Sometimes a well thought out response to user requirements is required. Colored coins are a mess.

I'm genuinely interested to hear why you feel it's to their own advantage, can you expand on your reasoning?

Nothing new released today.

I am working on the first build and hope to have it on github soon.

The source is the latest bitcoin release, manually merged with the scrypt modifications from the latest litecoin branch. Considerably more work than it sounds, yet enjoyable. It should serve as a strong foundation for future developments.

If anybody can spare some time, please review and check the writings on the bitmark wiki, the earlier we can catch any flaws in my rationale, the better.

Thanks.

Yes, and that Satoshi commented on both of them and had the concept of bitcoin close to perfected back in 98 when he was discussing it with Adam Back and Wei Dai.

1) Hundreds of Millions.
2) Theoretically nothing, if you discount checkpoints. with checkpoints it's hard.

But then there's the social 51% attack where a tiny majority hold a massive percentage of the currency. When this occurs the market is open to extensive manipulation for the benefit of the few, as with real world economics (the 1%).

NXT is a good example of the social 51% attack, the top 33 accounts hold 51% between them. The top 50 accounts hold 61.2%. I'm quite sure the top 1% of accounts (400 ish) hold almost everything, with the other 99% playing with spare change. source

I think that's why you see so many NXT shills trying to ram it down everybodies throats on this forum.

Checkpoints are broadcast to nodes to protect against history rewrites. It's centralisation of some kind, but serves the purpose.

Should I tell you how I know that's a lie?

The cost of launching and mining a coin is fast beginning to outweigh the profit from creating one. Once it is unprofitable it will have to slow.

As long as people keep voting with their money, it will continue.

Very sad to see such a waste of hardware, time, and electricity.

If you can't rationalise an investment based on your own research and comfort to hold for over a year, simply don't do it... (I'm not insinuating you can't though, just trust your own judgement)
Unless you like gambling, in which case gamble on something with odds, like a horse, rather than a whale infested cash cow.

Alternatively, foster new startups, kick start projects, back development projects you feel are beneficial.

If you must go for an alt coin, go for the one where you know the whales, and their intentions; or where you are the whale..

Being anonymous obviously doesn't help the developers of shitcoins and clones, however does the anonymity factor detract from the work of hard working developers who are making valuable contributions to the community?

Put another way, do institutional investors (within the context of supporting projects or buying aged PoW coins, not IPO/scams/PoS-premines), become deterred if the lead developer of a project is anonymous?

I wonder just how much of a bearing a developers identity has on a project.

Has anybody done a study or observed how bonus blocks affect the value of currencies which have them?

Are there any examples of currencies which are relatively mature and valued which have bonus blocks?

Very helpful, and that's the plan. Thank you

You should.

Don't announce it like a normal alt coin, don't push it, market it, inflate it's cost, premine it, or try to get it on exchanges. Just put the project out there and discuss + support it.

I'm having the same issue at the minute with bitmark (linking so you can see how I've approached it). I'm being public but keeping it technical or based on discussions, with much of the information needing effort on a readers part.. to go to the wiki and read, I'm finding response and feedback is small but valuable.

I feel there is, and should be, space for projects with merit, the noise should not preclude the real projects.

Publish your work, I for one promise to have a good look at it, as I see the need for DDAR solutions (decentralised digital asset registers), and believe colored coins being strapped on is not a viable solution.

Published Allocation of Variables

Port Usage:

• P2P Port: 9265 (testnet: 19265)
• RPC Port: 9266 (testnet: 19266)

If you are aware of a collision with existing services please open an issue or reply.

Just to state the obvious. This is not Jed McCaleb.

The attempted use of this tactic alone should be enough to damn the DOLP project.

Tired of clones, always happy to see innovative or refined new alternative currencies.

The former is noise, the latter is beneficial.

Too many coins, too many settings, it is now almost infeasible not to cause a collision of usage.

Has anybody already tackled this problem, is there a fairly complete list of ports used by alternative coins, and currency codes?

Perhaps one of the altcoin data suppliers could export a list of currency codes and ports (p2p, rpc, testnet) so we can see what is available.

Thanks you.

Close enough

Existing trust-me micro-transaction providers (games, services, itunes, facebook) add bitmark support for withdrawal and deposits. They continue to handle micro-transactions in a proprietary way.
Entails money can now flow freely between these providers, decreases reliance on latent legacy systems, increases adoption of Bitmark.
Positions these providers as micro-exchanges, exchanging site specific virtual currency / fiat / bitmark.
Reduces costs and services for all parties, increases or enables flow of money and additional revenue streams.
Further enables new ways of working online (ebaying, any form of content creation).
Paves way for future chain based micro-transactions (sidechain).

Bootstrap in existing trust-me microtransaction platforms, huge potential market, encourages greater adoption.

well it isn't bloatware, and it's developer's don't push agendas on the uninformed..

Published Microtransactions and Microtrust (Migrating to Sidechain) on the wiki.

Thank you for your kind words.

Short lived interest from the average altcoin enthusiast is not what we're looking for, nor excessive speculation, unwarranted hype, or artificially inflated value. Non of these things can benefit the bitmark project.

To me personally, one comment of support, some discussion on the specification or features, a bug found, or a genuine user is worth several times more.

Regarding attention, hopefully over time attention from those that can benefit from bitmark will be earned. Earned through consistent and committed development, a distinguished recognisable name, warranted evangelism, technical merit, longevity, you know... the way most real world and online projects earn their attention and adoption!