 Oh, sad, I was hoping that this list would be included Stratis My friend told me that Stratis will go to coinbase but he readed wrong it is Stellar pff.Now I hope that they will add Stratis later  .But even if they dont add I will still invest huge money in Stratis and it will still be new Ethereum for sure. if you are patience enough you will thank your friend for his mistake , stratis is absolute one to hold , it will take time before it can compete with ethereum , but it will do very good/better , and when it will do better you will be very happy to hold them Stratis doesn't fit the mold of the other coins, i.e. having a Silicon Valley backing. Perhaps in the next round. |
|
|
|
On that note, is there any roadmap where this won't be the case, or is BNT forever beholden to the whims of a single address?
The roadmap can be found here: http://ban.cr/roadmapAs for the freeze capability, it is limited to extreme emergencies only, like the one that recently occurred, and the Team hopes on not having to use this feature again, as per their latest blog entry. Oh wow so even after the hack, the team doesn't want to decentralize the system, and instead wants to have a single point of failure. Even after that single point of failure was responsible for millions of dollars of loss. Did the team come out and say anything about their intention to change that system at all? Please stop with the 'only for emergencies' beat - no one who's been in crypto for long believes that for a second. If a government asks the BNT team to freeze an account, will they? Hello, thanks for your thoughts. Always appreciated. We don't have too many details yet, as the team has been closely involved in the investigation and in normalizing the network. They have mentioned that this has been a learning process and will continue teaching them new lessons. Hang tight for further on changes to Bancor's approach to security. It's a very simple question really - if a government asks the Bancor team to freeze an account, will they? |
|
|
|
On that note, is there any roadmap where this won't be the case, or is BNT forever beholden to the whims of a single address?
The roadmap can be found here: http://ban.cr/roadmapAs for the freeze capability, it is limited to extreme emergencies only, like the one that recently occurred, and the Team hopes on not having to use this feature again, as per their latest blog entry. Oh wow so even after the hack, the team doesn't want to decentralize the system, and instead wants to have a single point of failure. Even after that single point of failure was responsible for millions of dollars of loss. Did the team come out and say anything about their intention to change that system at all? Please stop with the 'only for emergencies' beat - no one who's been in crypto for long believes that for a second. If a government asks the BNT team to freeze an account, will they? |
|
|
|
If it wasn't clear yet, Bancor is not decentralized. The team can change most things in the smart contracts at will - that's how they deliberately structured the smart contracts. Don't fall for the team's spin on the matter. Is there any updates from the team if making the system decentralized is on the Bancor roadmap? I can understand your point of view on this as everyone seems to have a different idea of what centralization is. Some would argue that there's no such thing as a decentralized exchange (liquidity network, in this case) as there is always a middleman, whether that be a piece of software, a network, or the blockchain. Something always needs to be trusted. Bancor wallets are on the blockchain, and Bancor doesn't not have any access to user funds or private keys. My only issue is that I can't find a mention where the team explain they can freeze funds anytime. Sure it helps in case of a disaster; but on the long run they are just able to arbitrary freeze someone funds. If I was an exchange CEO I wouldn't list a coin with that power. It was initially implemented into the publicly accessible smart-contract (line 333) for the emergency use only: https://etherscan.io/address/0x1F573D6Fb3F13d689FF844B4cE37794d79a7FF1C#codeYes, thanks for pointing it out in the code. But the concerns remain. If BNT can arbitrarily be frozen by a single address, no exchange should touch it. Since the ICO raised so much money, many exchanges may have skimped on their due diligence before listing BNT. On that note, is there any roadmap where this won't be the case, or is BNT forever beholden to the whims of a single address? |
|
|
|
I have a suggestion for Iconomi.
Iconomi can increase the number of Lisk they own by voting for delegates on lisk, which will give some forged Lisk in return.
According to my calculations, it can amount to burning of 124K more ICN /Month. Which is a very good amount.
