|
1302
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] <808> sha256 pos/pow Roland TR-808 tribute 808% Proof of Stake
|
on: July 15, 2016, 05:19:04 AM
|
|
What bothers me are those large sells that occurred at 76 sats that seems to be part of the 200k that the dev put up as per his previous post. If we are to believe the dev, those orders were supposed to be left at sell orders to be taken up by interested parties and not to be sold down if no-one took them. If no-one took them the orders would just have been withdrawn by the dev after 24 hours. Now why did the dev sell down instead of withdraw after 24 hours?
|
|
|
|
|
1304
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] Vcoin sha256 pow
|
on: July 11, 2016, 06:43:35 PM
|
Someone asked me if Vcoin is dead,no is not dead, that the topic is not active does not mean that the Vcoin is dead,there are developers who can support the Vcoin development,Soon we will announce a road map,Our goal is to create something useful and something special and unique,we could spam the thread in order to keep up, but we did not, there is no reason,any news about the Vcoin development will be posted here
Oh nice. Just start to lookup what is going on with vcoin, nice to hear that  In the meantime VPS nodes, block explorer and exchange are maintained. |
|
|
|
|
1307
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Tokens (Altcoins) / Re: CHESSCOIN - COIN FOR CHESS COMMUNITY - ICO CANCELED - REFUND IN PROCESSING
|
on: July 09, 2016, 10:37:32 PM
|
So now what? Dump all the chesscoins till they reach 1 sat (they're selling at 12 now) (who's gonna buy them anyway, the dev?) and then dump the refunded Bela until it reaches 1 sat as well?
And for the invested Bela, people only invested Bela because of the 1k rate, if they didn't have it, they mined it, they bought it, they earned it. There doesn't seem to be any use for Bela apart from betting in BellaChess, people will probably dump it and lose money (they won't get rewarded properly for the time and energy they spent ...)
Pretty much. The dev effectively killed the price of both altcoins. With that being said, it doesn't surprise me to make a poor financial decision like that. Putting the 10x BELA price and taking it away halfway through the ICO was also an awful idea. Anyone worth their salt would have seen right off the bat that the ICO was effectively being ended early when BELA compensation dropped from 1k to 100. Absolute piss poor decision making all around. Oh well, I'm officially a Chess bagholder now  I do nothing to kill my darling coin. I'm in process of introducing ChessCoin Android and iOS wallets next some days. Think it's fortunate for you to hold that bag. ChessCoin is currently trading at 7 satoshi on Yobit... and Bela is going to dip when refunds go through, as well. Really hoping you still plan to recover from this, but it's a long ways to go back up to the 40 or so sats where I can recover my losses. FIDE article 5.2.a seems applicable here now. |
|
|
|
|
1308
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] Ethereum: Welcome to the Beginning
|
on: July 09, 2016, 09:53:58 PM
|
You can read a bit of desperation between the lines but that is understandable because the author is not independent. Also, his line of thought has many assumptions, one being rationality which we all know is not a given attribute in the world we live in. It is not wrong though to have hope and one never know - perhaps the attacker will return the funds if all of the authors assumptions are true. It would be interesting to see how everything plays out. One point in the article that is true is that the damage has been done - how much remains to be seen. IMO DAO is RIP and eth has its own future in its own hands and must choose wisely. |
|
|
|
|
1311
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: ▒▒ANN▒▒░░░ECCHI░░░▒▒FOLLOW THE T*TS▒▒ DISTRIBUTION OVER, BOUNTIES SOON!
|
on: July 07, 2016, 04:10:40 PM
|
|
I think what happened here was the dev participated in the airdrop himself and just changed his IP address many times in quick succession to get many slots. That is probably why the 250 slots were taken up in 3 minutes but only 5 people posting in this thread. If there was really 250 people participating in each round there would at least be 100 different people posting. He then dumped his stash at 15-18 and has not logged on since 1 July.
He is probably gone and coin will die at 1 sat or 0.
Maybe I am wrong but that is what the situation looks like.
|
|
|
|
|
1320
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] Ethereum: Welcome to the Beginning
|
on: July 02, 2016, 01:22:42 PM
|
Any hardfork that invalidates transactions destroys reputation and trust. Period. These two concepts are the cornerstone if you are trying to break into the financial big league.
If anther contract has a flaw tomorrow, who plays God that will decide who lives and who dies?
