Thanks Palm. That worked! Note that I had to erase all in the roaming folder (not just peers.dat, and of course except the wallet) to re-download the blockchain.. Looking forward to catch-up with you on what's next  |
|
|
|
|
OK I get the Twitter campaign now - thanks. My 2 cents; let's be sure that the priorities are thought through to have a focused program.
Regarding Noble vision I'm just pasting here what can be found on the website:
About
January 7, 2014: The rise of cryptocurrency to mainstream, which we believe is just getting started, has fascinated and consumed us from the moment we got involved. Like many who get involved with this movement we have concerns regarding the current economic system, the major players involved, where society as a whole is headed (both socioeconomically and technologically), and how we will meet the massive changes and challenges we feel are coming. We believe that a sound, distributed, decentralized and secure means of digital exchange done at a global scale is a noble pursuit.
Dumping and making a quick buck does not excite us nor would it be personally and professionally rewarding. Imagining, building and improving a digital system, community and economy does excite us. The effect that just the idea alone of such a system and its gradual implementation will have on the general population as it becomes mainstream is mind-blowing. For these reasons we commit to developing and improving NOBLE, its community, marketplace and rewarding the movement over many years. To simply have the opportunity and technology in this day and age to attempt to achieve such a system is brilliant in itself. It is for these reasons we intend to be around for the long haul.
The Movement
‘The Noble Movement is the idea that a focused community sharing a common vision can achieve an enormous amount of good if we work together.’
1. The NOBLE Movement is the act of using this new era of digital exchange for constructive purposes: improving global awareness and potential uses of crypto-currencies; highlighting the more noble intentions of the crypto-community; increasing the exposure crypto-coins receive; and promoting their wider adoption globally.
2. Charities are nominated NOBLE reserves weekly (at a level that does not ‘dump’ excessive amounts onto the market). They are then able to spend this on merchants who have signed up to the network & agree to receive NOBLEs for providing goods/services that help said charities.
3. Charities are chosen from a shortlist acceptable to the NOBLE community. The key attributes we are looking for are a) a global/universal focus,
b) relatively free from being politically/socially motivated and c) receive A or A+ ratings for their ‘amount received to amount actually given’ ratio, financial opennesss and overall efficiency.
4. To prevent centralisation/monopolisation, external NOBLE merchants who do not wish to be specifically on our network are encouraged to apply on the forums and be recognised/accepted by the community as charity-providing candidates also.
5. The crypto-community is a wary lot and for good reason. All charities chosen are ideally to be internationally recognised as legitimate and independant from NOBLE. All transfers from the Reserves are to be done in an open and transparent manner (both through reports/announcements and with associated wallet addresses), and independently verified by both merchants and charities.
...
|
|
|
|
one question: what is the max. supply of phs ?
edit: 8.9 million correct?
Hi, Hard coded cap is the same as NVC/PPC, which is 2 billion. Since PHS is PoS only, hitting a hard cap would give 0 reason to stake anymore, so setting a hard limit isn't feasible anyway (fees are destroyed). IF we make no changes to code, and assuming 100% of PHS stakes constantly, this would take ~18 years. Of course, we average ~70% or so of staking so in reality closer to ~24 years from today. PHS works by consensus of the network, my current feelings is we should cap the amount of stake per block sometime in the next year or so. But this will need to be an open community decision. The average for the last 50k blocks was ~441.2 blocks per day and ~2,102 PHS created per day. Just an example, but an option:If we set a maximum stake of to 10 PHS per block, we would limit PHS production to ~4.4k per day. (could do more or less). At 10 million PHS this is a 16% annual inflation year 1, 15% year two... etc, decreasing in % on a steady curve. Bitcoin of course has a hard limit and designed as a store of value, with PHS we have some leverage in what we want to do, a healthy 4% annual inflation in 10 years onward would also be feasible. Ultimately it's up to you guys to decide. PD May be a mistake above in the number, Just wanted to illustrate options.  thanks! okok, sounds really interesting your idea ,but for me its hard to say which interest works near the best .of course at the moment 50% 
- Store of value: high rate
- Use in everyday life eventually: low rate
