I have been running the autonode (xmixer) for 48h now and there has only been one transaction ("fee") of -0.00001, is it like that for others as well? Doesnt seem like I get any fees for running a node  What wallet version are you running? |
|
|
|
i want da news.
Haha. Coming... when? Soon. |
|
|
|
i want da news.
Haha. Coming... |
|
|
|
Do you guys know if mintal will realese today?
Or another delay?
http://blog.moolah.io/No signs of a delay yet. On the other hand, this is by no means confirmation that there won't be one. ;-) XC's news will be released either way. |
|
|
|
rough compensation method you got going there.
That's not for you to decide. The point is that we stand to gain if XC increases in value. Therefore we have a vested interest in XC's success, and diluting our energies makes no sense. |
|
|
|
rough compensation method you got going there.
That's not for you to decide. |
|
|
|
Then how XC team members are compensated ?
By owning XC and watching it gain value. And by getting paid in XC, and holding. |
|
|
|
The BAD news is that you guys keep releasing good news and your price keeps falling. And your devs are so broke they are taking on other projects that directly compete with yours and you find out third hand  I think there might be some misinterpretation going on here. XC has a history of minor price dips when good news is released. Quite possibly an intentional manipulation by others in the altcoin community to prolong the inevitable. Further, working with other alts is a great sign in my opinion. Dan and the XC team seem more than dedicated to XC and it shows through their expanded roles. Taking a look at the bigger picture, Dan said a while ago that he intended on creating a platform that was 'bulletproof'. Since then, there has been nothing but consistent progress in creating a great code base that will enable the coming features. When XC releases anon VoIP with video (XCype?), for example, there will be no question that it is of unrivaled quality. Same with everything else they do. And it is in part because of the team's collaboration with other platforms. I'm thrilled that the XC team isn't working in a dark room...the foundation they are developing is going to make everything that comes in the next months actually awesome and not some flash in the pan. +1. Very well put sir. |
|
|
|
sometimes XC community reminds me a little bit of that poor kitten in that clip - slowly and considered making progress, and one might think everything is on the right track. then something unforeseen comes along and BAMMM.... everything 's going south for no good reason. well, at least most of the times we could look back and have a good laugh about the unnecessary discomposure.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h14wr4pXZFk .. enjoy!!  btw, i see myself as community member and of course i know it's just a few that cause the storm in the teacup, but we have to stick it out together. Cheers.  Ha ha. Hilarious. |
|
|
|
like i said i see the colaborations positive and i don't accuse anyone from "betrayal". but i can see why some are irritated as well. look at the track record: cache: jasin threw it out there. key review: well i don't wanna bring those feeling up again  ( all reviews afterwards executed perfectly) quibuck: their thread first nhz: again they go first i thinks thats what more gets on the nerves of some. some react totally inapropriate in my optinion but what i wanna say is the team, if it feels frustrated, should not forget that. regarding colaborations the track record of leaks stands and its bad luck that yet again it happened. ^ exactly this is my biggest problem. Everyone makes mistakes of course, it's human nature. But if you constantly make the same mistakes without learning from it, it's just........ No offense to anyone, just my opinion. Waiting anxiously tomorrows announcement It's other teams, making the mistake for the first time each time. Now can we please move on? yes exactly, i didn't want to imply that it was always your fault , especially yours personally. just how some percive the whole situation cause of this track record. i also agree that we should move on from here. next time you make an colaboration agreement you lock that fucker up until you got the release ready. thats probably the only way. Hah. If I could, I damn well would! |
|
|
|
lets make a prediction challenge. the current discussion bores me.
1, i say tomorrows news include some sort of review aggreement for xc.
2. the nhz colaboration will be the best colab so far for xc.
3. nhz will not surge like others before after announcment, still some pump though
Also can we who want more volume discuss how we can get this thing on freakin btc38 or btcchina. i don't wanna put this particular hope in the hands of mintpal 2.0 alone.
