading that, it doesn't look like they've done their research into what's allowed and not allowed and it's highly probable that mojang/microsoft will end up shutting them down.

I love watching people who aren't technical defend some coin when there isn't even a white paper for it. There are so many potential attack vectors for this coin it's not even funny and it's also centralized. And yet they'll defend it like it's the savior of cryptocurrency when there is NO damn white paper and NO peer review by actual experts in the field. Just go look at the history of the main dev on the coin. He is definitely no expert at crypto. I've said in the past I'd wait to pass judgment on the coin until there's a white paper but listening to these shills flog this coin is just highly irritating.

Will these nodes have to be trusted and only in the hands of a "few"? Will the coin continue to function without these nodes?

Go look into building a 6 GPU mining rig. There's lots of info and youtube videos given many are busy mining Etherium. Right now it appears that using the RX570s might be the optimal choice as from what I've seen they don't use as much power as other cards.

After reading a bit more about this coin on the actual official website. The "Static" nodes do in fact have to be trusted. If 50% + 1 of them are "bad", they can reject the blocks from all other nodes and eventually blacklist them. If there was a real financial incentive, someone could come along right now and take over the network.  So it doesn't solve anything. I also don't see anything on there that says that other nodes can actually validate the blocks and thus act as a way to double check the static nodes and ensure they're honest. Maybe it exists but it's not there.

Reviewing the the post history of the key people involved is also concerning. Nothing in their early post history shows any indication of them actually knowing much about actual development etc. No posts in any technical discussion whatsoever, just posts in other coins talking about investing etc. In fact, the lead developer talks about how he has money in the orginal XBY and so wants to resurrect the project in order to get it's value back up.  At one point the lead developer posted a pre-ann about starting some new coin which went no where but had this "All trusted online node sign the accepted blocks. The trusted keyless nodes help the transaction validation processes and preventing abuse. Untrusted nodes collect "node bounty" from trusted nodes.". Notice the similarities and how many things have to be trusted?

Anyway, I've wasted enough time on this. I'll wait for a whitepaper now.

Saying it solves a 51% problem does not make it so. Until there is a white paper and it's reviewed by all the real cryptographers/devs (that have years and years working on this stuff) out there it's all just words and promoting it as the answer to all the issues out there is disingenuous at best. Not one single coin has solved all the problems with cyrpto currencies and neither will this one.

Why is it was soon as someone starts pointing out issues with a coin it's immediately labeled as FUD. Do you expect people to just be good little sheeple and follow along like good little boys and girls? Have you even gone and read all the dev emails etc on bitcoin? Those guys "fight with each other back and forth all the time and don't consider it FUD. They're simply debating issues.

I'll tell you what. I'll stop saying anything until there's a serious whitepaper. Then I'll review it and I'll start to point out all the flaws and attack vectors etc. Will I still be FUDing at that point? Again. I do not have a favorite coin. They ALL have problems and I'll point them all out to anyone. Without real facts, putting money into something is just foolish.

Serious real crypto currencies are trustless. They don't rely on trusting some entity that could end up going bad or being copted. That was one of the ENTIRE purposes of even doing crypto currencies in the first place.

Are you insane. Not one serious crypto currency developer would say that. They're a single point of failure. Given what I watched happen to spammers in the early days of the internet as they got pushed out of hosting companies until they were limited to a handful of countries, I can guarantee you that all coins with masternodes will eventually get killed off.