PHS is secure thanks to the many people staking it, thanks to the high interest. The overall value of the coin doesn't change. Inflation reduces price, meaning that 1 PHS today is worth more than 1 tomorrow; as you have more when you stake you keep value stable. We are irrational animals, even if the value remains constant, it just "feels good" to receive stones For instance, I've seen other coins with interest up to 20% not getting enough staking... (ok maybe they were shitty in the first place) However for business it's a pain in the ass to have to adjust prices all the time due to inflation. So a high rate would be prohibitive. As long as cryptos do not get wide business/everyday acceptance I believe a high rate is needed. As cryptos move to wider acceptance, it makes sense to lower the interest rate (i.e move from store of value to everyday use). In this context, constant production of PHS (a la Ethereum) could be an acceptable solution. However it is highly risky. In fact it works only if the total value of the coin evolves at the same rate to compensate the inflation so that the price per coin remains at least constant. If it's not the case you're in a negative spiral, gradually limiting the interest in the currency with lower amount of coins at lower value per coin. Then making it less secure, further pushing coin value down. In fact, the problem above would arise whenever we start playing with the interest curve (i.e. evolution of interest rate over time). We would have to make assumptions as to what would be the best rate at different points in time based on price and market cap, to ensure there is enough incentive for staking over time. This would probably be tied to if, when, or how fast we think cryptos would get wide acceptance. The sad truth is that we have no clue... So our assumptions would likely become obsolete/wrong over time. And at that point what do we do? Change the parameters? That'd be acting just like a central bank. And no offense, but i would still trust more a central bank than a bunch of kids playing in the crypto sphere... Over the long term, a system like NXT would work best as no new coins are created, leading to 0 inflation and making it appropriate both for everyday use and value storage. But this requires high transaction volumes to be secure (i.e. provide enough incentive for staking as reward is based exclusively on transaction fees). This is much better than constant low inflation rate as in the context of business use, any inflation is a problem. Don't know if it helps. At lease for now 50% is good, and any change will need to be very carefully thought through...
|
|
|
|
a few things... - I've volunteered to help with marketing
I personally believe that with rofo on a (Temporary?) hiatus, our best bet is to get picked up by some major services. Getting added to existing businesses and marketplaces will be significantly easier than finding someone willing to put in the effort and take risks building a standalone business around NOBL like Rofo was doing. Doing this will also have no impact on Rofo's overall vision if he decides to return.
I also believe that one of the best things going for us is how widely accepted we already are. Their's very few coins that can claim to be supported by over 50 merchants. Increasing this number will only help =)
I'm willing to fund another round of twitter campaigns out of pocket, if we come up with a couple services we want to petition for.
I'd set up actions like:
Tweet to GoURL "Add NOBL Support!"
Our last campaign has ~75 unique users, and I don't even know how many dummy accounts. If 100 people tweet in 1 week that they should support us, they'll take notice.
What are your favorite crypto Services and marketplaces? Let's pick 5 and get a campaign going.
- Should we start a new thread? It's important that we have an up-to-date, and good looking OP. With the giant quote at the top of our current thread, it looks sloppy and something i'd avoid if I were a new investor.. I doubt rofo will be cleaning this up anytime soon.
Not to mention pools are still listed, broken links, etc.
- Lastly, NOBL's big claim to fame started out with charity. We need to get back to our roots, and become a charitable coin again. This is what makes headlines.
We have enough community members that want to see NOBL succeed to make it happen. All we need to do is organize our efforts and come up with a plan - Campaign - Good idea. But maybe it makes sense to wait a little bit and see what is the outcome of brain storming session etc? If we manage to attract new people willing to work on this coin we may have something to communicate. - New thread - Maybe this can also be discussed during the meeting? In my view it is OK to initiate new thread as time passes and we did not make any progress on this. But it is important to hear voices from everybody. - Charity - sounds good. And again something to talk more during the meeting. Basically by holding a meeting and seeing how many people are interested in actually doing something we may be able to predict what are the chances of Noble succeeding in the future.Thanks knutruben, fully agree with you. And thanks eagleflies for the switch to POS; you made it happen quickly after 1 year of non-conclusive discussions. Now I don't get the panic mode on this thread... All these posts are just about short term price... WTF guys. We used to have an interesting thread full of ideas, and constructive interactions... In my opinion this panic mode is driven by just a few short-term oriented people who thought a move to POS would increase price. Tough luck guys. In fact I believe that the price drop is a good thing for Noble: we may get rid of those people who don't understand the distinction between value and price. It's setting the basis for long term value. Re the questions/propositions that popped up: - New thread? If you want to remove the history of interesting discussions and keep only PnD style crap. History has value in itself...
