What was the reason the wallet - that was 1 month ago 95% completed, a week ago it was 99% completed - still hasn't released yet? What is the status of software development terms of what modules being developed and what is the expected release time for each?
I understand from the new supreme cheerleader commander Jay Jay that the devs work very hard (we know they always do), the coin is very undervalued (yes it should be 1 billion US$ market cap by now given that 3 people work on it part time), the future is bright and and vericoin will do all great things to human kind, and I accept all usual cheerleading mantra ... but is it possible to get a meaningful update on the status of development (apart from that go and check the roadmap)?
Not checked in here for while but saw the wallet was meant to be released Sunday after I saw Doug hyping it. They just never learn when it comes to setting dates for projects to be completed. The fact you pointed out it was 95% a month pretty much discredits the whole roadmap and the little trust we have in the deadlines. You are quite right that better not to have a roadmap if the only outcome of the roadmap are unfulfilled expectations and endless disappointments in the lack of progress. I was also wondering, where is jl777 James? Are there any updates from him terms of VRC development? By now it is clear the jl777 effect on the price is exactly same as the altcoinUK or AnyRandomUser34753 effect (all of them have zero effect on price), he is obviously not the saviour of VRC as he presented himself, but does he work in the background with the VRC devs and if he does what is being developed? Jl777 is EXTREMELY BUSY with his other projects (latest one is ATOMIC) which are making him TONS of cash. No one can responsibly blame him for the obvious shortcomings of our dev team. He has, is and hopely will continue helping but, sorry Doug, at this stage having the issues you are having is amateur hour at the level of first year in high school. A joke. No wondrr, in spite of James, the price is starting to reflect it again. @pnosker - yes I am VERY interested in participating in that group buy discount in the IPO of the SuperNET. Barrabas, if you are able to characterize this in such a stark and derogatory way, then surely you have the knowledge required to assist us and can push updates to the github. If not then please do not insult us as if you do, it's disrespectful and unjustifiable without the required knowledge. |
|
|
|
Not checked in here for while but saw the wallet was meant to be released Sunday after I saw Doug hyping it. They just never learn when it comes to setting dates for projects to be completed. The fact you pointed out it was 95% a month pretty much discredits the whole roadmap and the little trust we have in the deadlines. While a couple images of the current design were posted last Saturday, there was very definitely no plan to release the wallet on that Sunday. The Devs have not released a date for the wallet; any dates mentioned by anyone other than the devs are pure speculation. well i have to say i got the same impression from the posts i read that the wallet would be comming in the next couple of days. On a related matter is the new Forum up yet? I had the same impression... We are currently debugging some minor formatting issues with the new UI that are operating system specific. Please be patient, we are working non-stop. |
|
|
|
Okay,
now that I know that my miner works correct i pointed it back to veripool and will try to be a bit more patient. But I still hope our questions will be answered. It would be great if the mining pool becomes a little bit more transparent.
Questions are best for pnosker, as he manages the pool. He is on IRC ( http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=%23vericoin&uio=d4), where it is easier to do troubleshooting, or you can send an email vericoin@vericoin.info. Also we have someone working on a new front end for the pool with stats and such. |
|
|
|
Sorry.. I have 'generated but not accepted interests' in my wallet since August.. how can i fix that? Thank you  Some of these are normal, many is not normal. If you are on a Mac try turning your screen saver off, the Mac OS disconnects from the network sometimes on screen saver. If you are not on mac, how many conflicted interest payments are you getting? Rough percentage. |
|
|
|
Wallet really looks refreshing, I noticed this new wallet doesn't use the same blue color as we have now .. I love vericoin blue!
