The web version is still in progress. I think there have been some statements about which elements of the gameplay are to be moved to the web version in each iteration, but I don't know the details.

Yes and for this reason, as I suggested above, it will thrive in locations where the local currency and financial system functions the worst. This should be obvious: Bitcoin is the same everywhere, but it is competing with systems that aren't. It will succeed, if at all, first against the worst of those systems.

This doesn't need to be geographic necessarily. There are segments of the economy even in developed countries that are worst-served by the existing system (for example the medical marijuana industry in the USA).

Export and import should still work I would think, but they're not really worth testing because the current implementation is being reworked/replaced.

I wouldn't say it is offensive, but it does make Circle's contribution to the popularization of Bitcoin relatively marginal at best. Maybe that was always going to be the case, whether they offered auto-converting dollar-denominated accounts or not though.

Look elsewhere for developments that may actually help Bitcoin in a meaningful way, for example: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/03/magazine/how-bitcoin-is-disrupting-argentinas-economy.html?smid=tw-share

"With its volatile currency and dysfunctional banks, the country is the perfect place to experiment with a new digital currency" -- As I said several pages back on this thread recently on another thread (quote below), trying to compete with a reasonably well-functioning (at least in the short term) financial system in developed western countries is not going to work (again, in the short term).

Sorry I misunderstood. In any case, I don't need to ignore BlockaFett. I find him so ridiculous and pathetic it adds a bit of comic relief. I will make sure it doesn't clutter up the Monero Speculation thread with off-topic any more than it already has though.

Identifying out when someone blatantly lies about me is not making me look bad.  If you think it does, you need to get your eyes checked. It is BlockaFett who looks like he has a serious problem with making shit up, which he does.

Please stop repeating the "48 hours" story about the instamine.

That timeline is part of the ongoing Dash whitewashing, or at least lightening, effort. After all, 48 hours sounds like a period of time when quite a few people could reasonably expect to get in there and mine with everyone else, regardless of time zone, etc.

In fact, 78% of the instamine occurred within 8 hours and 92% of it occurred within 24 hours. Anyone showing up after the first three hours was already shut out of most of it.

Specifically:

Wtihin 1 hour of the ambush launch, 575.5k coins were mined.

Within 8 hours, 1.57 million coins.

Within 24 hours 1.84 million coins.

By that time, the hourly mining had dropped to the relatively insignificant 10k coins/hour, 1/20th of the average rate over the first 8 hours.

As you can see from this graph, after 9 hours, it was basically all over. If you went to bed when Evan told you go to go bed (because he "definitely" wasn't going to launch), by the time you woke up, you missed it.

Okay I'll work on the pool miners then. Should not be hard. Unless someone wants to take a shot at it. I'll be putting up the new PoW code on a branch soon (the change is trivial: cut both the scratchpad size and number of iterations in half)

The open source pool code might need the same tweak too, for correct share validation.

You're lying. I never posted on that thread. In fact I wasn't even online and hadn't seen it.

"post on then delete" = lame made up shit from BlockaFett, as usual.

There will be a hard fork for both the PoW and block time, but it will be scheduled for a future date (block number) after release so there will be plenty of time to upgrade. The miners will require modification but it is small. The internal solo miner will work. As for the others...is there even still a pool for this coin? If so I'll try to get the other miners working too, otherwise I won't worry about it for now.

Updated donation address in OP

elrippo let's not make a bit deal about what gets deleted and what doesn't. No one is trying to censor you. I deleted two posts at the same time because they both quoted the whole long message and added little to it. One of them happened to be yours. Next time, please quote less and/or add more.

You can set the daemon ports with --rpc-bind-port and --p2p-bind-port

I already explained that I can't figure out what Dash was because it didn't have a well-specified public launch time.

How can we tell if it was mined before its public launch if we can't figure out when that public launch was?

Anyway, let's move on. Obviously it isn't a clear enough premine to count as such for the purpose of coinmarketcap, which tends to want very specific and objective evidence for such things.


I comment on what I know about, which at this point is obviously going to be coins that are more "visible" from the Monero perspective. If you want to share some of these other coins that are major scams and should be pursued as such, feel free to let me know about them. Obviously I don't have unlimited time but I do promise to at least take an honest look at what you give me. Fair enough?

What the Dash supporters don't understand is that market cap as a naked number is not an indicator of success. They look at the charts and the market and think everything is just fine and the instamine doesn't matter.

It is in fact an indicator of nothing because you can get high market cap both due to good distribution or bad distribution, as we just discussed in the case of Bytecoin, possibly the coin with the worst distribution in history (okay there others that tie it). Those two cases are very different in underlying dynamics however.

I disagree. When you tell people the launch won't happen for a few days, and then when asked, again, by someone who wanted to make sure he wasn't misunderstanding, if it will happen in hours you say "Definitely not" (<- actual quote), and then you launch in a few hours, that was misleading and deceptive on its face. There is no need to get into intention at that point.

Maybe he suffered or suffers from a colossal case of airheadedness and it wasn't intentionally misleading and deceptive, because he just got mixed up, by mistake, about the difference between days and hours. I find that somewhat implausible, but not impossible.

Sorry, it got bumped to the second page of my PMs and I forgot to answer it. I'll reply now.

Okay, the price is down.

Whoever it was who pointed out lower highs was correct, although I don't really consider the 0.01 high to be part of a meaningful trend. That was more of a unique situation. Nevertheless since the summer high around 0.0055, the highs have been progressively lower. This is not a generally favorable trend over the medium term until there is a significant change.

Over the short term, I see market-wide factors that are playing a major role. XMR is down significantly over the past month but since our friend from Dash is joining us, I will point out that Dash is as well. The price ratio between the two is currently about 6.5 which is within the recent trading range and well within the historical trading range (which peaked at almost 20). Likewise BTC is down significantly. It  has not been a good month for cryptos.


 

Yes but you are missing that thankful_for_today was not the original developer of the code. He just forked it.

I agree with dga that the original developers of the code deliberately crippled it. That was Bytecoin, not Bitmonero.

We don't know that thankful_for_today ever even looked at that code any more than the typical copy/paste Bitcoin-forking altcoin developer reads all of the Bitcoin code.


No I said I remembered two occasions (and I identified them: 1) the dashcoin "buy out", 2) the coinmarketcap discussion) of having posting there, after being mention by name, by someone else on the thread. Conversations followed, in which I participated.

I did not say two posts, that was another one of your signature misquotes.


I consider instamines to be inherently a scam, by virtue of having a severely unhealthy front-loaded distribution, so there's really nothing needed to get from instamine to scam in my opinion. The only exception would be if something were done to correct the unhealthy distribution, such as burning the extra coins.

I also consider coins that significantly cut their money supply (thereby multiplying the value of existing coins) to be scams.

I don't really see how Dash could possibly not be a scam, or why you think I'm overstepping by saying so. But obviously I expect you to dispute it.


I've made the case -- with supporting evidence -- that his behavior surrounding the launch was misleading and deceptive, which it was. I can't speak for his intention, but you know my inference, I know yours. We disagree. That isn't lying. You are lying when you say it is.

Huh?

elrippo I have nothing against your contributions but when you quote 50 lines and then add one line that doesn't actually say anything, I'm sure you can do better.