- Live discussion on IRC? 1)This is a global currency, that goes across 24 time-zone... 2) This is not good for people who are not 24/7 on IRC or BCT (e.g. cc traders)... if you want to have all people (e.g. investors/stakeholders) to contribute keep discussions in the forum
- Twitter campaign? What for? Sorry i don't get it. You may be confusing price and value...
- Direction for the coin. Rofo had a vision, why not start from that and build plans based on it?
- New merchants is definitely a good thing. Shapeshift?
- From a development standpoint, what can be done with Colored coins? NobleNXT? Supernet?
Hope this helps. |
|
|
|
In fact 590 W is correct; 590 (W) / 1155 (GH/s) = 0.51 J/GH Watts are Joules/second; W = J/s That was a good refresher on physics ! |
|
|
|
Here is part of my calc on BTC at time of March 2015, maybe expert people do more research into this, from my perspective need of fully POS coins is given by math. I updated current Bitcoin electric energy consumption, calculated like here:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2hlwpy/5_terrawatt_per_hour_bitcoin_network/cktv3xl
BTC global hashrate:
360.000.000 Megahash/Second
Source: https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate
Current mining efficiency:
Optimistic: 0.51 Wh per Gigahash/s
Source: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=902305.0
Consumption of the network per year:
(360 000 000 / 1000) * 0.51 = 183 600 kWh per hour
183 600 x 24 x 365 = 1 608 336 000 kWh p.a. = 1.6 Terrawatthours per year Please correct some numbers you know better, even if 10% is real, too much carbon is burning in this moment, possible >1,6 million tons of coal a year, by a software with only 3 billions market cap, what else can go wrong? Hi mxn, In fact the starting point is 0.51 J/GH, which equates 0,000277778 Wh/GH, not 0.51 Wh per GH/s This is a pretty tricky conversion to use to go from Joules to KWh and Wh: 1J = (1/3600000)kWh = 1 Ws = 0,000277778 Wh This can help: http://www.unitconversion.org/unit_converter/energy.htmlIn addition, the total Hashrate is 360 000 000 GH/s, not MH/s. Then if you assume 1,842 kWh per ton of Coal following US Energy Information Administration, the estimate would be >870'000 tons of coal... Source: http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=667&t=6See below- Power Efficiency 0,51 J/GH Total BTC GH/s 360 000 000,00 GH/s Total BTC GH/H 1 296 000 000 000,00 GH/H Hourly BTC energy consumption (J/H) 662 025 974 025,97 J/H Hourly BTC energy consumption (KWh/H) 183 896,10 KWh/H Yearly BTC energy consumption (KWh/Y) 1 610 929 870,13 KWh p.a. Tons of Coal/Kwh 0,0005429 T/KWh Yearl coal consumption 874 554,76 T p.a. I've double-checked with the calculator from Coinwarz and the math square. On average, the J/GH consumption may be roughly double of the AntMiner you used as a starting point - so you have ultimately produced a good estimate of Coal consumption This is indeed VERY bad. |
|
|
|
Why so angry? I think it's good that the admins really ARE dedicated, and that is what matters. Thumbs up!
+1 Thanks guys for your continuous development efforts on ANC! DRK may develop things faster, but they are less and less focused on anonymity... |
|
|
|
I have 8.79041 stones "Generated but not accepted", what does that mean?  Forget about these stones they are not in the PHS blockchain (i.e. they don't exist); typically you get roughly the same amount a bit later (confirmed by the PHS network)... |
|
|
|
How about a Friday 13th / Valentine mash up? Yeah some POS switch pumps are sad indeed .. |
|
|
|
The presence of silence does not imply the absence of drama.
So what happened to palm, more than a month without a sign of life?
Sure, his code made still one of the best POS-Wallets, but meanwhile others create more features.
True, coins come with news at any point in time. The beauty of PHS is that it's not in this game; it's about steady improvements and value creation over time. Palm has actually delivered hundreds of improvements to (an already top-class) PHS code in Nov/Dec, and he keeps working on improvements. It may not sound as sexy as the latest fad but when you think about long term potential the criteria you should use to assess a currency are different... The presence of noise does not imply the existence of innovation. Palm was on BCT today, so he must be fine |
|
|
|
id agree that penalising larger holders is insane and would bring nothing beneficial to Noble!! Dunno fuck all else bout maggi POS2 but i dont like that at all!!!
