Great. Sounds like you're running a tight operation over there. Good to see.

Are you going to have KlaranetDark too?

If it's a scrypt ASIC then yes, you should be able to mine with it.

We definitely welcome all miners! Welcome!

I'm amarha btw

You realize that you have a place in Bitmark history now, right? You'll be forever known as the man who sees penises in unlikely places.

Disregarding the obvious work that's been done on the project so far which others have pointed out, is being a trustee/escrow of the ~5700 BTC superNET project enough "POD" for you?

Personally, I would be much more skeptical of any currency that feels the need to participate in a system such as "POD" rather than earning value and letting the development speak for itself. That doesn't mean all projects that have done "POD" are scams of course, but we all know how many shady projects also happen to proudly flaunt their "POD" status.

This looks very nice. Waiting for iOS version.

Bitmark/BTM would be a great addition I think as well I might add.

Do you feel that way about all cryptos including Bitcoin?

If there is going to be demand for cryptocurrenies then something like superNET is essential to bring another layer of abstraction that provides ease of use for people.

If you think that cryptos are going no where, that's fine too, but to me if people are going to be using cryptos in the near future then superNET is something that logically follows.

Do you think it's safe to say that by now we would be seeing a lot more odd blocks if an actual attack was underway?

It's beginning to become apparent that it's pretty unlikely that Bitcoin can compete on that level with private entities I think.

There are some bad an inefficient companies out there. Even if Bitcoin makes them step up their service or get over taken by a competitor that does it better it seems like a long shot that Bitcoin is going to become some sort of financial hegemon anytime soon.

Unless there is large scale bank bail-ins. Or some other financial disaster. Then there might be a large flight of capital in to Bitcoin.

But really at this point I'm pretty convinced that the only way crypto has a chance at mainstream adoption is through someone coming up with new, innovative, and easy ways to use it for regular people.

Nice, looking forward to testing out your platform.

BTC-e is a dinosaur with those alts, lol. I don't think they've changed since 2012. Except for maybe Primecoin?

Odd that they wouldn't add some of the more high volume alts out there now. Lots of money to be made.

Anyone have an estimate on how many megabyes Laxo Trade has contributed to the blockchain due to their spamming?

Hopefully you're feeling better if you're back on here.

Any thoughts on BCX's claim that an attack is in progress and might take up to 22 days to materialize?

There wasn't exactly a lot of suggestions from what I saw. And it seems people just want to move on from this anyway.

Interesting timing. Poloniex just implemented marking as their user reputation system.

I joined another campaign, so I won't be in for this week.

Thanks.

As I've stated before, I think the name Boolberry in general is a good one for something other than an anonymous crypto. Even for a crypto, it's an alright name. But I think if you and everyone else here believes that there aren't people out there who actually are dismissing BBR based on the name alone then I think you guys are wrong about that. I like BBR, but ever since I've been following it I've seen a fairly consistent amount of people bashing it based on the name alone. Some of these people are surely just Monero holders looking to get a jab in on BBR, but even so, some of those Monero holders might have dismissed BBR outright before they made their choice to buy XMR.

People here obviously like the name, and that's great. It's a community project and that the way these things work. But I don't think people should be under the impression that there aren't people out there who won't invest in something called Boolberry.

Some people might be voting with this logic:
 
I like the name Boolberry therefore we should keep the name.

Where as I think people should make sure their logic goes like this:

I like the name Boolberry enough to dismiss the risk of outsiders rejecting the currency outright based on the name. I realize that there are x% of people who don't see the name as one that should be attached to an anonymous cryptocurrency. But I like the name enough that I feel I get more utility out of keeping the name Boolberry, than I would from the economic utility of likely gaining more money through targeting a larger market.

x% in the above might be a tiny insignificant number, or it might be significant. Without market research we can only go off our experiences in the community here(basically Bitcointalk and the Poloniex troll box).

As an aside it's also possible that the x% for Aureum is higher than the x% Boolberry. So this isn't meant to be some sort of argument that everyone should be choosing Aureum. We don't really know how the public feels since we have no data.

But the big thing is that this a a very biased population here, as everyone who has an interest in BBR now by definition is not someone who dismissed BBR outright because of its name.

Also, you're other points about marketing BBR are good and educating people on BBR and how it's different than other cryptos is great.

Sounds like the 'S' curve we were discussing earlier in the thread.

Based on what I've learned about the technology behind it this would be very easy to add as a feature. (the messaging)

Yes, seems someone is trying to create controversy where there is none at all.