There are some key components in their statement that nobody has brought up yet. Not to talk about the litecoin development. That doesnt even make sense to send back any LTC since that is pretty worthless.You have time to claim your refunds until the very end of Early May 2015. Thereafter we will send the money back. The existing money will be spread accordingly to investments over all people that claims a refund. It sounds like: 1) Nobody will get a refund until sometime in May. 2) They are not planning on refunding Litecoin investments at all. 3) You should expect at least your original BTC investment amount, possibly more if some people don't claim a refund. Thoughts? I agree with all of these, although I guess if everyone was to claim their refund then we would get less than our original investment because some has been spent on server hosting and such. Hmm, I thought someone looked at the original BTC deposit address and all the BTC remains intact. I suppose the dev could claim expenses and send back less than the original investments though. |
|
|
|
There are some key components in their statement that nobody has brought up yet. Not to talk about the litecoin development. That doesnt even make sense to send back any LTC since that is pretty worthless.You have time to claim your refunds until the very end of Early May 2015. Thereafter we will send the money back. The existing money will be spread accordingly to investments over all people that claims a refund. It sounds like: 1) Nobody will get a refund until sometime in May. 2) They are not planning on refunding Litecoin investments at all. 3) You should expect at least your original BTC investment amount, possibly more if some people don't claim a refund. Thoughts? |
|
|
|
I think msin is partly right: the devs found some bugs they couldn't handle and choked.
yeah your probally right, but why not return the funds or even run away with them lol, it doesnt make sense to me Yup, it just doesn't add up. When the website went down, we all assumed it was game over. So if they were planning on running with the funds, why restore the web site? At this point I really think the dev is either sadistic (i.e. he's fucking with us), or the most incompetent, bumbling, annoying person on earth. |
|
|
|
Unfortunately the warning on Bittrex is back as there is absolutely no volume. At this rate it is just a matter of time until KTK is delisted (there is an article on cryptocoin news about Bittrex removing a whole bunch of coins this week). I saw a post from "psybits" on the devcoin thread (another coin with no volume and at risk of dying) where he offered to start a PR campaign: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=233997.msg10438607#msg10438607Not sure if there are any KTK bounties left but maybe the dev can reach out to psybits and ask him to do a PR campaign for KTK? |
|
|
|
He must have left a trail or two.
I doubt it. A child could hide their tracks on the Internet nowadays if they wanted to. 1) Buy computer with cash 2) Access Internet only through public wifi and/or VPN Even if the Exocoin devs didn't take these precautions, it would still be next to impossible to track them. You could ask Theymos for their IP address (not like he is going to give it) Even if he did hand over their IP address and it led directly to their residence, then what? Is someone going to petition their ISP to release their personal information? Never going to happen. There is only one way to stop these cryptocurrency scams and that is to not invest in them, period. |
|
|
|
im still here and very surprised at the little outrage by investers. seems we have become imune to butt f**k
What's the point of outrage? Does anyone know the dev's name? Where he's from? IP address? Nothing can be done. Chalk it up to yet another scam in cryptocurrency land. |
|
|
|
So what's going on over here, haven't checked this thread in a while  I've moved from Windows, I'm now a Linux guy  and I haven't reinstalled my PMP wallet yet. Any plans for the short term? BTW guys Linux Mint freaking rocks, I'm using the xfce 64bit version and I'm loving it !!!  LOL, I'm in the exact same boat - recently switched to Linux Mint and haven't reinstalled PMP yet I've been using Linux off and on since 1998 and now thanks to Linux Mint I've finally switched for good! |
|
|
|
Yep, this is rather strange. Maybe something happened with the dev(s)? Otherwise, what was point in all of these? I agree, it is very strange. They did far too much work for it to have just been a scam all along. As someone previously suggested, most likely they just got in over their heads so while it started off with good intentions, they will not complete the project and eventually take the funds. Hanlon's Razor comes to mind here: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. |
|
|
|
Sure thing, here you go: On first glance this doesn't look fully decentralized.
Oh noes, it's centralized! Subtle. Centralized and not decentralized are 2 different things. I explicitely said distributed which is exaclty what it is. Or rather what it seems to be according to the graphic. I'm not against distributed (as oppsosed to decentralized) networks as I'm also a supporter of the technology behind Ripple
Nice attempt to link Node to Ripple, one of the most centralized, hated cryptos out there. As I said I support Ripple. And the fact that it's hated is because people are missinformed. The fact that this setup is similar is undeniable. It's not a bad thing. It's just a fact. Just like in ripple there are "main nodes" - ripple calles it "validators" - that are doing the actuall validation. Just like in Ripple anyone can run such a node. but this is just completely different from what has been presented so far (lord knows the whitepaper didn't mention any of this).