Indeed. Anyone got ideas or connections for this? |
|
|
|
like i said i see the colaborations positive and i don't accuse anyone from "betrayal". but i can see why some are irritated as well. look at the track record: cache: jasin threw it out there. key review: well i don't wanna bring those feeling up again ( all reviews afterwards executed perfectly) quibuck: their thread first nhz: again they go first i thinks thats what more gets on the nerves of some. some react totally inapropriate in my optinion but what i wanna say is the team, if it feels frustrated, should not forget that. regarding colaborations the track record of leaks stands and its bad luck that yet again it happened. ^ exactly this is my biggest problem. Everyone makes mistakes of course, it's human nature. But if you constantly make the same mistakes without learning from it, it's just........ No offense to anyone, just my opinion. Waiting anxiously tomorrows announcement It's other teams, making the mistake for the first time each time. Now can we please move on? |
|
|
|
Team members joining another coins team looks bad no matter how you spin it.
That's precisely what I'm trying to suggest is a misperception. I'll give an example from my own life: - I do analytical philosophical research into sign action - I have a music career - I design gliders All of these "spread my resources thinner". But this is not a problem. It's life. The basic fact is that joining another team is an act of community. People join because their friends have a project that they're keen to help with. The perception that there is competition, scarce time-resources, and thus a "betrayal" in joining another team, is just the wrong paradigm. This is community. It's intertwined. It's close-nit. And it's superabundant in resources. There is no scarcity. There are only plentiful networks. When XC needs something, what do you know? Many people come forward to provide it. This will not change. So I suppose the shareholders of Apple or Microsoft would cheer if Tim Cook or Satya Nadella were to "co-join" another company under the guise of "community." How do you make the link between buying a coin and being a (voting) shareholder of a company? Do you know what an analogy is? Please can we not continue this discussion. As far as it's relevant to XC, it's been had already. |
|
|
|
There sure is a lot of Fear about this collaboration/announcement. and a lot of Uncertainty. and a lot of Doubt....
Yeah. I wish the community was ready to trust the team more at this stage, especially after the previous collaborations. I mean, we even announced that there's big news coming tomorrow... |
|
|
|
Dude...lol...you do know half of our community doesn't speak English as a first language right. I love ya man...that post just gave me an ear to ear grin.
Heh. Sorry :-). I sometimes forget myself. When the conversation turns to a point garnered from my academic work, it's hard not to express it in the style I read it in. |
|
|
|
Team members joining another coins team looks bad no matter how you spin it.
That's precisely what I'm trying to suggest is a misperception. I'll give an example from my own life: - I do analytical philosophical research into sign action - I have a music career - I design gliders All of these "spread my resources thinner". But this is not a problem. It's life. The basic fact is that joining another team is an act of community. People join because their friends have a project that they're keen to help with. The perception that there is competition, scarce time-resources, and thus a "betrayal" in joining another team, is just the wrong paradigm. This is community. It's intertwined. It's close-nit. And it's superabundant in resources. There is no scarcity. There are only plentiful networks. When XC needs something, what do you know? Many people come forward to provide it. This will not change. So I suppose the shareholders of Apple or Microsoft would cheer if Tim Cook or Satya Nadella were to "co-join" another company under the guise of "community." Their contract would forbid it, also all creative rights when employed by those companies goes out the window, you come up with a million dollar idea, be sure that it will be ripped from you faster than a crack addict after a fix That's exactly my point -- These elements are in place for a reason. Their contract would forbid it and they surrender creative rights to help ensure the success of the company and protect shareholders. Your point would be more legitimate if the comparison was on 2 companies , highly centralized , highly competitive in a centralized format , constantly buying up or patent trolling anything that shows innovation. Not decentralized and has one of the main focuses centered in open sourcing everything. You are not a shareholder when you buy a coin, you are buying into a currency, not a company. You can agree with them and disagree with them, but if you are going to disagree and the reason for the disagreement is a broken logic comparing it to something that it is trying to become better than, something that has been brought up as a solution to the very things you are comparing it to, features and implementations that make it the complete opposite of what you are comparing them to. then don't expect people to actually take note. All altcoins live or die on success of it's development team. Are you telling me that is not a centralized element of XC, or any altcoin? There are many ways in which XC is analogous to a company. There are many ways in which buying into an altcoin is analogous to being a shareholder of a company. So yes, I can point to these analogies. FACT^^^^^ BUMP Look at ETH team / marketing guys They have their hands in all the major projects. Talented people want to work with other people who share the same vision / ideas. This is what makes people brilliant: all that wonderful collaboration. Hence, collaboration is what makes for successful coins. Lastly and most importantly, XC's development team is not changing and neither are anyone's energies being "diluted". Collaboration *does not* equal dilution. So even if altcoins live or die on the success of their development teams, this just isn't at stake here. It's not a relevant fact in this discussion. XC's team is solid, top-class, and deeply committed to (and invested in) XC. |
|
|
|
Team members joining another coins team looks bad no matter how you spin it.
