Ok, I think I wanna invest a bit in Burst... Can someone tell me in a paragraph or two, what burst has already accomplished, whats being done now and what the future looks like..
Thanks guys.
Don't listen to bitladen.. he's been trying to convince people that the Burst clone he's going to make will be better and scare people into dumping Burst  Actually maybe you should listen to bitladen and take those Burst off of him. Short version: Proof of Capacity is really nice because it's energy efficient (uses only 25% more energy than POS.. basically nothing but 30 times less energy than POW). It is also ASIC resistant which means it'll be easier to acquire new coin holders over time as it should be profitable for every day people to mine and similar to a bucket, once they've invested a little bit, they are likely to buy more and use it. It's also naturally more decentralized due to this ASIC resistance. Also, Proof of Stake has some issues with it, there are no viable blockchain trimming algorithms at the moment. Also you can not trustlessly point to a chain and prove it's correct because there are no difficult to create Proofs that let you trace it back to the genesis block. And there are problems with the fact that everything relies on miners keeping their keys secret. Long version (though this is a rewritten version of the paper and much shorter and to the point than the last version for other people!): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cLFDFqMP0hhD-5kngKCTZfXM6a24yDfhAbwdgL3BAsQ/edit?usp=sharingAdditionally, Burst has Automated transactions working, which are also known as smart contracts. First coin to get true smart contracts running, and they've been running for 4 or 5 months now. Burst also has an asset exchange as well as a decentralized marketplace and messaging and all sorts of other goodies. We've also got a few other features such as built in escrow, and subscription payments. And there are some big plans for blockchain trimming and instant transactions and multi-sig and all sorts of stuff to come. The core team of people working hard on this has grown to about 7 to 10 people.. then some others who are contributing to a lesser extent, because let's face it, everyone is busy with life. By far the most undervalued coin out there.. but we're hoping to start marketing ourselves pretty heavily soon which should bring in more people.. we've barely marketed ourselves yet plus the initial heavy inflation has kept prices low. Great time to get in, in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Rebranding is a good idea. I am sure there are better name than burst which reflect the product.
I suspect Burst reflects the Bursts of energy when you are reading from the hard drive? What kind of name would you go with? Not convinced we need one, I like Burst. Btw, if you do find one you really, really like.. grab the domain names and hold on to them. If you can get them cheap before someone squats on it, I'm sure we could pay you back if we go with that name. Look at Google and yahoo and Microsoft, etc, how many companies have a name that really represents them? @bitladen keep in mind the largest account of Burst exactly matches percentage wise Satoshi's holding of total coin supply. |
|
|
|
How about POD - Proof of Disk? The name doesn't differentiate the product or describe what it is. Burst needs a name change.
The term "Capacity" is ambiguous. Proof of Memory makes more sense.
Change these two things and more people will join.
It's a harddrive coin not a RAM coin. Note it doesn't nessecarily have to be one word.. could be POHD.. proof of hard drive. Or Proof of drive capacity or something. Just something to think about. |
|
|
|
is the project completed yet? like they have a working demo for us to test?
Which project? Burst is working and has been for a long time now.. |
|
|
|
|
Proof of Capacity is a more accurate description though, the more hard drives capacity you have, the more you mine. Right?
And there are other words that I could see.. but they all start with a 'S'. And it'd be nice to not be POS or POW.
|
|
|
|
professor of crypto says (that is me) that if you are just in it for the money you shall loose, nice thing about BURST (and QORA actually sparked my interest albeit late because of its integration with BURST) is that people continuously work on the codebase and set future standards, actually many people here said they are in it for fun as well! which I find great that this is the case.
professor of crypto says that he is sorry that some of you can not pack huge profits in couple of months time
Good point.. it's not just about the money. We're making what could very likely be one of the biggest products of the future. It's pretty exciting to work on. Hopefully most of the crypto people are not solely evaluating a coin based on how it looks on coinmarketcap.com. But frankly it doesn't look all that bad on coinmarketcap either.. keep in mind that a large chunk of the marketcap going down is because BTC went down in price. |
|
|
|
|
Burst is not an Nxt clone, it's an Nxt fork.