The original whitepaper did not provide details on this aspect, so not sure how things changed exactly. I guess the language barrier is taking it's toll afterall.
And a nice final jab to close. Please don't pretend you wish to provide constructive criticism and help Node succeed, you aren't fooling anyone. I guess I can't post here without people putting words in my mouth. Fine. I'll remove this from my watchlist then. criticism is always welcome here but I think you would be hard pressed to argue that is what you are providing. For example, looking at your post history, I see your last post regarding Node before today was: For this and need a version and a persistent network connection with all clients. The old client will not be able to connect to new clients, and if we disable version checking and network, you will create a new network and a new blockchcain. All clients are interconnected with each other and are on the same network wave. When You make a transaction it instantly got all clients. (it's like FM radio wave, You won't be able to log in to the live broadcast or substitute audio data) and in the Node You will not be able to create a fake block. We also tomorrow I will try to answer more about networking and connecting with clients, many people think the bigger the network, the slower it will be, but it's not. Enough to be connected to the main peers to other peers clients (maximum 2 to 50 connections at a time )
Are you saying there are some peers that are more important than other peers ? To which Silk responded: For this and need a version and a persistent network connection with all clients. The old client will not be able to connect to new clients, and if we disable version checking and network, you will create a new network and a new blockchcain. All clients are interconnected with each other and are on the same network wave. When You make a transaction it instantly got all clients. (it's like FM radio wave, You won't be able to log in to the live broadcast or substitute audio data) and in the Node You will not be able to create a fake block. We also tomorrow I will try to answer more about networking and connecting with clients, many people think the bigger the network, the slower it will be, but it's not. Enough to be connected to the main peers to other peers clients (maximum 2 to 50 connections at a time )
Are you saying there are some peers that are more important than other peers ? Any peers can be important if we will make it in the default client settings Sure, the English isn't the best but I think it is pretty obvious that he is saying ANY peer can be an "important" or "main" Node. So not sure why you would ask the same question again. |
|
|
|
I have a post up over here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=878363.0Basically we are talking about the pro's/con's of forking mastercoin. A great number of people feel like the project is dead and/or horribly mismanaged to the point where the difference is hard to tell. Of particular interest though, especially to me, is what would happen to our maidsafe coins if Mastercoin totally dies, or if we were to fork mastercoin. A 3rd option that has been mentioned is porting Maidsafe tokens to Counterparty where we would have a genuine functioning bitcoin 2.0 system and community. It would be great if someone from Maidsafe chimed in on the conversation, as we know Maidsafe is holding a lot of MSC. I share your concern crazy_rabbit, I am very uneasy about all my Safecoin being reliant upon that POS known as Mastercoin. Personally, I don't see any point at all in forking Mastercoin. I think the best approach is for the Maidsafe guys to come up with a way for us to ditch the Mastercoin system ASAP! I would even prefer they have my Safecoin marked on a spreadsheet and linked to an email address rather than rely on Mastercoin. |
|
|
|
Due to numerous requests of Node community we have decided to reveal some secrets of network architecture and structure of queries and interactions before the end of the beta.
The main secret of transaction speed is in the structure of Node network which is designed according to the principle of functioning and interconnections of brain neural network.
All nodes in the system are peers similar to brain neurons.
Ordinary nodes serve as input neurons, the main nodes play the role of hidden neurons. Blockchain this output neuron.
*image*
Node network includes the main nodes and ordinary nodes.
Main node is a client running on the server via a key (start index.js -key: examplekey), ordinary node are the same clients running without a key.
Number of main nodes is mathematically unlimited.
Main node takes over 10,000 connections. If you run the client and first main node already has 10,000 connections than the client connects to the next main node.
Ordinary nodes are connected to the main node and with several other connected nodes through the main node. The main nodes primarily interact with each other.
*image*
For quick transaction the client needs to keep connection with one main node and with several ordinary nodes. There's enough 2-10 connections for fast work.
If the transaction is committed by main node and several ordinary nodes it is enough to fix the transaction by the entire network via priority communication of main nodes.
Thus, the client does not need to keep the simultaneous multiparty connection with all other network clients to sync transaction.