They probably won't since it will jeopardize the asset itself. In any case, these funds are meant to be used as funds, and not to be used for staking or delegation How would this jeopardize the asset? |
|
|
|
If it wasn't clear yet, Bancor is not decentralized. The team can change most things in the smart contracts at will - that's how they deliberately structured the smart contracts. Don't fall for the team's spin on the matter. Is there any updates from the team if making the system decentralized is on the Bancor roadmap? |
|
|
|
I have a suggestion for Iconomi.
Iconomi can increase the number of Lisk they own by voting for delegates on lisk, which will give some forged Lisk in return.
According to my calculations, it can amount to burning of 124K more ICN /Month. Which is a very good amount.
Please share your calculations. |
|
|
|
How do you know that the Team takes security seriously? This flaw was pointed out by Emin Gur Sirer before Bancor launch, and the Team never bothered to change the design. Why was that?
is this the reference to whhich you make allusion? hackingdistributed.com/2017/06/19/bancor-is-flawed/ That does seem to be the reference. Let me include Bancor's response so that we have a wider perspective: https://blog.bancor.network/this-analysis-of-bancor-is-flawed-18ab8a000d43The reality is, this is a textbook case of not following good security practices. This was pointed out to the team more than a year ago. The team did not take that seriously. Now they got hacked similar to what was predicted by security experts. I don't see where in the process the team has demonstrated that they take security seriously. I do not understand the team's position on security and marketing. They are completely ignoring these two important areas. The team is working very hard to ensure that this kind of attack doesn't happen again. Please stay tuned to the Telegram Group and the Bancor Blog for more updates! What's the reason for not "working very hard" a year ago to plug this security loophole that was very clearly pointed out to the team at that point that the team deliberately chose to ignore? The blog hasn't been updated since Jun 21, is this a joke asking to follow the blog for updates? |
|
|
|
How do you know that the Team takes security seriously? This flaw was pointed out by Emin Gur Sirer before Bancor launch, and the Team never bothered to change the design. Why was that?
is this the reference to whhich you make allusion? hackingdistributed.com/2017/06/19/bancor-is-flawed/ That does seem to be the reference. Let me include Bancor's response so that we have a wider perspective: https://blog.bancor.network/this-analysis-of-bancor-is-flawed-18ab8a000d43The reality is, this is a textbook case of not following good security practices. This was pointed out to the team more than a year ago. The team did not take that seriously. Now they got hacked similar to what was predicted by security experts. I don't see where in the process the team has demonstrated that they take security seriously. |
|
|
|
I have another problem. When I issue a number of property tokens for a new project and would like to join them to the main aggregated token when actual construction is completed it looks like M&A process for two companies. Therefore I need to decrease CCR to provide the same price.
Not sure I understood your concern, anything you'd like to see clarified on Bancor's pricing algorithm? That is a naive position to take, unless the team actually delivers on the decentralized part. How many times do they need to be reminded that third-parties are security loopholes? Does the team still think having a 'master key' is the right approach? Where is the public statement admitting they were wrong, apologizing, and updating their contracts so that such incidents cannot happen in the future?
This is not about supporting the project or not. This is about doing the right thing. Clearly the Bancor team isn't doing that, unless I missed an announcement somewhere. This hack would not be possible if the team took Security 101 precautions in their smart contracts and not have the ability for a single address to change literally everything.
What's the post mortem for how the keys were compromised?
We can assure you that the Team does take security seriously and that they're actively looking regarding what has happened. Soon enough, once there's more information, you'll hear further. How do you know that the Team takes security seriously? This flaw was pointed out by Emin Gur Sirer before Bancor launch, and the Team never bothered to change the design. Why was that? |
|
|
|
This is perhaps the hottest topic and the most discussed in the community. I think any failure should be considered as an opportunity to improve the project.
In addition, many have the opportunity to buy coins while the price falls.