Has the same blue, that is the highlight color and the logo color on this wallet still for sure. |
|
|
|
Pat, Doug and David Should we be working on getting different language packs for the wallet and Vericoin website translated into different languages? We could use a bounty system to get this done, English, French, German, Spanish, Chinese and Japanese should be the focus  I could do French! Yes new forums will have the home for VeriLeaders and we will do a program for this like you mentioned. Right on! |
|
|
|
Sneak peek of portion of the new wallet. We are putting in the finishing touches, and here is a taste of what's to come.  Is the stake number the REAL one or like before? This is the one from before. We would have to distribute new data to all the nodes in the network to get the pure coins staking. We will do this, but not on this update because it will come with the next protocol update. |
|
|
|
Sneak peek of portion of the new wallet. We are putting in the finishing touches, and here is a taste of what's to come. |
|
|
|
|
Hey guys,
Just wanted to give an update. New wallet is in final stages. Sneak peek at it is coming tomorrow. There is a few finishing touches, a little more testing, compilation for the three OSes, then we will release it. So we are at like 99% on that.
|
|
|
|
@ James
I read that one of the requirements to join the SuperNET is that SuperNET has to own 10% of the joining coin. I understand it is way too early at this point but since, initially, your requirement was 10% precisely to be bought at 10k sat, I am quite curious as to how do you envision that potential future transaction to go down and perhaps a schedule..?
Also, association and cross-promotion between coin projects are (today SYNC/PINK) and are going to continue being more and more extensive and frequent in the near future. Not exactly the same idea behind SuperNET but not altogether very distant either, how do you see that progressing and in which way, if in any, will those associations affect that project?
Thank you.
I do not worry myself over specific negotiations, this is done by TheWhale. Since the strategy is to invest in a coin prior to it being accepted and this being reflected in the market price, I would interpret that to mean that this marketprice is not known yet, as VRC is in the pre-acceptance stage. Now if the market becomes optimistic and makes the price too high, then this 10% is not achievable as the SuperNET funding is coming in on the low side anyway. I like to have a general idea of what I want to achieve, but not to predetermine every step, rather to observe the conditions at the moment in time when the decision must be made. Then to make a decision that is hopefully a wise one. In any case VRC is a unique situation due to the preexisting agreement and my personal involvement, so assuming any sort of standard thing is probably unwise. I do not fool myself into thinking I am able to predict anything 6 months out or even 6 days out. If two weeks ago you were to ask me about some big IPO, I would have thought you were talking about etherium as I did not even decide to do the SuperNET offering until two Saturday's ago. It just seemed the right thing to do as it solves a lot of the issues that need to be solved. I am not aware of any details of SYNC/PINK, but I am a supporter of any and all things that are helping crypto and I will do my best to make a wise decision on how to interact with these (or any other) projects. James P.S. OK, something just flashed in my mind and that is if there is this community fund of 10%, and SuperNET is making the big money like I expect in the coming months, then it will be able to afford to buy this 10% for BTC and/or UNITY and maybe this is what will happen? Just one of many possible outcomes, but one that feels like it will have a reinforcing effect to have the coin community owning a piece of SuperNET in exchange for SuperNET owning a piece of the coin. cryptorestu I think the coin communities owning a piece of SuperNET and SuperNET owning a share of the coin of each community is systemically near ideal, and potentially a very effective strategy for generating a feedback loop of growth and innovation. |
|
|
|
barabbas from VRC asked me a good question and makes me think that we might not need to be authorizing any extra UNITY for working capital needs, at least in the scenarios where SuperNET is growing in value. The NAV buywall is already authorized and assuming we will get weakhands to sell back at NAV, then this will be the extra UNITY that can be used. I am not sure what percentage this will be, but over time, I would not be surprised if it becomes ten percent. Like a stock buyback plan, the NAV buywall will be boosting earnings per asset while creating future working capital. However, I think that creating a Keiretsu between the coins that SuperNET invests in would be a good thing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KeiretsuIf the coin purchases are a mix of BTC and UNITY, then this creates financial incentives for each community to enhance the value of UNITY similar to how SuperNET owning the coin incentivizes maximizing the coin's value. cryptorestu Just an idea. To be able to do this, it would make sense to issue some extra UNITY Please think about this so when the time for voting comes the important questions have been asked and answered James I think regarding incentives, accomodating human nature and balance of the system, this makes a lot of sense. |
|
|
|
I know Crindon gave a sizable amount. (He was part of the pump team with Patrick and others in June / July, He gave a very nice public donation to Patrick after he sold out.) I am sure many others didn't want there donations known (Wizrig and others), but maybe its time to mention any side accounts, or family members who have profited from this? In the name of transparency. Maybe friends of friends have large accounts they are trading? We know Doug, and Patrick both have relatives invested in the coin. We have heard that you 3 dev's don't trade, but that leaves the door open for family / friends, and these new teammates, who have made the price jump on so little as speculation.
