.005 still isn't going to happen at this point unless Evan dies.
I didn't think so either (hence my current buy position) but it's only unlikely, not impossible. Let's say Evan tells (lies) us he got bored of slowly dumping the multi-zillion shadow-premined coins, so he will clear every orderbooks in one minute and retire. That would cause a yet unseen panic, not a mourning. I think that would be exciting to see even if it burns (I am sure I would never be able to buy any small amount of any altcoins, or even BTC for that matter but would be fun to watch still).  |
|
|
|
That said, I don't see your predicted .005 materializing.
I placed an order @0.00801 but I missed the bottom last time with 0.00901  And Cryptsy logged me out, so I couldn't join the panic buy and didn't panic-buy @0.013 approach the end of its shelf-life.
Doesn't really matter but did you mean shelf or self? |
|
|
|
slow decline, little volume, looks like no-one is interested in the coin anymore. And then BAM!
I think that is exactly how any altcoin behaves in manipulation-free times. This doesn't automatically grant you a BAM! The slow decay can go on for an indefinitely long time until some internal or external change (bad or good news from either the developers or other big players through trolling or praising articles/forum posts/etc, organized/engineered pump&dump cycles, and so on) triggers a frenzy (panic sale or panic buy, rapid movements with big volumes). Darkcoin can't possibly end up like that any time soon because it will be far from boring or forgotten for long but decays like this can go on until the last exchange removes the coin and the last sad guy/girl deletes the last wallet.dat in existence and thus the coin officially dead. This is the realistic future of almost every altcoins in the not so far future, especially of true shitcoins. |
|
|
|
What's this movie?  |
|
|
|
Was Bitcoin at any stage, any part of it closed source? No of course not. Anonymous closed source what a joke.
The crypto landscape these days is completely different than it was back then when Bitcoin was being developed. Satoshi didn't have to worry about competition. If DarkSend was open source from the start, we would have at least 20 shitcoins using "DarkSend", just copy-pasting release candidate versions and gullible people investing and losing their money in their scams. And if you bothered to read the answer, the DarkSend part will be open source when it's matured enough. It's still in release candidate phase after all. This will happen in few weeks time. Until then, you don't have to use the DarkSend part at all. Bitcoin is a million times more technologically advanced that Darkcoin ever will be after all its just a copy/paste of the original.
I guess this was your attempt of a joke? Please don't bring satoshi in this mess... The guy couldn't care less about competition , he had little interest if no interest in the value He just cared about his project and what could bitcoin bring new to the world. He probably was the only true idealist in the crypto world. And probably that's why he mined a shitload of it for himself but didn't randomly gave his coins away. I think it's 50/50 if he plans to spend some (if not all) of that later or destroyed the private keys already. We don't know. He didn't really mined by himself , there were few people who also mined a few blocks but at that time not many bothered with his project and many called it stupid. He had no other way of keeping the coin alive but mining it.... He didn't instamine , he didn't sell the coin in an ipo If he is still alive I doubt he still has access to all those coins. I consider it as a possibility that Satoshi destroyed the private keys (for example, he never stored them but used them from volatile memory just for the sake of mining and never cared keeping the coins) but not that he gave them away or sold them for fiat. If he sold them then at least a few of those coins would already be in circulation rather than laying around, unless he sold them all at once to an entity which is really serious about holding them as is, in which case it doesn't really matter how we call that entity, Satoshi or Matoshi, etc (it's the same thing because neither of them are known to us). But this speculation doesn't really matter. Since we have no proof that those coins are lost forever, they have to be considered accessible. |
|
|
|
Was Bitcoin at any stage, any part of it closed source? No of course not. Anonymous closed source what a joke.
The crypto landscape these days is completely different than it was back then when Bitcoin was being developed. Satoshi didn't have to worry about competition. If DarkSend was open source from the start, we would have at least 20 shitcoins using "DarkSend", just copy-pasting release candidate versions and gullible people investing and losing their money in their scams. And if you bothered to read the answer, the DarkSend part will be open source when it's matured enough. It's still in release candidate phase after all. This will happen in few weeks time. Until then, you don't have to use the DarkSend part at all. Bitcoin is a million times more technologically advanced that Darkcoin ever will be after all its just a copy/paste of the original.
