Questions.
1. Is StealthDevs, EmilioMann and deletebot the same person?
2. Did Stealthcoin developed XSTerminate?
3. If Stealthcoin was not involved with XSTerminate, does Stealthcoin condemn XSTerminate?
4. If yes, can Stealthcoin confirm that the bot will not steal user account details?
4.1 . If yes, can Stealthcoin explain the childish behavior of the the deletebot account?
If Stealthcoin deletes this question without answering, I will be forced to create a thread.
1. No 2. No, was a supporter from xst community who asked don't be identified 3. I don't know 4. steal user account details? Are you paranoid? No 4 is a legitimate question, and the answer should have been a simple yes or no, instead of directing personal insults my way. Just so you know, your questions are legitimate and it is not troll, fud or something repetitive. Just troll and fud are deleted. If my questions are legitimate, then why are you making personal attacks at me? @StealthDevs, your silence is deafening. |
|
|
|
Questions.
1. Is StealthDevs, EmilioMann and deletebot the same person?
2. Did Stealthcoin developed XSTerminate?
3. If Stealthcoin was not involved with XSTerminate, does Stealthcoin condemn XSTerminate?
4. If yes, can Stealthcoin confirm that the bot will not steal user account details?
4.1 . If yes, can Stealthcoin explain the childish behavior of the the deletebot account?
If Stealthcoin deletes this question without answering, I will be forced to create a thread.
1. No 2. No, was a supporter from xst community who asked don't be identified 3. I don't know 4. steal user account details? Are you paranoid? No 4 is a legitimate question, and the answer should have been a simple yes or no, instead of directing personal insults my way. |
|
|
|
sure, sure. I was asking for some positive/constructive comments since i still baghold worthless coins (i bought them as such) but also still believe their value could maybe be salvaged. Where are all the other bagholders?
I am sorry to tell you that you have nothing at this point. Even if someone was to resurrect it, it will have no market value because wolong is a known fraud and scammer 25 year old from singapore (maybe 26). Take it as a lesson and forget about it. that doesn't even matter. Coin can still be brought back to a small marketcap because it was technically good. All it needs is a dedicated community. First, you have to determine how many coins Wolong and his inner circle still hold. Without that information, Panda will always be at their mercy. Would you invest in a company where the biggest shareholders are crooks? Next, ask yourself if it's really worth your time to work on a clone coin that was only ever meant for the exchanges. I know everyone have dreams of going to the moon, but Panda never had any genuine real life utility or plans to achieve that. |
|
|
|
|
Questions.
1. Is StealthDevs, EmilioMann and deletebot the same person?
2. Did Stealthcoin developed XSTerminate?
3. If Stealthcoin was not involved with XSTerminate, does Stealthcoin condemn XSTerminate?
4. If yes, can Stealthcoin confirm that the bot will not steal user account details?
4.1 . If yes, can Stealthcoin explain the childish behavior of the the deletebot account?
If Stealthcoin deletes this question without answering, I will be forced to create a thread.
|
|
|
|
I don't really have a problem with whales, but I definitely think that they shouldn't be able to dictate the priority of development, the development requirements or the future of the coin..
The first few months of shadow I was completely oblivious to the fact that whales.. The more things progressed, the more people were offering funds to hire extra developers, managers, technical writers, journalists, etc.
The team has obviously grown, and it took me a while to realise I'm no longer able to make decisions on my own, but it seems to be moving forward. I really don't like the delayed open source thing, but I guess you need to protect investments for a bit.
The whales also tend to know allot about other whales, and obviously they've been in the game allot longer than late adopters, so they have very valuable input most of the time.
I would definitely enjoy developing allot more if there wasn't a direct monetary value, and if people didn't care about the price.
Some day people will realise that this is all epic research and experimentation, and that the monetary value is actually curbing the innovation, because they constantly asking are we there yet, and if you miss a deadline or there's a bug or a hack that the developers weren't in control of, the whales can put a massive dent in an entire communities investment.
What an impressive post. Speaks well of the kind of developer you are. In response to the OP's question, I think there are two types of whales. The first are the opportunists who make profits from natural market movements. I think we should welcome them with open arms. The second type are those who create coins, generate artificial hype, create pumps, and dumps their holdings before exiting the market. We should be wary of them, because they are capable of destroying cryptocurrency. |
|
|
|
please be careful from bittrex. I bought 50 balls and I can't put them for staking as bittrex asks for 15 BALLS withdrawal fee.
This is disgusting.
Before buying anything anywhere, check their fees.
...and also ask yourself: do I really want to put bitcoins in Spots' balls? You aren't really looking at a coin purse, you know.. This is a really painful image. @iGotSpots, get some pants on! Preferably one with pockets! |
|
|
|
If a community makes a black list, it won't hurt free speech. Posters will reform the way they post to avoid getting on a community blacklist. That would promote civil discourse over time, which is something sorely lacking from bitcointalk at the moment.