I tend to not agree on the whole " reputation " and " trust " negative shove on things. ALL I SEE - Is positive turn on things presented in front of us. They would be cleaning up their " reputation" by stopping a hacker from stealing the communities coins. They would be also building the " trust " of the community, proving they wont let the bad guys get away with junk like this. You seem to just be assuming this and that Jc12345. Not clear and focused thoughts my man. Cheers, MasterTrader777 Unfortunately it is not about what you think (or I for that matter) but what the world's businesses, financial systems and markets think. The world's financial system is built on trust and robustness and reputation is the name of the game. Things that threaten the integrity and stability of the financial system is frowned upon. The system hates uncertainty and will avoid it like the plague. Business wants to know that if a transaction is done and a contract is created, irrespective of if it is a good transaction or a bad, that the "system" cannot be manipulated to change that. A robust financial system will have controls in place to be able to stop a transaction from happening or to block funds before it is too late. If the money is gone though then it is gone, unless there are other ways to recover it through law enforcement or if the hacker can be convinced to pay it back. If a theft in a financial system exposes a flaw, then improve the system going forward to prevent it from re-occurring which is fine. If you get caught with your pants down, take one for the team and the system moves on with integrity, trust and robustness intact. Even if one argues it is a good thing that people get their money back, it is not the best in the bigger scheme of things. Once mega business sees that the past can be changed, they will lose trust in the system. Remember that a party takes a position based on inforamtion at hand. If they want to take a serious position to the one side they need strong assurances that underlying things will not happen that pushes the outcome to the other side. Otherwise they will just take positions that sits on the fence or move elsewhere. If eth wants to compete with the mega word financial systems and markets, then the DAO funds is a drop in the ocean. it is not worth it to sacrifice the war to win a battle. I dont think it can be clearer and more focused than that. If you don't mind, let's take a real world example of your line of thought: the SWIFT system is getting hacked. The latest hack cost a Bangladesh bank $81 mil. "During 2016, dozens of banks have been hit through the SWIFT network, and lost hundreds of millions of dollars. The attackers have repeatedly overcome local security measures to get into the SWIFT system, then made money orders through the banks' SWIFT account, and sent millions to fraudulent accounts." (Wikipedia) I don't see reputational or stock price damage to banks. In fact one could argue that ETH could be superior to SWIFT because an $140 mil transfer to crooks can be selectively hardforked away, whereas under SWIFT, the money is gone. I find all this whining about the DAO hack to be hypocritical in the extreme because SWIFT is currently an active hack target transferring trillions. If 0.001% of the negative effort directed against the DAO and ETH was channeled towards bandaiding the SWIFT system of money transfer, maybe this contra ETH blah blah could being doing something useful. So to be polite, your line of reasoning is lame. To continue your analogy. It is becoming more acceptable that systems will be hacked. It is how you respond to an incident that matters. The SWIFT issue will not per se cause reputational damage because of the compromise but rather if transactions or ledgers or messages are meddled with. Banks also have few alternatives for global payments. The banks and SWIFT needs to fix the control issues around the system and move on. The preventative controls should have stopped the transactions in the first place. Law enforcement can recover the money subsequently if it is paid out past all the controls and was unlawful. The SWIFT messaging system remains intact in the process and that is the integrity and trust I refer to. A valid transaction that passes the rules must be processed and honored. If an upfront or supporting process fails and a message is sent you dont go and change the messages to recover the money but you rather take the knock and fix the process through a risk mitigation strategy. It is also possible to follow a risk transfer strategy to recover the money in such an event and then of course to hold enough pillar I capital. Similarly with the issue at hand it is a slippery slope to mess with the blockchain. As soon as you do that the centralized authorities that emerge that become the judge must then come up with policies of the conditions and attributes that similar transactions must comply with to be granted a fork eg. transactions over a certain value, transactions of a certain type etc. This is needed so that any contracts where there are a dispute can have a fair chance of being granted a fork to "fix" it. Also there must be a legal process to adjudicate over claims that transactions comply with those conditions and attributes especially since the code is not the law anymore after the fork - one party could say he did not do X and another he did do X etc. There is also the moral aspect going forward where certain communities/cultures/countries can see something as wrong where in another it is perfectly acceptable. Or just screw it all and recover the money and put the project on red and hope the ball does not land on black  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