I guess this was your attempt of a joke? Please don't bring satoshi in this mess... The guy couldn't care less about competition , he had little interest if no interest in the value He just cared about his project and what could bitcoin bring new to the world. He probably was the only true idealist in the crypto world. And probably that's why he mined a shitload of it for himself but didn't randomly gave his coins away. I think it's 50/50 if he plans to spend some (if not all) of that later or destroyed the private keys already. We don't know. |
|
|
|
Anyone else underwhelmed with the speed of this rally so far after the initial boost? Are we actually gonna have to wait till the extra volume drives the price up naturally?
C'mon whales, the moon won't just go to itself.
Half the rise was already priced in. The signs were too strong that it would happen. The alternative outcome could have been a story about somebody at Bitfinex who wished to make a quick profit on DRK trading by selling a rumor. I think it was 50-50 and those who bought the rumor are already selling the news (hence the slow rise) and it's 50-50 again who runs out of the coins first (sellers from DRK or buyers from BTC). |
|
|
|
Moreover, Evan announced a fix for the masternode payment issue around that time too.
Yes. That did cross my mind and could have contributed. But a code fix and a major fiat gateway are kind of leagues apart in terms of long term valuations. b.t.w. I didn't mean to bite your head off in my last post. Should have previewed it and apologise if I was a bit antagonistic there. I think it's obvious for anybody who watched the market behavior and read the first posts about the bitfinex rumor that this was the trigger. The market behavior changed drastically in the very same moment. The developer announcement was only a prerequisite. It restored the confidence enough so that the bitfinex rumor could trigger a change. |
|
|
|
This is what's gonna happen..  HOLY CRAP!? ARE YOU SURE. If what you are saying is true, i'm terrified... is this really the end of grid lines in charts? LOL. It took me a few seconds before I got the joke while reading the replies backwards. Yeah, it looks like DarkCoin's price move wasn't "the pump to end all pumps" but it was "the pump to end all grid lines". DRK will go back in time and erase every grid lines from existence. Unless Doctor Who shows up and instamines every coins at day 1.  |
|
|
|
Cryptsy added DRK/USD Storm is coming : ) ) ) next new price 3070 $
LOL !!! This is AWESOME!!!!! Cryptsy FTW. Definitely gonna validate on there now. Wow! This is great, and here i was thinking Cryptsy didn't do any fiat at all. That's technically true. Those markets are nothing more but plans at this point. You need a lot of fiat before you can open a fiat/crypto exchange with fiat deposits and withdrawals and it also requires a lot of paperwork which is additional cost and time. Cryptsy have been saving it's income and selling it's shares to reach that goal a relatively long time ago. I suspect this is why they fail to increase the raw processing power of their servers and/or to optimize their code better to reach the technical requirements of their users. (All that lag and "internal server error" kind of downtimes during busy hours...) |
|
|
|
Wonder if anyone has ever has problems of updating wallet and everything and yet the balance is a little more than the blockchain explorer? I read about it here before and something about different addresses, but I only have one address.  The block explorer shows you the balance of a single address. Your wallet might have several addresses. Your wallet probably has at least two addresses with a non-zero balance if you have ever sent a smaller amount of coins than your total balance. In that case you probably have a "change" address in your wallet with non-zero balance. You might have several change addresses with non-zero balance or none (if you have never sent coins or you explicitly forced the sending address to receive the change in a raw transaction or the wallet could always find you the exact amount of coins without needing to break up a bigger amount). |
|
|
|
I don't get it even a minor bagholder with lets say 10,000drk who bough it at $0.60 can dump it now and make $50,000 profit instead of risking the wait until the correction... why would they hold?
