This is a very complete and thorough set of articles man. Great writing. Must read for every investor

Anyone seen the new website shown on discord? The blue color looks a lot better than the pink.

This turns out to be a great article set man.

- Wants more marketing so the project gets more positive attention and growing community.
- Lists a bunch of complaints while not being constructive or solution oriented, calls new people newbies and trolls, and all positive points mentioned is shilling.

The fact that you have complaints, doesn't mean there is nothing positive to mention. If people choose to mention positive sides, it doesn't make them a shill. The progress this project has made is fantacstic. Look at Cardano, and the people complaining about the fact they still have no ledger support. QRL is delivering, got to ledger before a top 20 coin. They deliver every week, but marketing definitely doesn't have a huge shill factor. Low on marketing towards the single investor level is a strategy, not an budget related excuse as you call it. The fact that you don't agree with a strategy, doesn't mean you're right. Complaints or suggestions aren't orders the team needs to obay. Quite likely your expectations on QRL marketing are not going to be realized. If it's a huge deal for you, maybe it's time to look for something new. QRL is however establishing a name in the industry. It does take time though. Throwing in the big bucks for marketing is a short term strategy. Selling just ideas and theories is played out. People are tyred of shilling fried air. Especially in a bear market. They want real products. QRL has a quantum resistant blockchain. It is the foundation of what they are building on right now. The first real functions will be implemented in the june/july fork.

Let's turn this discussion around: how about you put in some positive feedback. How would you market this project? Be specific, maybe provide examples of other projects. Let's focus on your complaints and look for some specific feedback.

*new "troll" ignoring "senior" troll..

https://medium.com/the-quantum-resistant-ledger/last-week-in-qrl-march-5-11-c7a094f2eca5

- Ledger application fully launched
- Wallet: v1.1.1 of wallet released with full cross platform support
- Go-QRL: Separate address state for multisig created
- Go-QRL: Unit test for multisig_create complete
- Mobile: Sending Tx with insufficient funds exception now correctly caught
- Automatic migration will close on June 15th, 2019.[/li][/list]

Dude, what are you doing? Way to welcome a new guy. You had your opinion and he asks you a simple question. You refuse to answer, call him a newbie as if there is some sort of ranking system that gives you the right to ask questions or not and and then start off about him being a trol? Way to "contribute".

And how is this a shill? How is his question hurting the project? And how are you helping it going forward?  It's cool and helpfull to have critique on a project. But what you bring up has been discussed and answered by the team several times. They have been held responsible and they have responded.

Founder used his funds to fund the project, not to buy himself a Lambo. Presale funds could be used after the foundation was set up properly. Vitalik did the same in the early ETH days. Besides that, I rather have that stack out of the way (almost two years ago now) Instead of him selling at higher prices. They have been held accountable and explained in full. You may not agree, but it's been almost two years ago. Get over it.

ETH still hasn't moved to PoS yet either. You holding QRL to a higher standard then ETH? Besides QRL team has been clear on why they chose to start up as PoW. PoS took longer and has some security downsides. At least main net is launched now. Development now is focussed on the hard fork in june / july and smart contracts. PoS will be in development later and it won't be pure PoS, but a safer variation.

All projects delay. Remember progress on ETH, especialy in the beginning? How about BTC lightning network? How about pretty much avery other single project out there.

And the spening on marketing.. Yeah if you would manage this project, funding would dry up within a few years of shilling. If they wait a few years, QRL has matured on the technical side, and besides that the whole market is back up and they can spend 10 x on marketing of what they economize now by staying low budget. Paying for article mentions and exchange listings is short term policy. It's spending money on fried air... In e bear market... Top notch advice to go full on in marketing now.

Heyyyyyy, Sammy how are you. Acid as usual? For anyone new to Sammy, check out his post history, which is most accurately described as "his cesspool of vomit over anything he comes across".

@Sammy, if Jehova’s are lead by the National Academy of Sciences and the National Security Agency, then your comparison kind of makes sense. But on the other hand Jehova’s are just Jehova’s and people invested in QRL are usually quite diversified.

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) has brought together a group of scientists of over 70 people from different interconnecting fields in quantum computing who, as a group, have come up with a close to 200 pages report on the development, funding, implications and upcoming challenges for quantum computing development. The NAS doesn't make an estimate on when the risk for current cryptography would occur. They acknowledge this is quite impossible due to the fact there are a lot of unknowns and due to the fact that they have to base any findings only on publicly available information, obviously excluding any non available advancements from commercial companies and national efforts. So they acknowledge that whether you claim it will occur within the next few years or in two decades, this would be best described as guessing. What the NAS lacks in guessing, they make up in advice. They have a very clear advice:

"Even if a quantum computer that can decrypt current cryptographic ciphers is more than a decade off, the hazard of such a machine is high enough—and the time frame for transitioning to a new security protocol is sufficiently long and uncertain—that prioritization of the development, standardization, and deployment of post-quantum cryptography is critical for minimizing the chance of a potential security and privacy disaster."

The National Security Agency (NSA) has made a threat assessment in 2015. In August 2015, NSA announced that it is planning to transition "in the not too distant future" (statement of 2015) to a new cipher suite that is resistant to quantum attacks. "Unfortunately, the growth of elliptic curve use has bumped up against the fact of continued progress in the research on quantum computing, necessitating a re-evaluation of our cryptographic strategy." NSA advised: "For those partners and vendors that have not yet made the transition to Suite B algorithms, we recommend not making a significant expenditure to do so at this point but instead to prepare for the upcoming quantum resistant algorithm transition.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_Suite_B_Cryptography#cite_note-nsa-suite-b-1

What these organizations both advice is to start taking action. Not for an apocalypse, but for the next level in cryptography. QRL does just that, it has build a strong foundation and is building on that quantum resistant foundation.