But Proof of Capacity is Burst's big deal. POC is a really big deal. But most people don't realize it. Automated transactions are also a huge deal.
I will agree that I wish the block reward didn't pay out quite as fast.. but look at Darkcoin and it's accidental instamine. They are still doing great.
I think most people would look at your coin as the clone, that being said, if you use the same POC algo, miners could mine for both simultaneously.. might even increase the number of Burst miners.
But if you don't believe in Burst.. please sell your coins to those who do. Personally the only time I'd sell coins was if I thought we were in a bubble and I can buy more later.. I really think that Burst's POC is the best mining algo out there and most people really have a clue why, they see it as a novelty or a toy. In their minds, why go POC when you have POS?
And look at the price relative to BTC, not marketcap.. I'm fully convinced this is just a normal up and down and Burst just hasn't convinced the masses yet. Give us about a month or two, we're finally getting some marketing stuff figured out, and I think we'll be over 200 satoshis.. probably much higher.
And keep in mind that the miners aren't the ones who make a coin take off.. it's the buyers.
|
|
|
|
Look at every one of the top ten or so coins.. know what they have in common? They have at least one, usually a few very large holders who have a lot of incentive to grow the coin and make sure it succeeds.. they also don't always start out as a top ten coin and have some ups and downs.
I certainly doubt it. Except the DRK scam. And very large is it like 90% large or more like 30% large? And are these holders first miners or are they investors? If they paid something for it I guess it's ok, they certainly have the motivation to make the coin rise. With burst, nobody ever sold the coin. Not even me  I must have sold like 5m only. Having large bagholders just doesn't appeal to investors. You turned this coin into premine. How many of the top 10 coins halved the block reward within an year? With burst, it's almost half now, and it's not even been an year. The only incentive for mining this coin is the lack of other PoC coin. But I will fix that! Bitcoin - Satoshi owns 7+% or there about.. been a whole since I did calculation. Gavin and team own single soffit percentages. Ripple - 80% owned by Type lands or whatever it is Litecoin - someone bought 20% while small, inflation has brought that to 5%. Dash - 4% holder, 2.5% holder, couple of 1%ers Dogecoin - someone owns 14% Stellar - 96 % held by 'foundation' Nxt - bunch of people started out holding on to 5+% of the coin Bitshares- someone owns 9% bunch of other large holders etc. Why do large holders scare people? They clearly believe the coin is undervalued and want it's value to rise more than others. |
|
|
|
Just a FYI I deposited some Burst at Poloniex and I haven't had it credited in my account. I contacted them and they said they'd 'look into it', but that was yesterday. Be forwarned.
And no Poloniex has nothing to do with the dump. That was a classic pump and dump, now the coin was lower then where it began with. Probably has something to do with Bitladen 'generating more volume so people see it and buy' strategy. -_-
Bitladen? I am a little bit puzzled about that! Just for split of a second think, that Bitladen would not mine at all. How LESS Burst would then have been created so far? When you figured out the answer, then you will understand my point! @Elmit, bensam quoted bitladen's call for "generat[e|ing] more volume ON THE EXCHANGES". @Bitladen, have you beefed up your rig ? For weeks you had 800-900TB online (extrapolated from the yield of my 380TB rig), and then starting around May 5th it looks more like 1.5 PB. It could also mean you fixed some i/o, cpu or other bottleneck while maintaining the storage footprint. I'd be interested to hear details about that. One good thing I'd like to read from that is: you burden the operating expense because you believe in the future of this coin. I'm in the same boat. I have to, as my opex (5 W/TB @ 0.35 USD/kWh) is very high and wouldn't be covered by the mining yield today - if I sold today. All will be good in year or two. I just acquired more capacity. Anyhow, there's clearly need for a new PoC coin. PoC is not dead, it's good, it's just that the coin has deflated too fast and now most coins are held by a few who first mined it. That's why nobody would risk buying it. It's not really worth mining it, but if there was another PoC option, the coin price would select where the miners go. I did start a bounty to bring a coin mixer feature to burst. This might just increase the interest in the coin. Anyhow, when I get the time, I will make a new PoC coin, so us miners don't have to put up with this situation forever. Look at every one of the top ten or so coins.. know what they have in common? They have at least one, usually a few very large holders who have a lot of incentive to grow the coin and make sure it succeeds.. they also don't always start out as a top ten coin and have some ups and downs. |
|
|
|
|
You know what I'd do of I had invested a bunch into Ether pre-sale and was malicious? Buy some burest slowly and dump just before Ether came out.. plus I suspect people had hoped ATs would make Ether a non-issue. But looks like we'll all have to compete with them.. which I could see weighing on investors minds.
