This thread has become so entertaining. My favorite part is when Shelby quotes that ego article. It's like he's so convinced he's an A-lister that he fails to comprehend what a real A-lister has to say on the matter. Anyone that is or is close to A-listers knows without a doubt that Shelby is nothing more than a wannabe b-lister lol.

I know that people really love to believe their favorite coin or whatever is decentralized, but in the case of this one, it's currently "centralized" in the developer himself. The moment he stops (is hit by a bus or something else happens), just like all others where the dev left, it will die. Him also having at least 10% (no one can be believed in this space and he could have far more than that), well that's a hell of a lot and cause for concern. It used to be that any coin that had a premine etc. of that sort of amount was immediately classified as a scam/garbage etc and avoided. Now of course people just accept it all as normal and make up all sorts of things to justify it.

His stating that this coin cannot be stopped by any country etc is just laughable and the fact that he's put that out there just has to make someone start to question more. Tor traffic can be detected and blocked. Bittorrent traffic can be detected and blocked. Sure, it wouldn't be cost effective to try and stop absolutely everyone, but you stop the majority and anything relying on it is dead. Seriously. I mean all you have to do is read the freaking wikipedia page about Tor. Just because no one really gives a shit about all this stuff right now doesn't mean it can't/won't happen down the road.

Another issue I have with this coin is that the marketplace is subject to the deal/licensing of Halo. Have all the specific details on that been made public? Would think that should be right in the OP of the coin as it's pretty important. Without it though, the marketplace no longer exists which makes it a risk.

At the end of the day though, this coin is no different than 99% of the others out there. It hasn't solved any real fundamental problems, offers a bunch of "stuff" that makes it seem like it has some sort of value and it serves no other purpose than a way for people to make a bunch of money for as long as it lasts. So as long as that's all you're interested in, then by all means, this one is as good as any other.

In what way exactly is this one supposedly the "first" marketplace? I seem to remember perusing the NXT one long before this one existed. Or is it by sticking "decentralized' in front of it and that they feel they can then make that claim.

The most telling chart is the one year one. Simply no real issue until Oct 2016.

Do you not have a link to the virustotal results? I recently ran half a dozen coins through it and most of the results were very similar. Usually the same scanners listing the same false positive results (if you can call saying it was some bitcoin miner derivative a false positive).

You don't need masternodes and don't let anyone fool you into thinking they're needed. They create a centralized system that can be shut down and/or co-opted by others. Anything that uses any form of centralization should be avoided and only used to take short term profits from and that's it.

Which can be faked as well. Even if you meet someone in person, you have no idea. How many fake names did the MintPal/Moolah guy have? Haven't kept up with that other than him being in jail now.

This is the only real truth in that post. Good luck.

Perhaps your idea of "near term" is different to most.

I don't really want to poke at you as I find a lot of things you discuss highly informative. But I really can't stand half truths, lies or misleading statements when people's money is at stake. I don't really think that's your intent.

Some advice from someone who's a bit older than you and has "wasted" more than just 3 years "thinking" about a problem as opposed to actually doing. Start doing something. Doesn't matter if you know part of it won't work. Doing something often clarifies and focuses the thought process enabling one to make that final break through. When you spend a ton of time just thinking about a particular problem, you inevitably lock yourself into that cycle and it's very hard to break out of it as it's so "comfortable". I suspect you have the ability to eventually work out the problems you're struggling with and I look forward to that. However, I'd also suggest you start thinking outside the box as opposed to confining yourself to what currently exists. Off the top of my head, perhaps there's something in nature, biology etc that might trigger a thought that could be adapted mathematically i.e. something that completely changes some aspect(s) of the current idea set (like the blockchain itself perhaps) that would then allow other problems to be dealt with in completely different ways. Good luck to you.