That is a naive position to take, unless the team actually delivers on the decentralized part. How many times do they need to be reminded that third-parties are security loopholes? Does the team still think having a 'master key' is the right approach? Where is the public statement admitting they were wrong, apologizing, and updating their contracts so that such incidents cannot happen in the future? This is not about supporting the project or not. This is about doing the right thing. Clearly the Bancor team isn't doing that, unless I missed an announcement somewhere. This hack would not be possible if the team took Security 101 precautions in their smart contracts and not have the ability for a single address to change literally everything. What's the post mortem for how the keys were compromised? |
|
|
|
|
This is such a disaster. Clearly Bancor wasn't decentralized at all. One address controlled everything. Essentially, everything the team communicated with respect to being "decentralized" is outright false, for starters. What's the excuse here? Will this be corrected after the hack, or will Bancor continue to have a single point of failure going forward as well?
|
|
|
|
Don't wait masternode this year. They focused on the sidechains and smart contracts. beta test breeze will last the entire year 2018
Sidechains and smart contracts are both excellent features, but other blockchains offer something similar. Masternodes/Tumblebit will make Stratis more useful for the Bitcoin community and makes it stand out from the rest. |
|
|
|
Iconomi price heading where it was like 2 years ago , never thought it can happen again . Waiting for 0.30-0.40 cents to get in . If somebody would ask me if iconomi can drop bellow 1$ when iconomi was 2+$ , then i would say there is no chance it will happen . But looks like Dream come true . Anyway i think this is one of the best projects out there .
Is there a price point at which you'll be willing to admit that you're wrong and perhaps ICN isn't one of the best projects out there? |
|
|
|
ICN already stated that they will honor this agreement and I trust them to do so. Is there someone with legal expertise concerning this claim from the whitepaper? 3.2 ICONOMI Tokens (ICN)
ICONOMI will issue 100 milion ICONOMI tokens (ICN) 10 days after the crowdfunding campaign successfully ends.
100 % of the ICONOMI tokens represent 100 % ownership of the ICONOMI platform, comprising of all assets and liabilities, as well as each and every
right and obligation, including but not limited to intellectual property rights, branding and trademarks Is this statement binding under a legal perspective? I've brought this up many times in the past - feel free to read the previous threads. The promise on which they raised money is not being implemented. Instead, all the investor money is being paid into the company making the managers rich. They have reneged on almost every promise made during fundraising. The implications would be different in different jurisdictions though. |
|
|
|
PB/RATIO Iconomi 0.44 lol soon 0.30 what an unfortunate shame for investors !!!!
If investors controlled the project, then it would be something. Unfortunately, ICN was just a fundraising mechanism without any utility on the platform. It doesn't matter how successful Iconomi as a company becomes and how much money the founders make - it doesn't have a direct bearing on ICN. |
|
|
|
I read the discussion and came to the conclusion that this project is ambiguous. However, it is worth looking at the chart and everything will fall into place. The XEM chart looks very promising. Now the coin is in the accumulation and growth potential is very good. However, I support the view that the team does not have a clear roadmap, I would really like to see it.
What do you mean by 'the project is ambiguous'? |
|
|
|
As much as i love nem, theyve been talking about catapult for a very long time now. Why are they moving so slow when more complex projects are developing rapidly?
There's only three core developers. Also almost every other project moves fast and breaks things. NEM delivers stuff that works from the off. That's an attitude that isn't welcome in cryptoland in general. Better if it works right out of the box than the move fast and break things attitude. You're talking about billions of dollars networks, so care should be taken for upgrades anyway. Sometimes people tend to treat cryptos like web-apps |
|
|
|
What's your reasoning for considering it an attack? Did they try and include invalid transactions? Reverse transactions? Anything else? |
|
|
|
Stratis disappoints me, I have less and less faith, after we listed on bithumb, we suffered huge dump, not a pump at all.
You just have to have faith and be patient. Bithumb doesn't just add any random shitcoin. Wasn't Mike Novogratz or some other big hedge fund manager talking about Stratis too? Just time and patience...all you need. Yeah, news and price aren't correlated in bear markets. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