Think Bitcoin. Nobody became rich by selling at 5 and 10$. I agree, but theres alot of risk at the moment. With the clusterfuck of the hard node and lack of communication of how were are going forward ( I mean trusting pools really..) or the risk of another hardfork. It makes sense if you are a big bagholder who bought it cheap to sell now and wait to see if it clears up. If it does you buy back in and have 9000 coins instead of 10,000(still very happy), but if it doesn't you have a huge profit and can buy in for more when the price goes down. I'm talking about the next few days or week, not the long term. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. The bitcoin devs have clusterfucked much worse when they forked bitcoin and they weren't even introducing a substantial change to the codebase like masternode election and payment protocol. Still price boomed after that from like a few dollars to 1200$. Is DRK gonna go 1000$? I can't tell... That's highly dependent on where BTC itself will go. But I agree, you can cash out some of the coins. However if you haven't sold at 0.028, why sell at 0.011? There's simply no temptation. Only emotion. Yeah... You know, that was Karpeles's Gox bot, Willy, using people's money (including mine), right...? Well, I am glad he used at least a part of it to increase the price and awareness of cryptos instead of simply stealing it all... |
|
|
|
Btw just want to say this. I know from some insider info that some guy who is really known on btc e has stated that he hates drk and has dumped all at 0.014 on a panic sell LOL LOL. He went all in x11 coin and he is gonna dump THE FUCK OUT OF you. And not talking about a Fontas style ltc dump. No bigger..
The only hint I can give is ''Cool''
lol not kidding. Some kid promoting drk like crazy then when he panic sells at 0.014 because I KNOW he fucking did. All of sudden after that he starts hating on it like hard and promotes x11 coin hard. Untill hes gonna dump everything on you.
#justsaying
He dumped all DRK's at 0.014, bought XC, and is now going to dump all XC? basically. If XC has growing pains he'll drop it and call it a scam. Rinse, repeat. I don't really blame him. I guess this progressively more and more aggressive newcomer/dumb-raper/butcherer crypto-scam game (basically everything after BTC in one way or the other + even BTC through Karpeles's GOX) have successfully made most of the people shitcoin-paranoid up to a point where it became a self-sustaining ecosystem. The seemingly endless shitcoin collapses made almost everybody paranoid, so it's extremely hard for any honest innovation to escape the shitcoin stereotypes and even harder (if even possible) to keep that hard earned weak confidence when there is even the slightest problem on the horizon. I saw through this problem in my own psyche when I shot down my MN and sold that 1k DRK during the pumps but started to miss it the next day. Not only because the price kept rising but because of the realization that I made a logical mistake. I knew it will probably fall back temporarily (follow the regular pump&dump scheme) and thus I will have a chance to buy back. But still... I missed it and marked it as a mistake. Well, I seem to have that second chance on the road now and I learned the lesson after I experienced that "you miss something only after you already lost it": after reading and thinking a lot about DRK, no other coin felt like a good investment anymore but DRK felt even better than before. I think I already said this: owning BTC just didn't felt that great anymore and I couldn't imagine to put that BTC into any other altcoin which is not DRK. And as "profiteering" goes: I keep my crypto and fiat funds completely separated. I don't sell crypto for fiat. I am trying to increase my virtual wealth in crypto and "switch lifes" when crypto starts to officially rule the world.  So... those who don't like high number of the Amazon EC2 masternodes, I will probably restart mine in the garage soon.  |
|
|
|
seems all the dumpers are in mintpal. cryptsy kinda just chillin
Yeah, but I bet this setup would reverse as soon as I move my BTC from Cryptsy to Mintpal, so I will just leave my buy order as is and hope for the "worst" (temporarily, of course). |
|
|
|
DRK coiling hard on the 15-min/hourly. Should see a large directional break one way or the other in the next 30-60 minutes as the pattern continues to its apex.
Well, I think Mintpal's behavior would suggest the price wish to go up or more likely to stabilize while Cryptsy's that it wish to continue going down. But the average price was constantly higher on Cryptsy, so it probably seems like this because Cryptsy simply wish to match mintpal and then continue to follow it anywhere. |
|
|
|
Maybe all the FUD, attacks, etc. in the last month have left me skittish -- but I wonder even in the short term what might happen to the coin if there is an organized effort to hurt DRK based around pools cheating. If Evan does go through with this then I hope I am just worrying over nothing.