Very true. However for POW coins there's a "floor" at which miners break even or make very a small profit. One could consider a coin down around that level as being undervalued. In 2015 bitcoin came down to around it's floor and now it's currently in another huge bubble. Any coin that doesn't have PoW has a floor of pretty much 0 and so has no real value and so no way to be considered undervalued. I suppose if a non PoW coin has businesses running that rely on it then there would be a different way of figuring out it's "floor/value" but how many freakin coins have that? lol

This will be fun to watch. Doesn't matter if there was any or not or even if Polo "wins". If it ever gets to discovery all hell will break loose. I would think Polo would settle out of court before it ever reached that and probably use everyone's BTC to do it lol.. Oh yes, this will be fun.

lol... I suggest you have a look at this thread.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.0
If he even bothered to look at this particular project he would trash it in seconds due to it being centralized. I suspect he was talking more about DAG itself as that's how I ended up over there following some of CfBs posts. I was hoping for a technical discussion but apparently the two of them couldn't come to an agreement on the definition of something. Regardless I've only made it through about 8 pages of that thing and it's given me a bit of a headache lol.. Will reply to the other response to my post later or tomorrow once I've cleared my head and done more reading on some DAG type stuff.

Mankinds history has been all about man vieing for power/control via "money" and destroying everything in their path towards that goal regardless of the consequences. We're currently seeing at least one iteration of that play out with the bitcoin war going on now. Any coin that reaches that level will go through the exact same situation unless they're already controlled by a few. Of course is you don't care about that, then it doesn't matter. Plenty will have a future no different than the current financial systems.

Greetings. Been looking into new coins and today I'm looking at DAG coins. I read the white paper which I found to be woefully inadequate for being a cryptocoin. No probability formulas. One page talking about double spend which only talked about one possible attack vector. And then I saw that it's centralized by requiring "reputable" witnesses, "captains of industry" they were called. So the only question I currently have is whether or not this coins cryptography and implemention has been peer reviewed by experts in the actual field.

Greetings. Been getting back into looking at some new coins and I REALLY like the whole IoTs of this one. I do however have some questions. I'm not very cryptography technical so a lot of the white paper mumbo jumbo is over my head. Well, certainly all the math.

From what I've started researching about DAGs, there's a very real issue with double spending which the white paper discuses. My walk away from that though, and from learning that there can be a lot more possible selection algorithms than what is outlined, is that this project is very much an "experiment" at this point. Am I correct in that assumption and if so, in what way will the project inevitably find which ones provide the most secure result? Not saying that's a bad thing since bitcoin is just an experiment as well. Although, at this point it feels like bitcoin has become more of a social experiment as opposed to technical lol.

The other thing I didn't see in there was anything to do regarding something about the payer and payees being able to use different probabilistic algorithms. Is there something in the design/implementation that removes that issue?

I read the white paper (if you can call it that) for another DAG coin which shall remain nameless, but it appears to me to be a "centralized" coin since it will be relying on "reputable" witnesses. Does this one have anything like that?

There was another issue about fracturing but I haven't digged deep enough yet to know what that entails. I did see someone, I think it was from bitcoin core, say something off hand that DAGs were susceptible to that but I haven't been able to find that info again yet. Can someone give me a somewhat detailed breakdown of what that entails (or point me in the right direction to learn about it) and how IOTA gets around it?

Lastly, has the coin's cryptography and implementation been peer reviewed yet by any of the experts from the crypto currency realm?

Funny thing really is that probably 95%-99% of the people in crypto don't give a shit any more about the whole purpose behind crypto currency. All they want is to make money and turn the real crypto currencies into standard financial institutions. Almost all the crap stuff that's come out in the last few years has been nothing but money making schemes, "coins" being controlled by a few individuals and those run by new big business. It's extremely sad that they all just use a blockchain and call it crypto currency.

If they were free, hold onto them for a "long time". Someone pointed out that if people had held onto some free NEM that was given out it would be worth $120k now. Lots of people kicking themselves about that including myself.

I have not seen a single coin that could be considered a "long term" investment and that includes bitcoin (look at an all time chart). Every one of them has gone up and down. You can only currently make money in crypto by buying the lows and selling the highs.

As for time frame. You can't judge it by that. There are coins that have been around for several years but they've been abandoned with the bagholders keeping it cropped up. You have to actually do your due diligence. No difference than "real world" stocks.

No. Hubs using LN could be "banks" which could use FRB. But LN itself has nothing to do with that.

It's very interesting to see that this coin is still alive after all this time. Think I still have coins in an old wallet. Will probably have to get the newest version and see what the state of things is. Is there any sort of rough roadmap of the future for any new features etc. Not gimmick stuff, just improved tech features.