Who is SN?

don't you see that as suspect?

Your reading comprehension is appalling. Peercoin is not a clone. I called out peercoin, mutliple times because you didn't read it the first time, with a suspect start.

http://cryptometer.org/ppcoin_104_week_charts.html

caught my graph bullshit? I guess you are calling out cryptometer.org. Please, by all means, lay out how these graphs are bullshit.

"no less scammy than any other coin". Wow, really encouraging there. ...Everyone else is sort of scammy as well, don't worry about it!

Still love the fact you think I have an ulterior motive. Did you resolve the other parts that "didn't add up" without telling us?

Like what many of said here. Kind of self explanatory...almost "instantly" coins are mined. When the mining slows down significantly, those early miners have a massive advantage.

Goldcoin is a great example...plenty of small to mid range alts out there that are massively instamined.




There are 30,000,000 goldcoins in existence currently. The coin started in may of last year...and this shows that 9 million coins, almost 1/3 of all coins currently, were mined within 30 hours.

Source http://cryptometer.org/goldcoin_96_hour_charts.html

take a look at bitbar, too, while you are at it. Why would anyone by in knowing this info? They wouldn't, which is why we need to spread info about instamines.

Use the cryptometer source to look up older coins...unfortunately the dev has not done too many new coins. There are a ton of instamine coins on there.

Coins worthy of looking at for suspect instamines. Primecoin, Peercoin, Litecoin, and most recently, Vertcoin.

The longer the coin survives and rises, the less of a problem an instamine is. Litecoin was definitely instamined, but that only comprises around 1.5% of the total litecoins out there. Not to mention the number of rise and falls litecoin has experienced since its inception...you can't know for certain, but unless the instaminers where holding out for an aburdly high market cap, you can be pretty sure that the 1.5% instamine has already change hands numerous times. Usually those holders will be selling all the way up. The most danger is in the beginning, when they control the highest percentage of the currency.

so I ask for proof and you have an anonymous person that you can't tell me about.

 


Again, your logic is strikingly poor. YOU CAN LOOK AT THE DATA AND SEE IT WAS NOT INSTAMINED. Just because there were less miners then doesn't make it an instamine. That is a genuine early adopter benefit. Nothing shady about it. The entire reason people don't like premines and instamines is the fact that they are designed to make a few people rich. In other words, they are less interested in viable currency and more interested in making money. Bitcoin was designed and mined fairly from square one.

Designing your coin to be mined at an absurdly high rate in the first few days in comparison to the rest of the coins history, like vertcoin, litecoin, primecoin, peercoin, comprises some of its integrity.

If you can't see the difference between these two scenarios, I can't help you.

one, i dont need you to buy my "bullshit". I simply need the public to see your asisine arguments and let them decide. By all means, ignore me. At this point you would probably do your coin a favor by speaking less, you are making this too easy.

two, I already addressed primecoin, peercoin, and litecoin as highly questionable starts. Do you not read? Here is what I said earlier...


I am calling out other coins, I just happen to believe that Vertcoin is more likely to have more people holding instamine coins because of it's young age. I have also urged people to check out more of the coins posted on cryptometer.org and lamented that there isn't more information widely available about a lot of the questionable coins out there.

Third, I am copying these graphs from cryptometer.org. I never claimed to be an expert on graphs. LOL, you just read the graph. Not that difficult. There is more information at the site, including amounts minted and block rewards. Would you like to explain in more depth how this website is comparing apples to oranges? Just alluding to evidence and calling me a "well known asshole with an agenda" is a terrible argument. It's also hilarious because I hold less than 1 btc...I'm just an average joe. I don't mine and I'm not some secret agent out to kill a coin you hold. Your conspiratorial assertion with no evidence makes holocaust denier's blush.

Fourth, the reason why it "doesn't add up" is because I just posted it as I discovered it. I'm not a hit man from any X-11 coin or anything. liekwise, I wasn't posting it to crash the price and scoop up all of the coins. Maybe if you let go of theories that have no basis in reality (see: your instance I haven't talked about Primecoin, for example), it will begin to add up.