If? It is a given that at least half the pools and big farms (a lot of them nowadays) won't be paying. So the 20% will be more like 10% for the masternodes, =what they were expecting anyway. But it will be a disproportionate weight to the "fair" pools. The whole thing to appease investors with "ok guys no hard forks" and bagholders of masternodes with "ok guys you'll get 20%" is sketchy. I know I'm harsh but I like things to go right  Price is price. It'll go up, down, sideways etc. Let it be. All the price attention is having an impact in development. Development must proceed as planned so we can have the final product, nice and polished - no matter if it takes 1-2-3 or 5 hardforks and no matter if investors are bitching that they are losing masternode income because the implementation is late. Do they want to have masternodes of a coin that is GOOD or do they want to have a masternode of a coin that is doing hack-arounds? The masternode protocol works, the masternode payments work (we saw them - it's not vapor), it's just that there is something introducing instability which has to be debugged and sorted out. If the origin is difficult to trace, then perhaps a different mechanism can be used for doing the payments (not voluntarily) We also need improvements in DarkSend. The competition (MRO) is integrating I2P (as we've said) and XC will be using encrypted communication between nodes (as it has been said of DRK's future plans as well). I know this sounds like a mom's "to-do list" to the child until she gets back home, but priorities are priorities, and price or reaching litecoin immediately are not a priority. If the code is sorted out and the product delivered in final form, LTC will start rolling down. Too fast of a price rise with a half-baked product is problematic. LTC can't compete anyway in fundamentals like inflation (10x the BTCs to absorb LTC production compared to DRK) or innovation so they will be dead anyway by debasement. #2 is a given. Preserving #2 is not due to the competition. Who is gonna buy 300k USD of LTCs per day? It'll go 0.019 -> 18 -> 17 over time. It doesn't look that "hot" of a property. Only buys will be for cost-averaging buys at 0.025+. Having said that about the #2 competition, the anonymity competition actually looks pretty lame (BCN and clones too many issues, XC mostly vapor for now but that could change a few months ahead as they seem to have the prospects of delivering a product similar to what Evan has at like 70-80% completion). But we can't base our strategy on others failing or being pumps & dumps that are "threatening" us due to pumps => we must excel and take the market. Then bring V2 for "fatality". Otherwise the risk is there for more serious contenders appearing. My 2 duffs. Apparently I have more faith in humanity than anyone else around here I'll implement the masternode payments via hardfork, who knows, maybe all of you are right. I am a true skeptic, so probably that's why I didn't understand how masternode payments would even be possible without a hardfork (the voluntary payment system didn't even cross my mind). |
|
|
|
|
Wasn't that useless draft around about a month ago until a topic regular finally "asked" him to leave?
|
|
|
|
I am not a troll but I honestly don't understand how it's possible to start paying masternodes from block rewards without hardfork.
We already had the hardfork to start paying them, but then had to switch them off temporarily. The fix & switching back on doesn't need a hardfork. But wasn't that temporal shutdown carried out by a (yet another, very quick) hardfork just like the earlier start of the payments was? How does the network know if masternodes should be paid or not? pool updates probably. smart guys... i want to really hear evan to report the cause of fork! I was very eager to initiate an all-in panic buy in the moment when Evan posted an update (because I figured the price will bounce back if his news are great). But honestly, I wouldn't touch the DRK market with a stick until somebody explains this (with not too much technoblabby but not just a short scifi magic wizard tale about giant metal dragons working behind the scenes). |
|
|
|
I am not a troll but I honestly don't understand how it's possible to start paying masternodes from block rewards without hardfork.
We already had the hardfork to start paying them, but then had to switch them off temporarily. The fix & switching back on doesn't need a hardfork. But wasn't that temporal shutdown carried out by a (yet another, very quick) hardfork which followed the earlier hardfork (which initiated the payout)? How does the network know if masternodes should be paid or not? |
|
|
|
Devil's Advocate: doesn't it sound a but pumpish to say you've wanted to raise MN payments to 20% for a while, when it's never, ever been mentioned. It's crossed my mind that it should be done, but I've never said it out loud... Never saw you say so, either... This'll be new troll focus, so why not address it now? I think I blurted it out a few hundred pages back. I am not a troll but I honestly don't understand how it's possible to start paying masternodes from block rewards without hardfork. And after this leaves a big question mark, the incresesing of the masternode payments start to look a little suspicious. But that's a different matter and won't be a problem if the above question is cleared. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