We already know "anon" dev 4 is a coin trader with a personal stash of at least 200k VRC by his words recently. He makes big profits, and big plans around buying / selling / developing. I don't care how ethical you may think he is, anonymous is not ethical. Nor what he, and his team may be doing behind the scenes with the momentum created from his own doing.
Greed is a temptress. If you're not one of the few people "in the know" I would be extremely careful of hoping for a future promise to come to fruition. But by all means, ride the waves, take profits on the momentum. You will ensure that the anon dev cannot take your profits when he is ready to fade back into the shadows for whatever reason he decides when its time to pull the plug.
Pat already addressed nearly everything regarding this. I did receive one tip of .2 BTC from Wizrig once for my work on the wallet, when I was up all night working on it. I actually told him after that I wasn't comfortable receiving tips like this. I would rather just put the work in to improving VeriCoin, it's value and that be my reward. This way I don't feel obligated to do anything in any way (he never asked me to do anything for him though). I also have all my mined coins and bought some on the market and I am holding for the long run. Friends and family are also holding for long run. |
|
|
|
I think we should not stake until we've raised what James considers to be a suitable amount. As this was originally intended to be a fundraising activity until we reach 2.7 million VRC, I think he can call the shots as to when we have enough in the escrow. When that happens, we will audit the donations and get both corresponding VRC and BTC addresses for each donor. That way we can split the share evenly, with precision, and know how to refund the coins. Right now, we just have a VRC address. Ultimately we will need a BTC address to pay the 10k satoshi/VRC payment. But if we start staking, the blockchain gets confusing and we really need it to be as simple as possible to track.
If my calculations are correct, there is no need to actually convert to BTC to pay people. You can pay them in VRC just returned to them. (Ex. 50,000*.5*.0001=2.5BTC, 2.5BTC buys 5000 VRC @ .0005.). Thus just return 5000 VRC to the originator and no need to sell VRC and pay in BTC. Or, actually an even better method is just use whatever the VRC price is AT THE TIME of the end of year distribution. If after 1 year the price is .0006, then your 2.5BTC of value would represent 4166 VRC plus the 1150 of interest. The key being it's not too difficult to add in the interest portion to each address once we are done with all donating for this project. Yeah I agree we don't need a BTC address, that was the original intent for simplicity. Also drkman if you would be willing to build up the spreadsheet (which would help tremendously) then I would be happy to bring the coins online periodically to earn the interest accrued via coinage. This is also another incentive to make the pot bigger as the community would be getting some significant interest payments over time. |
|
|
|
Ok Doug can you lay it out because there seems to be some confusion here  We are integrating with SuperNET, working with James on a special project specifically for VeriCoin, I am a trustee of the SuperNET escrow, but the core coin final vote has not occured yet. However this doesn't change our special positioning in SuperNET it reflects that some things are not yet complete and we are in a very good position. Thank you for clarifying Doug...can you also clarify what Vericoin's special position is in the SuperNET. Thanks again James' envisioned role for VeriCoin is mostly the entry point from the fiat world into crypto and the SuperNET. Our role will be accessing new users from the non crypto market in addition to the crypto market. This is a unique position and compatible with our vision for VeriCoin originally. Now it would be with a more substantial infrastructure under which this may flourish to unseen levels, while also enabling access to some of the best cutting edge blockchain tech. |
|
|
|
Ok Doug can you lay it out because there seems to be some confusion here We are integrating with SuperNET, working with James on a special project specifically for VeriCoin, I am a trustee of the SuperNET escrow, but the core coin final vote has not occured yet. However this doesn't change our special positioning in SuperNET it reflects that some things are not yet complete and we are in a very good position. |
|
|
|
So if I understand correctly, VRC is not in the superNET core, but it will simply integrate superNET into it's wallet, am I right?
It is in testing now, it will be in the core afaik. Pnosker confirmed that Vericoin will be a Core Coin!The current core coins are Bitcoin, Litecoin, Darkcoin, BitcoinDark and now Vericoin What? Those are not superNET core coins ... you guys are probably talking about the MGW. MGW !== superNET the superNET core coins are Nxt, BTCD and BBR, afaik. And only James can make the superNET core announcement, otherwise that would result in disqualification. I think there is some confusion about this. We are not at this point core. |
|
|
|
So if I understand correctly, VRC is not in the superNET core, but it will simply integrate superNET into it's wallet, am I right?