Do you know what you are talking about? It seems you have no idea of the idea behind Magi's PoS concept. Or are you only a big coin holder with fear, someone else might get more than you? It's NOT a penalty. The idea is to take away the advantage of a few coin holders with a huge amount and give coin holders with smaller funds a better chance. Take a look at the rich list of most coin. You'll see some huge wallets at the top, mostly the devs and a few early birds. They get way more coins via PoS than any other with PoW and PoS combined. That's an unfair advantage and, like fairglu said, a risk for potential attacks. So in your opinion NOBL is only made for established community members already having a huge amount of coins? You don't want new people who just learned about NOBL? In this case, call it VIP only coin, use default PoS with 1000% in order to ensure established coin holders get the most and tell other people to use other coins with a fair distribution. With your thinking, NOBL with be NOTHING else than the current FIAT ecosystem. The rich ones always get richer, the poor ones always remain poor! Or probably spend some minutes to understand a concept before stating it's BS. By VIP you mean the early investors who bought in at 25 sat? Maybe new investors would like to get candies by mail as well as they buy? Rofo; I was all in favor of POS back last summer but looking at the current status and the discussions, please do what you want with the coin but DO NOT GIVE CONTROL. I can go along with POW if YOU lead NOBL. I invested in NOBL because of its vision, not because of its technical specs; and I think I'm not the only one. I guess I prefer smart tyranny over brainless democracy.... why do you say that? The community tries to change something und you complain? there need to be done an algo switch asap. Whether we take Pos / PoS II or we take MM PoW. But there are some people WORKING on the future instead of complaining. Rofo took a needed break. What he said ^^ What we need is help, rather than someone ungratefully pointing out that it would be better if the dev came back, why don't people help out and pitch in some ideas? We are doing the best with the situation we have been given, if you don't like it you know where to go. Geez, I really understand why rofo left, the crypto scene is full of morons... Well I did provide some ideas recently; it seems a dick brings more attention than a helping hand. Anyways, I guess all i can do now is trust you guys if Rofo is not taking part in the new developments of Nobl. And of course avoid commenting before coffee in the morning... |
|
|
|
id agree that penalising larger holders is insane and would bring nothing beneficial to Noble!! Dunno fuck all else bout maggi POS2 but i dont like that at all!!!
Do you know what you are talking about? It seems you have no idea of the idea behind Magi's PoS concept. Or are you only a big coin holder with fear, someone else might get more than you? It's NOT a penalty. The idea is to take away the advantage of a few coin holders with a huge amount and give coin holders with smaller funds a better chance. Take a look at the rich list of most coin. You'll see some huge wallets at the top, mostly the devs and a few early birds. They get way more coins via PoS than any other with PoW and PoS combined. That's an unfair advantage and, like fairglu said, a risk for potential attacks. So in your opinion NOBL is only made for established community members already having a huge amount of coins? You don't want new people who just learned about NOBL? In this case, call it VIP only coin, use default PoS with 1000% in order to ensure established coin holders get the most and tell other people to use other coins with a fair distribution. With your thinking, NOBL with be NOTHING else than the current FIAT ecosystem. The rich ones always get richer, the poor ones always remain poor! Or probably spend some minutes to understand a concept before stating it's BS. By VIP you mean the early investors who bought in at 25 sat? Maybe new investors would like to get candies by mail as well as they buy? Rofo; I was all in favor of POS back last summer but looking at the current status and the discussions, please do what you want with the coin but DO NOT GIVE CONTROL. I can go along with POW if YOU lead NOBL. I invested in NOBL because of its vision, not because of its technical specs; and I think I'm not the only one. I guess I prefer smart tyranny over brainless democracy.... |
|
|
|
Your stance and commitment speak in your favor. However the explanations given above are all but clear.
Let me suggest a few questions to help you shed light on the specifics :
- How did you fund the project until last week?
- Why did you sell BTC last week to fund the ongoing development? What has changed? Why last week?
- Why do you announce this 1 week later to CKC ICO investors?
- Did you sell all the BTC from the ICO or only a fraction of it?
