 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 »
|
|
is it sure that they will be listed on bittrex?
|
|
|
|
is there a hardcap?
I think the hardcap is a max of 8 million dollars but I'm not sure I think there's no hardcap, b/c it states "Over 8m..." |
|
|
|
A few questions: - What is the exchagne rates changes right before clicking send (reserve manager has set a higher rate now)? - What if operator delists a reserver, will the reserve contributors get their funds back? - How much fee will be charged by the Kyber-network ie. how much fee does the reserve pay in order to utalize the Kyber-network? - The
collected KNC tokens from the fees, after paying for the operation expenses and to the
supporting partners, will be burned, i.e. taken out of circulation. What does after mean? Does it mean the operational expenses will be payed by selling the KNC tokens on exchanges to FIAT and the supporting partners get paid in KNC and if this sum < fees then the rest of the fees get burned? - Why does the Kyber operator only allow reserves with big money behind it? It would create more competition if everybody would be able to issue their tokens as a reserve and manage them themeselves via the reserve-manager feature instead of everybody contributing tool gigantic reserve pools with only one price. thx |
|
|
|
A few questions: - What is the exchagne rates changes right before clicking send (reserve manager has set a higher rate now)? - What if operator delists a reserver, will the reserve contributors get their funds back? - How much fee will be charged by the Kyber-network ie. how much fee does the reserve pay in order to utalize the Kyber-network? - The
collected KNC tokens from the fees, after paying for the operation expenses and to the
supporting partners, will be burned, i.e. taken out of circulation. What does after mean? Does it mean the operational expenses will be payed by selling the KNC tokens on exchanges to FIAT and the supporting partners get paid in KNC and if this sum < fees then the rest of the fees get burned? - Why does the Kyber operator only allow reserves with big money behind it? It would create more competition if everybody would be able to issue their tokens as a reserve and manage them themeselves via the reserve-manager feature instead of everybody contributing tool gigantic reserve pools with only one price. thx |
|
|
|
|
I could not find any transaction explorer for ripple, where you see every transaction that ever happened. Is this not existing for Ripple? I found some other tools but not something like that. If there is no such thing does somebody known why ripple has chosen this most likely not very appriciated way. Thank you very much.
|
|
|
|
Haha, you took it too seriously, it seems. Dude, you are marked as a troll in my note book. I'm talking to you only because your are funny, after all that nonsense you posted - no way you understand what you are talking about when it's related to tech. Just to give you a clear picture guys. This is not only since I posted something here that he and the developers provide such references to wikipedia with such abstract articales, this was also going on since the beginning as I was trying to figure out if it is a legitime approach. All people in the iota slack then come up with such articles. This is their plan to hide the scam. |
|
|
|
why? I'm not so much into Ethereum, I'm focussing on other projects.
Because they claim the opposite. Whom should I trust, to them (who proved their expertise) or to you (who is a random dude from the Internet)? I guess you speak about Ethereum sharding or so. I think this discussion should not happen in the IOTA thread. I expected a direct answer to the direct question... You are a nobody, can not expect from others what you do not provide either. Answer the questions in this thread about IOTA or stfu and enjoy your scammed money. He's just a "investor" not as developer. He believes in this project. I talked with him in slack. I doubt that he understands it. Think about it you do not have thew whole tangle. You should approve two transactions. So without going two a third party and aks it for state you can you confirm in the dark, which implies that your transaction maybe is not legitim. Try to ask such a question on slack they will give you that as answer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle. As already pointed out they are trying to make an unspottable scam, where they constantly try to tell you that you do not have the knowledge to understand. They also claim that they have some revolutary technique behind iota that currently nobody is aware of and do not release information about it. At the current state they running their system with a centralized coordinator and they haven't released any information how it should run without it. Be aware... |
|
|
|
why? I'm not so much into Ethereum, I'm focussing on other projects.
Because they claim the opposite. Whom should I trust, to them (who proved their expertise) or to you (who is a random dude from the Internet)? I guess you speak about Ethereum sharding or so. I think this discussion should not happen in the IOTA thread. |
|
|
|
In other words that means as long as you do not run a complete full node you have to trust others
Tell this to Ethereum devs, they'll be laughing hard at you. why? I'm not so much into Ethereum, I'm focussing on other projects. |
|
|
|
Because a tangle on it's own works if everybody has the whole tangle, but in a real world scenario you need network logic. You cannot assume that everybody has the whole tangle like in the tangle whitepaper. And there is no information on this part besides: Swarm Client
Another approach planned to enable the IOTA client running in these very resource restrained environments is to shard the core logic and database amongst different devices that then collectively run it. Similarly to swarm intelligence, this enables a cluster of devices to efficiently make transactions without being a full node, but having reduced trust requirements from SPV and light clients.