A vote which has not occured yet will decide which coins are in the core. Though I think we have a very strong position going forward. James asked me to head up a trustee committee to setup a multisig escrow of the SuperNET ICO BTC earnings. Multisig would require maybe 4 to 6 trusted individuals to simultaneously sign for release of funds after voting. We will be contacting some trusted developers of some of the top coins to join us. See link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=762346.msg8751306#msg8751306 |
|
|
|
[Escrow Solution]
The following is an escrow process that would make investors (including myself!) trust that the funds are safe, at least I think so. First the easy part, Azeh (the founder of BTCD) has agreed to be the Trustee for the BTCD raised and bter has agree to be the Trustee for the CNY raised. Due to the smallish amounts of BTCD and CNY compared to the rest, I dont think there should be any issues with this allocation. effectsToCause, the founder of VRC, has graciously agreed to help reach out to more coin founders to create a trustable group of Trustees. It is very happy for me to see all the different coin founders working together in the spirit of UNITY. I have posted at length about the procedure to make a spending request, I wont repeat all that here. The key is to separate the deciding of allowing a spend from the people that are holding the funds. There will be a spending authorization committee of 7 trusted members, an Approver and the set of trusted members who hold the funds. When the Requestor (currently me, but this is a spot that can easily be taken over by anyone, just ask!) posts a spending request, the Authorization committee members would verify that everything is in order, eg. it is following the spending rules or election results, and post a token with their approval. If 4 approvals are received, the Approver validates the tokens and posts the Approval of the spending request. At this point, the Approver will PM all the trustees with a Spending authorized message with URL to the post authorizing it in this thread. An available trustee would verify the official thread to make sure there are no strangenesses (the everyone taken over by aliens scenario) and posts his availability. Immediately, the Approver posts approval of the specific trustee to make payment. then txid is posted and Approver PM's all the trustees (and posts) that the authorized spending #tbd has been paid. With this method, the Approver is the only one that is doing a lot of work and lucky for me I cannot be the approver as I am the Requestor The trustees just have to check their messages and if they see an spending approval #tbd without a matching paid PM, they click the URL, verify it is in the official thread here and that there are no aliens, posts availability, sends funds, posts txid All other trustees can just ignore a matched pair. In practice, this is the duty of a Trustee other than safekeeping funds: 1. get PM about approved spending 1b. if "funds sent" PM is also there, just ignore 2. verify it is not fake and there is no controversy 3. post availability to send funds 4. when approval is posted, send funds and post txid (*) If 2 of 3 multisig is used, then two Trustees for a slice will need to coordinate There is a division of responsibilities and powers. No one is allowed to be more than one of Requestor, Authorization, Approver, Trustee. The specific people who are filling these roles will be listed in the OP. The amounts for these two currencies are relatively small, so I dont think this is an issue. This leaves the NXT and BTC and I have reached out to other coin creators and known escrowers for the Trustee positions, the NXT community is selecting the 7 Authorization committee members. If you would like to apply to be an Authorization committee member, please post in https://nxtforum.org/index.php?topic=5181.0This issue of a safe way to escrow the massive amount of funds has not been a simple one to solve. I believe getting the help from other coin devs will be a very good solution as this shows the spirit of UNITY and if we cant trust the core dev's of top coins, then who can we trust? Of course I welcome any feedbacks! James #### SuperNET EscrowsRequestor - jl777 Authorization Committee of 7: <selection process pending> Approver - <position offered> Trustees: CNY - Bter BTCD - Azeh BTC/NXT - effectsToCause (VRC), coinsolidation (BTM) ... Hi all, I am beginning communications with some high level, community trusted developers, of some of the top coins. My hope is they will join us as trustees and the funds can be multisig protected and controlled, as this is absolutely required. I think James' vision of unity and network collaboration is a winning vision, and will likely be instrumental in bringing digital currency and decentralization to those who don't know it exists, while greatly enhancing key social systems such as money, to those who do. Doug |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