- What is the degree of completion of the geo software?
- Why is it late in comparison to the original timeline?
- How much work/FTE is needed to complete the geo software?
- How much would it cost? What are the options?
- At what point in time can Bitsend fund the development of the geo software?
- What is your best estimate of geo software delivery? Or at least what are the scenarios?
- How would you provide a return to a potential investor? What would that person be investing in exactly?
Finally, why not asking for help within the CKC community first for development and funding?
Some tangible answers - even if controversial/disapproved - will help in the trust turmoil you're in.
These are good questions but some have been answered in the updates as well. I will help with a few and leave the rest for Bitsend. - Here is the ICO transaction again that has been posted. Obviously this is the used funds: https://blockchain.info/tx/8979b44feaf7ab5672aaa5b5d8f32c3515b10b564926c9af6bfeb1112d67d35chttps://blockchain.info/address/1GMFKbFfZN983c6ZRzxLVdXMyxBLWreHvW- They needed to sell the Bitcoins to ensure continuation. As you can see the bitcoin price today they saved already around $100 per btc which amounts to over $10,000. If they hadn't sold them Checkcoin would be a whole lot more in trouble so I'd say they played it well. Ofcourse they could just hold until it recovers but it's still speculation. If that wasn't a good move then please explain what else they could have done. - They will post a roadmap when it's ready. Thanks BTCat. I think however investors now need to understand the specifics in detail. For example: we see BTCs were moved, but have they then been sold? All of them? If the plan was always to convert them to FIAT, why not have done so at the time of ICO or hedge the funds? Not doing so is speculation indeed, and poor business practice. If the plan was to keep them, why sell them now when there is little need for them if there is no dev to pay? What are these funds used for now? ...etc. |
|
|
|
Hello everybody,
Checkcoin update from Bitsend:
Our team is working hard to develop Checkcoin in all aspects and will continue to do so for the coming year. We believe in the ideas of combining GPS Geocaching with cryptocurrency and will continue to support the project as best we can.
The Checkcoin team wants to be transparant to the community and share the current status of the project. As we never had in mind to make loads of money on this project but rather to get this fun an innovative project under our belt, we put up a pretty low budget for a project like this as any project developer will agree to. In addition, todays Bitcoin price hasn't helped us, all the funds for development were held in Bitcoin to keep it transparant for the community but last week we had to make the difficult decision to sell them 30-40% under the price at the time of the ICO, to ensure further development of the project. If Bitcoin keeps on dropping we would risk having not much funds left to reach our goals. We have to find ways to make sure development does not stop because of having less funds available. Bitsend is willing to finance the project by adding funds from it's own but we will only be able to do so on a longer term. The latest meetings with potential investors were without results but we remain open for meetings with interested people and companies, Checkcoin has a lot to offer and will continue to grow in all aspects as a cryptocurrency. It also means that we from Bitsend have to find other candidates to continue the development process within our new budget. At this moment we can not start the closed beta because the software is not finished. We have several offers from developers but the costs would be too high for our budget to accept them, we will and are actively meeting with new developers to continue the process as soon as we can.
Bitsend still stands for 100% in support of the project and we will continue to do the best we can for further development of Checkcoin and the GEO location software. For this, unfortunately we are going to need much more time than originally planned to overcome current difficulties and move to the next stage. We are sorry that we can not release the GEO location software as soon as we originally hoped for. We will very soon make a new roadmap with a plan of action spanning the timeframe of the next year. This will include more detailed information about what path to follow as well as a new expected release date.
We have committed a lot of time, energy and money to the Checkcoin marketing and development and we like to continue to work hard to make it a success. Checkcoin is still in it's stage of development and has a long future ahead to grow. Thanks everyone for your continued support.
The Bitsend team.
