No: we've been as open as we can be. The above quote contains plenty of information about our approach. We have always been clear about rollout in Q1 2017.

Quite apart from this, what interests could exchanges be protecting by not listing Incent? The accusation that we are covering for them doesn't make sense.

ShroomsKit, is that you?
2014 had a better class of troll.

Tried too hard, not even close that time. Never go full troll.

Haha, I wonder what you're going to do when the ANNs are made and it becomes clear what's actually going on. You're going to look so dumb.
My guess is that you'll just disappear like most trolls, maybe create another id and start trolling with another theme instead.

Personally I wouldn't call that a bubble. It was just the market getting ahead of itself and then correcting. Price =/= value and at that point, price overtook value. Now it's back to arguably closer to where it should be.

Those not on Slack might be interested in this conversation:

blackpete [8:13 AM]
btw Rob, any water-level report regarding exchanges? Seems to have gotten a lot tougher to get listed these days. (edited)

pyneer [8:13 AM]
joined #general

blackpete [8:15 AM]
or are there any considerations to list INCNT on Waves DEX first? Make it some sort of exclusive?

rob [8:19 AM]
I can tell you that the relationship between Waves and Incent is very tight and that we shall defo be making the market for Incent with them. I had made overtures to Bittrex and, to a lesser extent, Poloniex, but ultimately this proved a mildly distasteful business.

[8:21] 
We are a Waves token. This is where I have pitched our tent and it's a decision I am very comfortable with.

blackpete [8:23 AM]
thank you for clarifying and your open words. Market making on Waves is a very good idea in my opinion. This is a marathon and not a sprint.

[8:24] 
Both Waves and Incent can profit massively of the first successfull CAT on the Waves platform.

marousi [8:25 AM]
bingo

rob [8:29 AM]
So I should be clear that we are (jointly) thinking way bigger than this. Allow me to explain...

[8:29] 
Within the next week we shall be launching this site http://icotech.me

[8:30] 
...as a side project.

[8:30] 
Incent will be baked in. Allowing us to support market price, in advance of core product launch.

[8:31] 
Sasha sees its potential to bring business to Waves and will support with marketing horsepower from the get go.

[8:32] 
My team will also swing back into action on marketing.

[8:32] 
We are in the process of negotiating our first big ICO.

[8:33] 
The result will be a Waves token that resides on both Waves and Ethereum blockchains.

[8:34] 
More generally, this will keep Incent at the cutting edge in the building of the Waves CAT community, with us in the centre of those relationships, and our stack ready to white-label to projects as they come on line...

[8:35] 
...all with Incent baked in.

marousi [8:35 AM]
very very good @rob

rob [8:36 AM]
I want to stress that none of this detracts from our core dev roadmap. Instead it complements and leverages it, to the benefit of our backers.

marousi [8:36 AM]
even better

rob [8:37 AM]
This is exactly where I wanted us to be at the start of 2017. The team are, as you can imagine, stoked, and we are ready to press hard.

blackpete [8:37 AM]
Rob, you are a free-thinker and very creative entrepreneurial mind. However, please don't get carried away and focus on incent's core product. This was your pitch and that is what your investors lined up for. Now, please tell me, how the same team that works on incent now has a side-project and that this side-project does not take away any ressources

[8:39] 
besides that, I totally support the idea behind icotech.me. Its a missing link

[8:39] 
and I have been playing around with a similiar idea myself

rob [8:39 AM]
Good question. So the core ICO Tech is built and basically deplorable on a key. What my devs now need to focus on is the core stack. The rest of us can market this while they do that.

[8:40] 
Remember, an ICO and other client that wishes to tokenise their business is no different from a merchant client where Incent is concerned. The better they do the more Incent is sold and the greater the sport for the price of Incent on the secondary market.

[8:41] 
This is a way for us to stimulate demand quicker than we had originally thought possible.

[8:42] 
And if it pays for itself we will hire against it.

[8:43] 
It is - I want to stress - completely synergous with our core mission.

[8:43] 
It simply leverages tech and expertise we have to support Incent and Waves.

blackpete [8:44 AM]
probably a good decision business-wise. You know your ressources better than anyone and I trust you in that regard. An ICO is primarily not about a promise anyway...its about investing in a team (edited)

rob [8:44 AM]
Pete, trust me, things are lining up nicely.

[8:45] 
In the meantime I'll publish a roadmap shortly. I need to bring you guys into the tent on this so you can keep us honest.

^^^
I know this is off-topic, but honestly, what possesses people to eat spam? Really?

To keep it on topic, I'll randomly speculate that there will be no major moves (< $100 a day) for a while.

There was not the irrational exuberance of a bubble ($100k!!!) and we didn't pass the old ATH. The 'crash' hasn't been that severe. It was high-volume, so I'll want to see plenty of volume on the way up to keep me happy. But right now I'm not bearish. It seemed like more of a correction than a reversal.

If it was a bubble, it was a pretty unimpressive one. A run-up, sure, but nothing spectacular by bitcoin standards. No double top. A crash that burned a good few traders but was underwhelming in the grand scheme of bubbliness. Whatever's going on here hasn't finished playing out by any stretch, and neither have the geopolitics driving it.

Distribution happens manually and periodically. To stay right up-to-date, join us on Slack.

The alts are a sea of red still. Traders are not yet moving funds back into them. Presumably they are in fiat waiting for the right entry point to go long btc.

You can check shorts on Finex, right? Money is being borrowed to go long/short. Lots of money.

Thank you! RT'd.

Minus the ~$200 bottom of the cup. So ~$682-876. But really, I wouldn't expect anything too conventional here.

Yes, thank you! Anything you need, let us know.

I find it extremely hard to believe that Wright is Satoshi. Apart from failing to provide the proof he promised he would, his communication style is completely different to the Satoshi on the forums and email list. Wright is rambling and messy, if bright. Asking us to believe that the same person wrote his blog posts and did those interviews is like suggesting Charles Dickens would finish a book with 'lol kthxbye' or that JJG would write a haiku instead of a wall of text.
I also doubt whether those early 1m BTC will ever move. The long article in LRB fills out a lot of detail about Wright. It seems most likely to me that he was involved, perhaps tangentially, at the beginning, communicated with Kleiman (maybe Finney and others) at the beginning, but had no keys. Then he overplayed his hand and no one believes a word he says any more.

Well, if history repeats itself, that was the equivalent of the Silk Road crash in October 2013.

"Amid Silk Road uncertainty, Bitcoin value drops over 20% in 3 hours". Sound familiar?

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/10/amid-silk-road-uncertainty-bitcoin-value-drops-over-20-in-3-hours/

Men who stare at charts: was that what you call a 'handle' on the cup?

It's a truism that coins are accumulated when the price falls (by forward-thinking and wealthier investors) and distributed on a price rise (as those same investors reap the benefits of their risk-taking/foresight). So yes, likelihood is that the dump was caught by a bottom-fishing whale and the coins are now being sold on to multiple smaller traders.

What was the crash to $900 then?!

We're back to close on $1100 already. Volume of the drop was significant, but nothing like the preceding green candles, which dwarf anything in the previous week. TL;DR I'd want to see a lot more indication that the rally is running out of steam. We needed a pullback and there was something fishy about that correction, but it still serves a purpose.