Status: Research / preliminary stage
In other words that means as long as you do not run a complete full node you have to trust others, which makes it more or completely centralized as the tangle grows. Collectively run it means you give your processing power and data in third party hands they compute something and then they have the current state (from that cluster). Because you cannot verify/confirm tx on your own (because you do not have the necessary information) you are completely dependent on third party, which makes it in fact centralized. And all that gets even worse as the tangle grows. |
|
|
|
|
I'm waiting for a whitepaper. Releasing a tangle whitepaper whithout an "iota swarm" whitepaper is like releasing no whitepaper. They say this whitepaper will come next year ^^.
|
|
|
|
|
The whole whitepaper assumes that everybody always has the gigantic tangle.
I got the information that it should work via clustering. But no single word in the whitepaper about that. In my theory I cannot validate a tx if I do not have the whole tangle. I cannot know if he has the funds or not. Now I can trust a cluster or simply validate without knowing if tx is valid. Tursting a cluster would be centralized.
Marketing and website of the company is pretty good. But they actually never try to explain how it really works.
In my opinion people will never use this system because it is way to abstract and nobody understands it (i it is really a valid system and no scam).
Try to ask in their slack for information. They will spam you with pointless articles (about swarm intellegence, human stampedes, human crush, whatever) and not even try to explain it. This seems pretty scammy. Many cryptoscams are easily spotted, this one would be unspottable, because they can just claim you do not understand it.
Information from slack:
"It's a whitepaper on tangle, not on iota swarms".
That was ther reasoning why no single sentence about how it actually works in the whitepaper. So in reality they did not even reveal how it works in their whitepaper. This iota swarms whitepaper will come next year.
|
|
|
|
Wouldn't be easy to find out who leaked their key? That's theft of service basically.
LoL try to find it out. A system secured by that assumption that nobody will leak or share public keys ^^ |
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure that this is an exploit of civic. According to the whitepaper this expoit is easily possible and in theory cannot be avoided. In addition to that flaw airports will never except an identity that an user has made of a photo off his passport and is verified by some cheesy verification company instead of a goverment issued passport with live-security-symbol.
|
|
|
|
Q:
The attestation is nothing but a hash of the PII + signature of the validator. So if a service provider needs to verify somebody he could just ask another service provider give me the public key of the validator and then just look at the blockchain and verify it himself without paying something in a smart contract.
Example: Service providers could just share all public keys that they have (lets say on a website where all service providers register their known information, public key = validator). And when they then receive a PII from user they could just try to decrypt every attestation on the blockchain and check if the plain text of that decrypted text includes a hash that matches the hash of the PII that he has received from user. Like that service providers would lower their costs massivly and validators provit would decrease massivly.
Isn't that a HUGE problem? Normally in order to get this adopted goverments should join the party as validators. And the whitepaper states on page 13 paragraph 2 "Civic's ecosystem will be designed to incentivice participation of trustworthy IDV providers known as validators, wo may be include financial instiutations, goverments....". How do they want incentive them? The will earn not much if the service providers share there keys and everything is visible on the blockchain.
Why would anyone share their keys for free if they could get paid to share them? If one service provider has the key he could just share them with other paid or not paid. This is not avoidable that your key as a validator will get public someday, maybe somebody posts it on the internet or tells it somebody else. |
|
|
|
|
Q:
The attestation is nothing but a hash of the PII + signature of the validator. So if a service provider needs to verify somebody he could just ask another service provider give me the public key of the validator and then just look at the blockchain and verify it himself without paying something in a smart contract.
Example: Service providers could just share all public keys that they have (lets say on a website where all service providers register their known information, public key = validator). And when they then receive a PII from user they could just try to decrypt every attestation on the blockchain and check if the plain text of that decrypted text includes a hash that matches the hash of the PII that he has received from user. Like that service providers would lower their costs massivly and validators provit would decrease massivly.
Isn't that a HUGE problem? Normally in order to get this adopted goverments should join the party as validators. And the whitepaper states on page 13 paragraph 2 "Civic's ecosystem will be designed to incentivice participation of trustworthy IDV providers known as validators, wo may be include financial instiutations, goverments....". How do they want incentive them? The will earn not much if the service providers share there keys and everything is visible on the blockchain.
|
|
|
|
|
I always read Ethereum is a platform for dApps, but is there even an applicated registry like in Golem?
|
|
|
|
|
Can somebody tell me where GNT is stored? Is it stored on the Ethereum blockchain ie. dies the Etrhereum blockchain get bigger because of Golem?
|
|
|
|
|