That was a lot of rambling, so no, i don't get it.

But you claim Vert was "hit hard" by all the miners.

Let's compare Vert's start to Dogecoins start. Mind you, Doge started and it was not popular at first. It had to fight and claw its way towards $5,000,000 market cap before it really took off.

(oh wait, am i too much of a newb to know the history of dogecooin?   )

From www.cryptometer.org

Vertcoin network difficulty and hash rate, first 96 hours...






And Doge, first 96 hours...




Notice how Doge has way more difficulty and network hash rate.

These are quite low difficulty and hash rates, fwiw. I don't buy your argument that because Vertcoin was "hit hard" by the miners, it caused an instamine.

Just go to Cryptsy, they have one of the top BTC markets according to my Crypsty dashboard. 64.5 BTC volume should set you up in no time.

Let's see the figures and graphs, eh?

You can't reject the graphs I show because it is something you don't like and ask for more graphs that show something you do like.

Yes, you can design a coin to be mined fast at the beginning. So you can indeed create an instamine. You can also prevent against it. They clearly did not prevent against it. I think that warrants a questioning of their motives.

Since it is only wise to hold large amounts of coin in multiple wallets, I wouldn't try to prove it in the way you suggest.

But you are correct in that I haven't done hours and hours of research against Vertcoin. I don't care that much.

See the bolded part? That is your mistake. VTC currently has 3.5 million coins. LTC has 27.5 million coins.

When you are talking about an instamine 600,000 coins, it depends on how many coins are also in existence at the time of your evaluation. The longer times goes on, the less the instamine matters.

You will understand after this scenario:

Let us say their is an instamine of 600,000 coins of something exactly like Vertcoin in every way that we are looking at now. Except one thing; this example we are looking at has a total number of coins ALREADY in creation at 1,000,000,000.

Since a 600,000 instamine doesn't even measure up to 1/1000th of a percent, that instamine matters much less.

 

Let's be clear where we are at here.

You said, without evidence, that bitcoin was "the most instamined shit ever".

I provided a publicly available source that details the knowledge of coins and their inception, suggesting bitcoin was not. I am not a technical person so I can't prove or disprove it is 100% factual. However, I haven't found a single source that suggests www.cryptometer.org is "fake". The burden of proof is on you, my friend.

At this point, you should work on disproving crypotomter or somehow coming up with evidence that bitcoin was massively instamined.

Sigh.


If you want me to use your own words to prove my point, so be it.

From a Darkcoin scam thread, you said...


So, you apparently believe it's fine to premine 1-2%. Not a universal opinion, but clearly your opinion.


In this current thread, are you trying to challenge me by saying the current 1-2% instamine for Litecoin is NOT okay, after just saying in another thread that is IS OKAY?

 

When someone instamines 16% of the coins, that is worse than a 1-2% premine, btw.

Are you also saying you don't understand the difference between an instamine where 1-2% of the coins in existence is what is being talked about vs. 16% of the coins in existence?


-----


For the record, I think Litecoin was a premine given the facts. Unfortunately, we are 2.5 years after that fact. So yes, calling out Litecoin matters much less. We should still call a spade a spade, but given 2.5 years of existence, I have to admit its more likely that a lot of those 600,000 easily gained coins have probably been sold and resold multiple times. I think peope have less to fear about a massive instamine dump with Litecoin at this point. I still question the intentions of the founders.

Vertcoin has been around since mid January. Call me crazy, but I don't think a majority of those instamined coins have left their hands just yet. I think a lot of investors could get screwed by this, and of course, I am calling into question their intentions.

wow...look at the graph, buddy.

It looks...so not curved...and... not instamined. Not close, actually.

Care to prove me wrong?

96 hours in...looking pretty straight forward





90 days in...still looking COMPLETELY normal





104 weeks in....




oh wait...what is that is see? Is that bending up a tad around 50 weeks in? Could that be slightly MORE coins being produced a year after its creation? In other words, the OPPOSITE of an instamine?