I'm glad someone that is able to speak proper english steps up and explains the infrastructure. I really don't mean to offend anyone but it was about time This is completely different from what we were told though. On first glance this doesn't look fully decentralized. I'm not against distributed (as oppsosed to decentralized) networks as I'm also a supporter of the technology behind Ripple but this is just completely different from what has been presented so far (lord knows the whitepaper didn't mention any of this). I guess the language barrier is taking it's toll afterall. Thanks for posting this ! I'd argue that it is less of a case of language barriers, and more of a case of "NEM bias" (AKA "looking out for my own bag itis") that pretty much everyone who comes to this thread screaming "scam", "centralized", "not scalable", etc is suffering from. How exactly is this centralized? Did the devs say that the "main" nodes are only going to be run by them? Did the Node team incorporate themselves? Does the dev team hold 80% of the Nodes in existence? Attempting to call Node another Ripple is nothing more than FUD. Point me to the posting where i stated any of that. thanks. I even said that I support distributed systems. Do you even read peoples posts before attacking them ? I think you are suffering from NODE bias as opposed to others suffering from NEM bias. Sure thing, here you go: On first glance this doesn't look fully decentralized.
Oh noes, it's centralized! Subtle. I'm not against distributed (as oppsosed to decentralized) networks as I'm also a supporter of the technology behind Ripple
Nice attempt to link Node to Ripple, one of the most centralized, hated cryptos out there. but this is just completely different from what has been presented so far (lord knows the whitepaper didn't mention any of this).
The original whitepaper did not provide details on this aspect, so not sure how things changed exactly. I guess the language barrier is taking it's toll afterall.
And a nice final jab to close. Please don't pretend you wish to provide constructive criticism and help Node succeed, you aren't fooling anyone. |
|
|
|
Due to numerous requests of Node community we have decided to reveal some secrets of network architecture and structure of queries and interactions before the end of the beta.
The main secret of transaction speed is in the structure of Node network which is designed according to the principle of functioning and interconnections of brain neural network.
All nodes in the system are peers similar to brain neurons.
Ordinary nodes serve as input neurons, the main nodes play the role of hidden neurons. Blockchain this output neuron.
*image*
Node network includes the main nodes and ordinary nodes.
Main node is a client running on the server via a key (start index.js -key: examplekey), ordinary node are the same clients running without a key.
Number of main nodes is mathematically unlimited.
Main node takes over 10,000 connections. If you run the client and first main node already has 10,000 connections than the client connects to the next main node.
Ordinary nodes are connected to the main node and with several other connected nodes through the main node. The main nodes primarily interact with each other.
*image*
For quick transaction the client needs to keep connection with one main node and with several ordinary nodes. There's enough 2-10 connections for fast work.
If the transaction is committed by main node and several ordinary nodes it is enough to fix the transaction by the entire network via priority communication of main nodes.
Thus, the client does not need to keep the simultaneous multiparty connection with all other network clients to sync transaction.
I'm glad someone that is able to speak proper english steps up and explains the infrastructure. I really don't mean to offend anyone but it was about time This is completely different from what we were told though. On first glance this doesn't look fully decentralized. I'm not against distributed (as oppsosed to decentralized) networks as I'm also a supporter of the technology behind Ripple but this is just completely different from what has been presented so far (lord knows the whitepaper didn't mention any of this). I guess the language barrier is taking it's toll afterall. Thanks for posting this ! I'd argue that it is less of a case of language barriers, and more of a case of "NEM bias" (AKA "looking out for my own bag itis") that pretty much everyone who comes to this thread screaming "scam", "centralized", "not scalable", etc is suffering from. How exactly is this centralized? Did the devs say that the "main" nodes are only going to be run by them? Did the Node team incorporate themselves? Does the dev team hold 80% of the Nodes in existence? Attempting to call Node another Ripple is nothing more than FUD. |
|
|
|
Because the way NEM did or do the things is the correct one? Lol. The cryptobible
I dont see how anyone can argue about which one has been more succesfull at the moment. IMHO NODE must do something to escape for doom. Im not doing anything.. Simakki is the annoying dude here. Seems like he has the need to be a troll all the time and give lessons about how things must be done. I dont like people who believe they are always correct. I dont think im correct but for sure i dont go around in others coins threads giving lessons and spreading fud. Exactly. Notice how no Node supporters ever post FUD in the NEM thread, yet we are constantly invaded by FUD spreading NEMsters (TaunSew and Simakki). I wonder why that is, especially since NEM is apparently so much superior? I mean, their marketing and release strategy is so much better, maybe that's why they have so much time to post complaints on other coin's threads. LOL |
|
|
|
TEST Start is october 20 , When is available ?
it depends how test goes this mean 1 week 1 mont or even 1 yearh or what (when it goes bad)? how long the test will about go? As long as it takes. Learn some patience. Hmm i think NODE holders have had a lot of patience, but the launch was total disaster. They should have the POA already in the launch..... Market cap #97 and no marketing for months.... I guess it should have been more like NEM - all marketing and no fully released client nor exchange right? |
|
|
|
|
Nothing makes sense. If this was a scam, why on earth would the dev wait until now and then send out only 23,100 RSU x 3 to immediately dump on the market for what amounts to no more than $500! Why would he stop there then? There are still open orders on the book and over 120k RSU in the account.