That's precisely what I'm trying to suggest is a misperception. The basic fact is that joining another team is an act of community. People join because their friends have a project that they're keen to help with. The perception that there is competition, scarce time-resources, and thus a "betrayal" in joining another team, is just the wrong paradigm. This is community. It's intertwined. It's close-nit. And it's superabundant in resources. There is no scarcity. There are only plentiful networks. When XC needs something, what do you know? Many people come forward to provide it. This will not change. So I suppose the shareholders of Apple or Microsoft would cheer if Tim Cook or Satya Nadella were to "co-join" another company under the guise of "community." Good point. The shareholders would be outraged. So yes, the situations are not analogous: - Crypto is fluid, communal, and not held together by legal contracts. - This makes it vastly more innovative and flexible than corporations. - It also makes it vastly less small-minded than the corporate scarcity-dominated mentality. - Community fosters superabundance. Anything that does this is beautiful and should not be replaced by a dynamic that creates scarcity. Big up for community! The situations are analogous to a degree. Are you telling me that if Dan (atcsecure) were to officially announce that he was coding (as an official dev) for another coin, that XC 's price would not crash? And that XC holders would not be outraged? They'd dump if they adopted a scarcity-dominated paradigm. If they adopted a communality-and-thus-superabundance paradigm, they'd see it as a sign of a healthy ecosystem that's benefitting them as much as others. As an interesting aside here, it's still commonly thought that the biological realm is dominated by competition and evolutionary natural selection. Funnily enough this hasn't been the consensus since the 1980s, when biosemiotics took off as a field and people realised that symbiosis was both more fundamental and more prevalent than competition. |
|
|
|
Team members joining another coins team looks bad no matter how you spin it.
That's precisely what I'm trying to suggest is a misperception. I'll give an example from my own life: - I do analytical philosophical research into sign action - I have a music career - I design gliders All of these "spread my resources thinner". But this is not a problem. It's life. The basic fact is that joining another team is an act of community. People join because their friends have a project that they're keen to help with. The perception that there is competition, scarce time-resources, and thus a "betrayal" in joining another team, is just the wrong paradigm. This is community. It's intertwined. It's close-nit. And it's superabundant in resources. There is no scarcity. There are only plentiful networks. When XC needs something, what do you know? Many people come forward to provide it. This will not change. So I suppose the shareholders of Apple or Microsoft would cheer if Tim Cook or Satya Nadella were to "co-join" another company under the guise of "community." Good point. The shareholders would be outraged. So yes, the situations are not analogous: - Crypto is fluid, communal, and not held together by legal contracts. - This makes it vastly more innovative and flexible than corporations. - It also makes it vastly less small-minded than the corporate scarcity-dominated mentality. - Community fosters superabundance. Anything that does this is beautiful and should not be replaced by a dynamic that creates scarcity. Big up for community! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