Your stance and commitment speak in your favor. However the explanations given above are all but clear. Let me suggest a few questions to help you shed light on the specifics : - How did you fund the project until last week? - Why did you sell BTC last week to fund the ongoing development? What has changed? Why last week? - Why do you announce this 1 week later to CKC ICO investors? - Did you sell all the BTC from the ICO or only a fraction of it? - What is the degree of completion of the geo software? - Why is it late in comparison to the original timeline? - How much work/FTE is needed to complete the geo software? - How much would it cost? What are the options? - At what point in time can Bitsend fund the development of the geo software? - What is your best estimate of geo software delivery? Or at least what are the scenarios? - How would you provide a return to a potential investor? What would that person be investing in exactly? Finally, why not asking for help within the CKC community first for development and funding? Some tangible answers - even if controversial/disapproved - will help in the trust turmoil you're in. |
|
|
|
I have started working on a PoS wallet for Noblecoin. This is just the very beginning so please do not expect miracles anytime soon. However I would like to ask everyone on this thread what is your opinion on PoS parameters which should be chosen. Feel free to elaborate why you think those are best for us. Maybe someone did research into PoS parameters and would like to share results? I would love to hear that! 1. I think we should have very moderate to small inflation rate at PoS stage. No "High PoS". With PoW, when calculated year-to-year starting from now (1.8 bln + another 2.6 bln in 365 days), the PoW inflation now is 144%. For PoS, in my opinion maybe 5%-10% a year would be good. The highest PoS coins have seen a big hype (see HYP), but then the fall is very dramatic, because of the enormous supply. 2. I think we can make a transition to PoS at a "round number" like 2.0 or 2.1 bln NOBL (depending when will we manage to have a running PoS wallet)/ 3. I think we should distribute new PoS NOBLes using the fairglu'd automated script method on some clone of 100% premined PoS coin. 4. IMO it would be good to divide the money units (coins) in circulation by 5 or 10 to avoid 1-digit satoshi price range ( Ratio 5:1 or 10:1. In this scenario, 1 mln old NOBL would equal 200k or 100k of new PoS NOBL, distributed evenly to all existing addresses, redeemable at any time in the future from your old wallet.dat). I agree with 5-10%. No high pos. Just keep the stake rates steady along that line. I personally believe 5% to be more then enough. We are going for a good, professional crypto currency here. 5% is more then plenty for inflation. I think slightly higher. At 5% it isn't worth leaving a computer on staking IMO. I think rofo decided on 12% from what I can remember. Indeed 5% seems too low to effectively secure the network. 12% better, and possibly even a bit higher (i.e. 20% - 30% range); in the short term network security (staking) is more important than inflation. Also pls consider a system of constant amount of coins like Ethereum so that inflation decreases over time (as opposed to constant inflation, which is the case with a constant POS rate, even if it's low...). |
|
|
|
Update of the numbers, not 100%, because of partly hidden orderbooks, but still ...
1.76 BTC = Poloniex sell orders until 24999
4.42 BTC = Bittrex sell orders until 24400
0.07 BTC = Bter sell orders until 23995
----------
6.25 BTC - that is a ridiculous 1.7% of your ICO wealth.
So ... how much DO you believe in your own coin?
So you mean that if a team believes in their coin they ought to divert money from development to invest in price manipulation? |
|
|
|
Ok so minimum stake time?
It's 9 days.. |
|
|
|
Nice! thank you for all your hard work!
What about the promotion by sorrros? Any updates about that?
Hi paardenkip, sorry i've gone very quiet over the past weeks - got a pretty hectic day job and little time so far to get started on the promotion of PHS. I'm still planning to help the community with promotion; sorry if it's not as fast as you (and I) would have wished... Thanks Palmdetroit for the new release! PHS has the best staking wallet; quick syncing, very low power consumption and hardly any orphan - the real deal!! |
|
|
|
why the low volume?
Small interest at this moment. This coin need more time to see its potential Personally I don't think anyone would be wise to put up any significant buy orders when > 50% of the current coin supply is controlled by the dev premine, and this will be the case for six months or longer, with the very slow emission of this coin. Maybe it's a good thing, it will give devs time to work out the bugs, and then they can go open source in a six months or a year, when they only control 30-50% of the current coin supply, but still, I'd have some reservations buying in even in one year's time when dev controls "only" > 25% of current coin supply, and there's no way I'm adding any buy support when the devs control like 80 or 90+% of the current coin supply, which is the case at the moment. It's a fair point mathematically but its relevance is arguable. Either you trust the devs for their reputation, the quality of their coin (without looking at the code), their lasting work on its future development AND their smart use of the premined funds. Or you don't... The 1st coin to have Zero-proof technology is something big enough for the devs to behave well - if not for money for glory. And both is totally fine. |
|
|
|
|
Indeed it doesn't seem the recovery happened overnight
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