It has to be some sort of hack. I can speculate that the reason the RSU wasn't emptied completely is because the hacker didn't want to end the project. I really don't know, just guessing.
Since it is the weekend, let's give the dev until Monday before we write this one off.
|
|
|
|
Are they putting orders of buy, NXT-BNL2-8M6L-TYVJ-3BDC8 3'000 0.31 930 NXT-XNA4-UER9-EFWT-FRJ2M 1'678 0.3 503.4 NXT-XNA4-UER9-EFWT-FRJ2M 3'000 0.27 810 NXT-XNA4-UER9-EFWT-FRJ2M 3'000 0.26 780 NXT-K766-65ZA-BYLD-FLVJP 3'400 0.25 850 NXT-BB22-BBV6-XPH5-BTNAR 2'160 0.23 496.8 which someone warns them until there comes the dev to explain of whom they are these 3 accounts of 23100 RSU that are selling everything? 11.10.2014 10:56 NXT-ZHC6-ACGA-YT8D-CV34G TRANSFER OUT 23100 RSU TO NXT-D4PJ-NBEQ-K3ZX-3FJTM 11.10.2014 10:58 NXT-D4PJ-NBEQ-K3ZX-3FJTM SELL 23100 RSU http://nxtreporting.com/?ac=NXT-D4PJ-NBEQ-K3ZX-3FJTM11.10.2014 10:57 NXT-ZHC6-ACGA-YT8D-CV34G TRANSFER OUT 23100 RSU TO NXT-TPW2-TAGZ-BL2M-HCGXB 11.10.2014 10:58 NXT-TPW2-TAGZ-BL2M-HCGXB SELL 23100 RSU http://nxtreporting.com/?ac=NXT-TPW2-TAGZ-BL2M-HCGXB11.10.2014 10:57 NXT-ZHC6-ACGA-YT8D-CV34G TRANSFER OUT 23100 RSU TO NXT-D9RF-7SSU-353N-FZ4KG 11.10.2014 10:59 NXT-D9RF-7SSU-353N-FZ4KG SELL 10636 RSU 11.10.2014 11:25 NXT-D9RF-7SSU-353N-FZ4KG SELL 7000 RSU total 17636 RSU http://nxtreporting.com/?ac=NXT-D9RF-7SSU-353N-FZ4KGI did some research: The Genesis account, which has been inactive since Oct 6, sent out 3 transactions of 23,100 RSU this morning. 2 of the 3 recipients sold all 23,100 immediately, crashing the price. The Genesis account still holds the vast majority of the unclaimed RSU: 128'390.0000 Given the facts, this has to either be a fat finger (since 2,310 is the correct stake amount) or a hack. Both explanations seem strange (if a hack, why are most of the RSUs still there?) I don't know what to make of all this, we must remain calm and wait for an update from the dev. One thing I know for sure, the dev would not throw away this project over 69,300 RSU which was sold for a mere 1-1.5 BTC! |
|
|
|
|
I recommended Kraken to a friend and he ended up having an issue with his deposit. Dargo provided excellent assistance and took care of everything promptly and professionally.
Kraken is a refreshing change from all the exchanges with poor or totally nonexistant customer service. I would recommend Kraken over Bitstamp or BTC-e any day!
|
|
|
|
A big thank you to Pat and Silk for sticking with this and clearing up some questions. I agree with Pat about having that info in the whitepaper.
Yes, those were some good questions. It cleared up a lot of things for me as well. I see now why you can say that Node's transactions are instant as they go out onto the network and are verified immediately. If you tried to do a double spend, one of the transactions would be dropped before it ever receives a confirmation. Did I read correctly that currently 3 confirmations are required before the transaction is added to a block and later this will be changed to 6? |
|
|
|
Not bad price is up again. Yeah i feel really sorry for those who sold at 0.1 and 0.066 in a first panic lol Lucky are those who believe in the project and bought more RSU at a very cheap price. Panic sellers will definitely regret it. I couldn't believe it either that people were selling below 0.1. Absolutely crazy. If you want to be successful at anything, all you need is patience. People were lucky enough to have gotten free stakes in a promising project like this one but didn't have the patience to see any real returns. |
|
|
|
Would be interesting to know how much btc in total you have refunded anon.
I would also like to know. Then we can calculate the new rate for how many EXOs we will get per BTC  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