500 I believe. It's a choice made by Bittrex.

Well, you could ask your shitdevs. But then again, they’d probably answer they hash their pub keys so no one could use the full pub key to derive the private key from. Which is BS, because all transactions will eventually carry the full pub key which creates the opportunity to do so anyway. Network based attacks, or off network MITM attacks would always be a possibility to get to the full pub key, so only if a blockchain uses a quantum resistant signature scheme (not as an option, but as the only vallid signature scheme), then you would know if your shitcoin is quantum resistant.

Quantum computers give way to new (quantum) algorithms that can make faster calculations and need fewer steps to come to an answer. If you use different type of signature schemes, these algorithms are not able to find the answer, even by using a quantum computer. These are quantum resistant signature schemes. If we move away from the subject shitcoins and talk QRL, you will see QRL used XMSS as a quantum resistant signature scheme. See for reference here: https://eprint.iacr.org/2011/484.pdf

NIST is holding a competition from which they expect to come to standardization of the best quantum resistant cryptography. The outcome of that competition will be somewhere around the year 2022-2024. That will take a while. XMSS however, is not part of that competition because it requires the system that you use it for to keep state. Not all systems can do so fully guaranteed. The outcome of the NIST competition should be a type of cryptography that can be used wide spread, so also for systems that can’t keep track of state. For blockchain however, it is possible to keep state if XMSS is implemented correctly. For QRL this is the case. They have an advisor Leon Groot Bruinderink, who is a post-quantum cryptography expert with a PhD on the matter. Also QRL has had two external audits. So that’s solid. Going back to NIST: they likely will standardize XMSS for a specific group of applications that can deal with the statefull properties. See for reference here: https://csrc.nist.gov/news/2019/stateful-hbs-request-for-public-comments As you see Bruinderink is mentioned in the NIST article. Note that the request for comments is to provide guidance for protection of misuse, and specific characterization of advisable usecases. The part where we wonder if it actuallyy is quantum resistant is in the past. It is considered to provide provable quantum resistant security.
This will mean XMSS and LMS will quite likely be the first quantum resistant signature schemes to be standardized. Which is huge as you might imagine.

Well, I don't think this guy costs a lot of money. 

But I agree the visible marketing is the weak point of QRL right now. But at the same time, they don't have a huge stack of $ and the value of marketing is temporary, while the value of development is long term. And long term is what they aim at. They have to, because they are the solution for something that is 5 to 20 years away.
Doing some great marketing, pushing their name, but in five years running out of money putting the project to a stop is even worse than lacking marketing in this early phase. Also every $ spent now would be worth x 5 or 10 later since they have their funds in BTC and ETH. So that would be tenfold waste of money.

Investing in QRL now, is early investing. This is your long term bag.

Sammy still a 12 year old high on energy drinks I see. Don't know what you still do around here hating this project so much.

Marketing in the state the crypto market is right now is just a waste of money.

They haven't launched yet have they? I mean tokens are still ERC20. When they plan to launch, and how will the tokens be used? What are the tokenomics?

Vote for QRL at Kastle:
https://kastle.pro/en/project/vote
You can vote daily. One vote per user per day. Every Friday the top project is added to the Kastle review pipeline.
Voting doesn't start over every week, your votes stay valid untill QRL reaches #1 position.

Real easy: create an account just by entering your name, email and a password. Then confirm email and yourre ready to vote.
Voting daily doesn't take more than a few seconds. Just register, stay logged in, bookmark and it will take a few seconds of your time a day. End of next week QRL can be the top spot there easy.

The reason they can't get listed fast is mostly technical. It's a new blockchain, it requires special adjustments for an exchange to make sure they can trade it. It's way different than listing an ERC20 token. Exchanges are ready for those.
The team can't talk specifics on negotiations with exchanges due to NDA's and they would mess up chances of getting listed soon if they would brake those agreements. But what I have understood so far is that they negotiate with as much exchanges as possible and make adjustments to make a listing as convenient as possible for certain exchanges. In the last updates you could have seen there are adjustments being made specifically for listings. Also they keep repeating they are not allowed to get into details of how negotiations go so far.

And as to just buy your way into an exchange: the amount of money you need to pay for a serious exchange is an amount that comes close to extortion. They got some funds obviously, but from an investors point of view I prefer them to spend that on development (And after listing on marketing) I think it's a healthy choice not to pay the "ransom".

Consider other projects. For example Tezos, who has pretty much the biggest bag of $ to spend on development, marketing and exchanges etc. They are not listed either on any serious exchange.

New Medium post from Peter:

https://medium.com/the-quantum-resistant-ledger/mainnet-v1-1-5-is-released-2db14b103332

Author: Peter Waterland
- Mainnet v1.1.5 released
- Attacks on the QRL Network (we're fine, nothing happened)
- x41 audit completes (results will be pushed to github)
- BECH32 Addresses (shorter and error corrected!)
- Project Silicon (Smart Contracts)

They pass by in discord every now and then. Bittrex has been notified, but Bittrex has been reluctant to list new protocol coins. QRL is no exception, IOTA and NANO are not listen on Bittrex for the same reason.

Yeah, you talking about QRL being an ICO, and I'm the retard

That would be the ERC20 tokens, not the QRL main net. Those still need to be listed as far as I know

Exactly, you can't sell at this moment. But... Why would you want to sell for this price. It's way to low to sell anyway

You can only buy and sell the ERC20 QRL tokens (presale tokens) at exchanges right now (Bittrex). Assuming you mined or migrated them: these are not the ERC20 tokens, but you have received the real deal QRL coins and you can't sell these at any exchange right now. They still need to be listed.

See also this conversation: