Thanks for posting it here klonat 

Well this thread sure is quiet! It sure has been ages since I poked my head around BitcoinTalk. Figured it was worth mentioning that 'supernode' rewards have been restored for NEM! In the past there was a very high minimum XEM holding threshold for rewards that excluded most people from participating, but it has now been lowered to a mere 10k XEM!

If you have 10k XEM and any experience hosting a node / IT aptitude, it's worth looking into - https://nem.io/supernode/

I'm also surprised how many people seem to think NEM is bankrupt -- NGL and the NEM Foundation are no longer operational, but a substantial treasury remains and most of the OG NEM devs are still actively working on both NEM and Symbol(XYM). Focus has shifted to the Japanese market, where XEM and XYM got the most traction.

Glad to see the OP cleaned up and things continuing to progress. Looking forward to the IBCO and eventual Smart Vault launch!

It's so hard to identify legit and impactful projects in the early stages.. Reputation of the team is a good indicator, but very hard to sort out.. I definitely look up core team members and see what I find - that has saved me from some bad investments for sure. Another key is figuring out the market cap and assessing the potential market cap -- is there room for 4x, 10x, 100x? Weigh risk and return.

Getting in early means EXPLOSIVE potential with extreme risk, but some of the risk can be mitigated with adequate research..

Another thing I've learned - if you invest in a project and want to see it succeed, HELP OUT. Invest time and energy into your investments. Your involvement is a huge asset to a new project.

Unfortunately the market is oversaturated, and finding good projects is like a needle in a haystack. One project I'm keen on is thestandard.io (TST).. It's dead quiet right now and you'd have to wait to buy any (pre-market & no public distribution running at present), but the team is busily working away behind the scenes.. The team has a proven track record (vaultoro - long running gold/crypto exchange) and TST is basically the culmination of their learnings, limitations, and missed opportunities in Vaultoro. All of that said, early stage projects are always something of a crap shoot.

So many people are unaware of how vast the memecoin graveyard really is..

December interview with Joshua Scigala covering a lot of the underlying rationale behind TST. https://weissratings.com/en/weiss-crypto-daily/video-the-stablecoin-minefield

Symbol is not quite the same as NEM.. Not all XYM was minted at launch.. Think Bitcoin -- not all 21M exist yet. Each block produces more -- same with XYM.

##############
Also - for any NEM Node operators still watching this thread, please review the above post on the new fork and UPGRADE YOUR NODE if you support it (which you should)!
##############

Absolutely. XYM was pretty much dead quiet from July to September -- to the point that even I was beginning to have my doubts.. Yet the sleeping dragon is once again rustling. Check out the discord channel.. Big things in the works. XYM is still seriously undervalued.. Take a look at NEM's price charts, and consider that XYM is NEM's multi-year Catapult project, effectively NEM 2.0. It's launched, but not all systems are online as of right now. There is also a recent explosion of community participation paired with a looming 180 degree shift in the XYM's political / power dynamics.


This is part of the story, but there's more to it. The transition to XYM burned a billion NEM - https://symbolplatform.com/tokenomics/
"XYM has a fixed maximum supply of 8,999,999,999 tokens. On release, initial supply was 7,842,928,625 tokens, allocated to users based on XEM holding at Snapshot. Another 1,157, 071,374 XYM was created for inflationary rewards over time. The inflation rate is closely mapped to that of bitcoin, extending out over the next 100 years. Similar to mining rewards, Symbol’s rewards will be released to each block creator but based on a POS+ (Proof of Stake+) system."

I'm actively harvesting, which is giving something like 2% monthly returns on my staked XYM.. Harvesting rewards are a massive incentive now -- never were for NEM.

Buy Symbol (XYM) before it explodes? LOTS going on -- join XymCity discourse to get caught up: https://discord.com/invite/xymcity

Had a great chat with Joshua on Telegram.

In terms of the change in distribution, he opted to open up the early stage sale after most private interest wouldn't accept a vesting period (wanted to be able to dump day 1). This was deemed unacceptable, so they opted to open the presale to a broader audience.

He pointed to Maker DAO as an example of arbitrage helping to maintain price stability - a compelling example that counters my concerns of quick injection/removal of liquidity (and associated S-EURO issuance/burn). Unlike Tether, liquidity injection would be slower, but arbitrage should help keep prices stable.

For an outflow of S-EURO in a crypto boom causing high fees, and this being a disincentive to prospective asset tokenizers, he mentioned work on bots not mentioned in the white paper that would help vault holders mitigate risk.

For the risk of TST becoming centralized with asset holders and potentially leading to DAO manipulation, he pointed to a number of perks available to TST holders (remuneration for participation, airdrops of vault fees, access to liquidated assets, etc), as well as a constant demand for TST by Vault Holders who benefit from paying fees in TST and spending it on automation bots.

Overall I'm much more comfortable with the project.. Still a massive undertaking with ample risk, but in good hands from what I can tell.