What say you?

well look what we have here...another sacred cow people don't want to talk about! Didn't realize Litecoin was like that, either.

i suspect the fact that their instamine only comprises only 1.5% of the total coins in existence means that this news will matter less to litecoin holders. 1.5% to 20% is almost a factor of 15.

Perhaps the person who suggested it doesn't matter if their is an instamine has a point. Eventually, the instamine will be paltry in comparison to the beginning. So it must not matter???

(answer: WRONG. it matters the most when you catch an instamine early. As time goes on, those holding the early coins will have less and less influence, and so it matters less. But it still matters.)

...

The significance being that early adopters should benefit by mining a cheap coin. Their large benefit only comes into play if the currency takes off.

The significance of an instamine is the coin was designed to strongly benefit early adopters. In other words, the immediate intention of the coin was for its earliest users to get rich quick.

To really spell it out for you, a coin's early adopters shouldn't get rich quick until the coin really takes off. Vertcoin is looking to get rich fast before the coin takes off. It should be the other way around. The coin should become wildly popular and THEN the early adopters get rich.

That should make you weary of their other intentions.

You can ask "FUD?" all you want. I directed you to facts about the coin. You should refute them instead of calling them fear and uncertainty. If you can't dispute the facts, they are CERTAIN.

BTW, pointing out that some other coin is a bigger question mark of credibility doesn't refute the question mark i am giving investors.

For starters, no one knows what caused those crashes in Vertcoin's prices early on. To assume the early adopters sold off all their coins is rather silly, imo.

I just discovered this about Vertcoin because I used to check cryptometer.org all the time. I forgot to check it recently and saw the creator posted Vertcoin. Once I found out, I posted.

My main agenda is to get people familiar with cryptometer. It's a great tool and I think we should encourage whoever runs that site to compile more data about the incoming currencies. Or, we should encourage everyone who is investing in this alt coins to know this basic data. I suspect some people who be hesitant to jump in if they knew this about a coin. I want this kind of data available for all coins.

Basically, if your currency's graph of coin creation is tends towards being STRAIGHT, your coin was mined fairly over time (assuming no premine).

If your coin is mined with a steep curve in the begining, the designer of that coin made it so the early adopters got A LOT more.

I didn't know vertcoin did that, hence my posting.


Other currencies worth viewing on cryptometer... Peercoin and Primecoin also have questionable curves. XPM is interesting in that it had a "super fair" start by not minting any coins the first couple of days...but they still created 1,000,000 XPM within 10 dyas. They mined a lot of coins fast and slowed down over time. I think PPC and XPM are cool ideas, just pointing out the facts. Bitcoin has a nice, mostly straight line. Quark also has a decent line, but their fucked up launch lends me to believe their credibility is already damaged for investment purposes.

Now i understand that the coins come out slower and slower over time...but there is a difference between doing it slowly and doing it quickly. The quicker you do it, the scammier it smells.

Both extremes are off here. Peter Schiff is correct in saying that if 10x more businesses accepted bitcoin today, we might have a surge of sell orders creating downward pressure. He just leaves it there, however. If the sell orders push down the price, (as other people are noting here) there are millions of bitcoin investors, some of them very wealthy, ready to pounce on purchasing opportunities. This creates serious upward pressure.

The end result?

A huge increase in volume and a stabilizing effect.

Which debunks his other notion that it is too volatile. The more merchants accept bitcoin, the more the price will stabilize for the reasons stated above.

This is why bitcoin moves slower in comparision to the rest of the alt coin market. This will only continue, imo, as the currency becomes more widely accepted. Once the market cap reaches 100 billion...i think the 10% plus or minus moving days like the one we just saw recently will struggle to max out at 3%.

Also FWIW, I think Peter Schiff's brother is smarter than Peter. I spoke with Andrew at Occupy wall st while his brother was making an ass out of himself and he was having genuine conversations with occupy people. Much cooler guy, imo.

http://cryptometer.org/vertcoin_96_hour_charts.html

None of this bodes too well for Vertcoin holders, but I'm not sure it will stop people from investing in them.



You have 3,500,000 total mined currently. From around hour 33 to hour 63, 600,000 coins were mined.

That's what we call an instamine.