The other reason I suspect price declined? Looks like some one decided to invest very heavily and I suspect did it slowly, hit his limit, and stopped buying.
|
|
|
|
it's very concerning that withdrawals are not working from polo for a VERY LONG time now...
I wonder why and is it related to the incredible price drop???
Hmmm, I'm waiting more than 24 hours for deposit also... Poloniex has problem with his BURST wallet I suppose. it's been more than a few days now on polo with issues. something isn't right. there's a problem they're hiding. they keep saying, we're still having issues and NO ETA this really looks like polo is hiding a serious problem. At least we can be pretty sure their Burst hasn't been hacked: http://burstcoin.eu/charts/addresses-by-balanceI suspect has more to do with rollout of new features and they are overwhelmed with request by people not understanding new features. |
|
|
|
|
Elmit and haitch, please go to burstforum.com and make a thread to discuss this, or use PM. Personally I really don't care, I skim right over those comments and don't know what the newest argument is, but it reflects poorly on Burst to have constant bickering in the comments anytime Elmit posts something. His miners have been warned that he make be taking large cuts or be having issues and can look around.
|
|
|
|
it's very concerning that withdrawals are not working from polo for a VERY LONG time now...
I wonder why and is it related to the incredible price drop???
I think it could definitely be related to price drop in last 24 hours, since polo announced their policy of requiring names to withdraw. I know I'm about to dump some burst just so I can move all my coins off poloniex and be done with those assholes. Maybe this will come back to bite me but I was curious.... "Not real" is a perfectly valid name. Didn't try withdrawing though.. maybe it needs to be approved and I'll have to change it at that point. But point being... Don't really have to provide real name. Would have been nice if they'd given users a heads up first. Personally, I don't really care and I can understand they need to compile with legal stuff but it is annoying. |
|
|
|
This is such an amazing coin, why it is being dumped is beyond me  maybe oversupply but I'm just going to keep piling up, hard to believe a coin with so many great features has a market cap of barely $170,000 I'm with you.. so many people are someday going to be saying that if they'd only been here when burst was going for 100 times cheaper, they would've as many as they could afford. But as you can see.. many people are here, know the coin, and yet are still dumping. Crazy. But seriously, 20 times higher after we do a little bit of marketing seems on the low side to me. In the meantime, please find more programmers and marketers who can be invested and have an investment to protect when we hit that point. We don't need or want speculators until we've got a solid team.. and we've got a good one but it could always be made better. |
|
|
|
Would it be a solution, if I take from my local wallet the directory burst_db and replace it at the pool and restart the wallet?
That is a good idea, yes. |
|
|
|
I have a wallet at the pool, and there this error poped up. I restarted the wallet, but now it stucks at 100649 - no error
Maybe the list of peers is outdated:
nxt.wellKnownPeers = "198.199.103.145; 178.62.39.204; burst.cryptoport.io; 192.155.252.202; 37.58.107.74; 119.81.165.138; 119.81.44.170; 119.81.44.171"
Seems unlikely that would cause this error... can't hurt to add a few peers but like I said, seems unlikely. Is account 12468105956737329840 your account? Can you figure out who that account belongs to? I take it the wallet is automatically interacting with the mining pool, not that you are performing some actions on it? Odd that it's telling it it's happening at block height 2147483647. We aren't close to it.. seems to me like maybe you started solo mining your own fork or something odd like that. I realize it's currently a time consuming thing to do.. something I'd like to be among the next big projects to be done. But my first reaction is that you need to redownload the blockchain. I wouldn't delete the old one yet, just rename it and start downloading the new one.. let me keep thinking. |
|
|
|
What does this mean in the wallet: 2015-05-20 07:42:10 SEVERE: Error processing transaction
java.lang.IllegalStateException: Not in transaction
at nxt.db.Db.endTransaction(Db.java:198)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl.processTransactions(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:515)
at nxt.TransactionProcessorImpl$5.run(TransactionProcessorImpl.java:210)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:304)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:178)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:293)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1145)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
2015-05-20 08:18:30 INFO: DUPLICATE KEY!!!
2015-05-20 08:18:30 INFO: Invalid key for account 12468105956737329840 at height 2147483647, was already set to a different one at height 12469
2015-05-20 08:26:57 INFO: DUPLICATE KEY!!!
2015-05-20 08:26:57 INFO: Invalid key for account 12468105956737329840 at height 2147483647, was already set to a different one at height 12469
2015-05-20 08:29:43 INFO: DUPLICATE KEY!!!
2015-05-20 08:29:43 INFO: Invalid key for account 12468105956737329840 at height 2147483647, was already set to a different one at height 12469
2015-05-20 08:31:05 INFO: DUPLICATE KEY!!!
2015-05-20 08:31:05 INFO: Invalid key for account 12468105956737329840 at height 2147483647, was already set to a different one at height 12469
2015-05-20 08:32:39 INFO: DUPLICATE KEY!!!
2015-05-20 08:32:39 INFO: Invalid key for account 12468105956737329840 at height 2147483647, was already set to a different one at height 12469
2015-05-20 08:36:02 INFO: DUPLICATE KEY!!!
2015-05-20 08:36:02 INFO: Invalid key for account 12468105956737329840 at height 2147483647, was already set to a different one at height 12469
2015-05-20 08:36:07 INFO: DUPLICATE KEY!!!
2015-05-20 08:36:07 INFO: Invalid key for account 12468105956737329840 at height 2147483647, was already set to a different one at height 12469
2015-05-20 08:36:47 INFO: DUPLICATE KEY!!!
2015-05-20 08:36:47 INFO: Invalid key for account 12468105956737329840 at height 2147483647, was already set to a different one at height 12469
2015-05-20 08:37:09 INFO: DUPLICATE KEY!!!
2015-05-20 08:37:09 INFO: Invalid key for account 12468105956737329840 at height 2147483647, was already set to a different one at height 12469
Looking into it.. could you describe the steps you took that lead to this error? |
|
|
|
I have made a web wallet and want to transfer my BURST from Poloniex. Since is a new account I must add the public key first, but I do not see how to do this from Poloniex withdrawal.
Anyone know what would be a viable solution?
Eth.
Is the wallet telling you this? Or is Poloniex? I believe the answer is that Burst doesn't require a public key, just send Burst to your wallet address, and then for securities sake, send any amount of burst from that account or buy and asset or make any transaction that proves that you own the private key linked to your public key. |
|
|
|
|
So sounds like you are saying trust is required.. and while understandable.. why not simply trust them with a central ledger and do away with the blockchain? I thought point of the blockchain was to minimize trust?
To partially answer my own question, I guess that this allows different people to trust different companies yet still use the same currency between themselves.. that's definitely useful.
|
|
|
|
|
The algorithms behind the scenes can be as beautiful as you want them to be BUT ultimately most people using these wallets can't code or read code so they need to trust that the cryptocurrency wallet they download isn't sending their passwords off to the creator of the cryptocurrency. Certainly open source helps but theoretically the site hosting the wallet could giving out different versions to different people or something.
So what is the point of trustlessness if we are trusting developers?
I don't really agree with that statement myself, but I'd like to spark a discussion about the topic and hear the thoughts of others as well as solutions.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