Say I tokenize an amount of gold and generate a Smart Vault of 100,000 S-EURO - effectively borrowing S-EURO against my gold. My gold is insured, in a vault, and audited regularly - all of which adds maintenance costs; these costs would be covered in full or in part via a daily reduction of the initial 100,000 S-EURO balance required to close my Smart Vault and restore full ownership of my gold. I am also charged a daily stability fee primarily driven by fluctuations in supply and demand for S-EURO. If, for example, a significant increase in demand for S-EURO causes it's price to exceed that of fiat EURO, the stability fee will decrease and the cost of maintaining my Smart Vault (a.k.a. loan) will reduce - much like a lower interest rate being applied. This fee volitivity is intended to encourage asset holders to hold/tokenize or de-tokenize my assets based on the supply and demand for S-EURO... Think I have that part down.. Now the hard part..

Would a reduction in stability fees really result in the desired outcome of getting asset holders to tokenize more assets? Onboarding new asset holders should be a lengthy review and approval process, so in the short term you'd largely depend on existing asset holders to tokenize more of their assets; this assumes asset holders would initially tokenize a portion of their assets and would be open to tokenizing more assets down the road given the right circumstances. I don't see low fees as much of a draw, but after some consideration I can see the appeal of tokenizing assets while the S-EURO is overpriced ASSUMING the value of S-EURO issued exceeds the real world value of tokenized asset (i.e. my 100k EURO worth of gold is tokenized 1:1 for 100k S-EURO despite the market price of 1 S-EURO to 1.2 EURO; effectively my 100k EURO asset is tokenized for 120 EURO worth of S-EURO). This approach would rapidly increase the supply of S-EURO as asset holders seek to cash-in on inflated valuation; the result would be a bevvy of 'approved' asset holders waiting for the right conditions for quick profit, and a corresponding rapid price correction. Conversely, should the value of S-EURO issued in this scenario be roughly equal to the value of the tokenized asset (i.e. when 1 S-EURO = 1.2 EURO, a 100k EURO asset receives 83k S-EURO, worth 100k EURO at the time), low fees alone would hardly incentivize asset holders to tokenize, resulting to a sluggish price correction at best and a complete decoupling at worst.

A snap crash in the cryptocurrency market would be liable to spark a very sudden and immense increase in demand for S-EURO; without an aggressive price correction system in place, you risk undermining the DAO's vetting process, which is liable to result in the overvaluation of tokenized assets or even outright fraud.

On the other side of the equation, the risk of stability fee increases would require prudent Smart Vault holders to closely monitor fees. A crypto market boom is liable to cause a significant outflow of S-EURO, in which case the stability fee correction may be similarly significant. Smart Vault holders would effectively be penalized in an effort to encourage vault closure.. The passive Smart Vault holder may return months later to find exorbitant fees levied which must now be paid at stabilized S-EURO prices.. This strikes me as a substantial deterrent to asset holders who don't want to be bothered with constant monitoring of market conditions.

Furthermore - the S-EURO is in no way directly linked to the value of TST (which provides a vote in the DAO that oversees S-EURO).. We must consider the audience for this token which is primarily used to determine fees and approve tokenization proposals.. What is a vote in the DAO worth, and to whom? Stability fees are collected by the DAO, so dividends may provide a prospective draw to otherwise unbiased stakeholders.. Beyond these, what value is there in having a say in token issuance and fees if you aren't either a self-interested asset holder looking to get your asset tokenized / reduce fees for your tokenized asset, or a major user of the token (i.e. an exchange) looking to encourage stability? Who do we imagine holding TST, and to what end? We may dream of market experts and prominent business leaders benevolently taking the reigns and creating the stablecoin platform to replace all stablecoins, but what compelling reason do they have to opt for a DAO vote over its cash equivalent? I worry that the DAO will eventually be governed by the self-interested, and everyone involved will suffer for it..

Transparency isn't a strong point in the stablecoin domain, but this is at least partially offset by fairly clear accountability. Much as I can appreciate the use case and need for such a platform, I'm afraid I don't see how this project addresses issues of transparency and accountability in the stablecoin domain.

Taking a minute to look at this further after some initial curiosity and interest..

Some preliminary thoughts:
1. It seems half of the 100M tokens initially allocated for Institutional/Angel investors have been opened up to the public... Per the published token distribution plan, 250M tokens were supposed to be sold privately before the sale went public; it seems we only made it to 50M before opening things up.. This raises some concerns around the degree of interest (and investment) in the project.
2. TST appears to be a is primarily a voting token for participation in the DAO.. It is unclear to me what value it holds beyond the ability to participate in decision making for the uptake / administration / tokenization of other real-world valuable assets.. That said, there is also the DAO's treasury - presumably this could be used for dividends/airdrops to TST holders? That would make holding much more interesting.
3. Only 45% of TST are being distributed to the public / investors; this means the majority of the decision making power is very centralized initially.
4. The allocation of TST for Marketing strikes me as curious; why not allocate a portion of funds raised from the presale of TST rather than selling TST post go-live for a marketing budget? The added sale pressure would serve to suppress TST's value; something presumably contrary to at least part of the intention behind marketing.
5. The Pre-Market distribution is set at 1 ETH = 100,000 TST. The total distribution of TST is 1,000,000,000. This sets the initial market cap at $33,000,000 USD.. Pretty low for a starting point, which again has me concerned about the degree of interest, but it's also a presale so prices are expected to be lower and there's a huge potential upside..

As an aside to other readers - token distribution is supposed to be:
Pre-Market Distribution - 100M for Angel and Institutional investors
Private Distribution - 150M for waitlisted folks etc
Public Distribution - 200M for TBA
DAO - 100M
Early Participants/Team/Advisors: 300M
Marketing/Networking: 150M

Looking at Nem's recent bounce back, I suspect it's largely about chart history.. So many people only look at market history, technicals, and charting rather than the actual substance of a project these days.. Not a very smart long term approach. I'm definitely holding. Firmly believe xym will easily pass Nem as it gets more attention

Howdy Bitcointalk - it's been FAR too long since I last visited!

I've recently spent some time looking through a number of threads and felt the need to chime in on Symbol (XYM) https://symbolplatform.com/xym/ - NEM's long promised Catapult project . Catapult was initially intended as a monumental upgrade to the NEM blockchain, but the NEM Foundation opted (or needed) to implement it as a fork of NEM - creating Symbol. Anyone who held NEM at the fork is able to redeem XYM at a 1:1 ratio and effectively migrate to the new chain (without losing any NEM of course). NEM continues to exist and remains supported by the NEM Foundation, but with years of additional development behind it, XYM is pretty clearly the way forward..

Surprisingly, NEM remains priced above XYM - I believe largely due to NEM's name recognition and a broad lack of awareness of this transition.. I'm a longtime crypto enthusiast and fully understand just how easy it is to lose track of the myriad of projects out there; it seems to me that many NEM holders and buyers may still expect that Catapult will someday launch NEM to the moon, completely unaware that it launched a few months ago. NEM has long been referred to as the 'Sleeping Dragon', and it seems the lack of big news for Symbol since it's launch has largely kept it under the radar for now.. Once news of partnerships and business adoption begins to trickle in, I suspect more and more people will start connecting the dots and realize that XYM is in fact NEM 2.0, and wildly underpriced as such.

What's more - NEM's fee-based harvesting (staking) reward system was never particularly lucrative. I harvested NEM for years and the rewards have always been laughable. Symbol completely changed this with a hefty block reward system. I might have received up to 6-8 NEM in transaction fees on a LUCKY block, with most blocks netting little or no rewards; harvesting Symbol presently nets a consistent 128 XYM PER BLOCK plus transaction fees.. Four months of harvesting has netted a 2+% return on my delegated (staked) balance!

I must admit that I am a long time fan and supporter of NEM (among other green cryptocurrencies), and my opinions here are undoubtedly influenced by this.. Biases aside, there is no arguing that XYM is NEM 2.0, is priced below NEM, remains largely unknown, provides much better block rewards than NEM (more incentive to hold), and has the potential to grow considerably as adoption and recognition of its place as NEM's successor grows.

Thanks for the follow-up! Trying to remember my response to this one.. I think it was along the lines of 18.73 :p

The sleeping dragon stirs. Catapult - a wake-up call? Perhaps, but your voices matter too.. While developers have long been busy at work, NEM has always had some emphasis on community - it's origins helped to instill that on the long road to a 'fair' distribution at launch. Those behind the initiative faced seemingly insurmountable odds, and yet here we are. NEM has been my favorite crypto for many years now, and while we do have a major milestone around the corner, I feel there's a pent up demand for re-engagement. Thoughts?

I withdrew some INPAY from cryptoptia to my Waves wallet address and they came through as Tokens.. Looks right to me - anyone aware of any issue with this approach? Is INPAY a Waves token, or is there some distinct wallet where this should be sent? Haven't kept up on it.. Either way, my waves wallet shows having recieved INPAY tokens, so that's a good sign.. Recommend starting with a test amount first if you're trying this.

Wrote up a high level proposed framework for cross-blockchain wallet storage & transaction for NEM -- please take a look and provide feedback!!

https://forum.nem.io/t/nem-cross-chain-key-storage-transaction-framework/5271

Ripple is centralized and private, Nem is decentralized and Public. The Nem community can veto the devs by rejecting a hard fork (see etherium classic) .. As such, Nem can never have ties with anyone in the same way that ripple can.. It's a matter of company ties vs community ties.

Looks like SBI is getting much more interest and momentum than initially anticipated: https://news.bitcoin.com/42-banks-japanese-blockchain-consortium/

Per a post from last December, there was some degree of partnership/interest from SBI in Nem https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=654845.msg13274949#msg13274949

I know SBI has partnered with Ripple, but with our costs coming down in the upcoming fork, Nem may be more competitive than before. I think this is especially true with the flexibility provided via Mijin.

Do we know if SBI's still interested in Nem? Any inside scoops?