Behavior modification achieved through censorship and/or the threat of? Splendid. More power to anonymous devs! Reminds me of George Orwell's 1984. • "We do not merely destroy our enemies, we change them. Do you understand what I mean by that?" • "We do not destroy the heretic because he resists us; so long as he resists us we never destroy him. We convert him, we capture his inner mind, we reshape him." |
|
|
|
can someone break down in bullet points on who this spoetnik person is?
i saw someone mention about cryptsy?
He's the hero Bitcointalk.org deserves, but not the one it needs right now. Because he can't fit into the uniform. So we'll hunt him. Because he can take it. Because he's not our hero. Because he curses like a drunken sailor. He's a silent guardian. A watchful protector. A slightly overweight, sharp-tongued, but honest Canadian. |
|
|
|
If this was the playground you'ld be eating dirt Spoetnik.
You're lucky Evil Dave lives in Europe or he would do all sorts of sick Eurotrash chyieet to you.
I don't know about this. These Canadians, they sometimes hide an axe or two under their layers of coats - in case the temp dropped below freezing again. And those Frenchies, well, some of them will run from a fight faster than they screw (sorry Dave!  ) Either way...  Somehow I imagine Evil Dave is working in Amsterdam as a tattoo artist. Is this any basis in reality? He used a French term when addressing me a few weeks ago. Not conclusive, I know, but still... |
|
|
|
Will the exchanges lock accounts now? Are they required to by law? Or will their legal teams advise them to do so as a precaution?
Not unless they receive a written court order, and then, only if they are under the jurisdiction of United States' laws. |
|
|
|
i just want to know when to run.
I usually run in the mornings, but some prefer the evenings. It depends on your own schedule really. |
|
|
|
If this was the playground you'ld be eating dirt Spoetnik.
You're lucky Evil Dave lives in Europe or he would do all sorts of sick Eurotrash chyieet to you.
I don't know about this. These Canadians, they sometimes hide an axe or two under their layers of coats - in case the temp dropped below freezing again. And those Frenchies, well, some of them will run from a fight faster than they screw (sorry Dave! ) Either way... |
|
|
|
+1
Beware, there is less than a day before Bittrex release the 350btc FUNDS. This must be STOPPED!
Criteria to met before funds are released:
- Working Wallet
- Block Chain
- Explorer
I remember this scam, just as clearly as I remember the IRC session where Rami called me a communist, and how he was annoyed with me because I pointed out holes in the Cluster story. He even admitted to not reading the whitepaper, despite hosting the ICO. And there were a handful of trolls that day in the Bittrex channel that were flinging constant insults at me, including pool owners like Chisefu who hurled homophobic slurs in my direction. Good times. |
|
|
|
More details too much to ask?
In short mods are deleting proof that are clearly groups behind some coins who scam people on and on. Now Spoetnik lost his spirit finding his thread deleted. yup.. thx for being honest about that. i'm done with all this crap.. In memoriam of Spoetnik, the little bus that could.  Spoetnik may be rough around the edges, but meant well. |
|
|
|
1. I think IX's point is that demand is not constant and can move up or down. BTC has a constant supply generation that cant react to, nor cares about demand. If you have a moving demand, but the supply is fixed, then it's down to the other variable in the equation to take up the difference, which is price.
2. That is similar in parallel to Gold, except we know the supply parameters of BTC, we don't with Gold. The end result is the same though, no real control over supply of Gold just as with BTC, so the price is the only variable that can move.
3. Another similarity with BTC & Gold, is that while there is not control over supply, both can be bought and hoarded en mass leading to a bubble, and nothing can be done about it.
4. The above was one of the main reasons I decided to develop eMunie as opposed to doing something with BTC (plus the fact that the economic model is based on the medieval theory of "Value By Labour")
5. From a technical standpoint Bitcoin is genius. As a tool to kickstart to decentralization of wealth, its genius. From an economic standpoint, it sucks.
Fuserleer, I must confess that Ix's dismissive attitude towards Satoshi, Bitcoin and the community as a whole was what prompted me to engage him in the first place. 1. I've heard similar arguments before, and I was interested to see which direction he will take. Resolving the pressure of demand with inflation (creating new product units) diminishes both the real and perceived value of the product. I think we've all learned that from fiats, yes? 2. The single similarity doesn't really justify the "barf" remark. Bitcoin is revolutionary. It's a fact. 3. I think the same can be said of any product - unless someone has found a loophole in the law of supply and demand. 4. I take it you mean the labor theory of value? I am very interested to see how you've developed a currency model using ltv. I'll probably check it out. 5. I disagree. Bitcoin has lost one of its central tenets - decentralization, which has effectively crippled its wider adoption. However, Satoshi's entire model as a whole is still revolutionary, as was his code. Heh I noticed, he's been here as long as me, and probably taken as much shit. It wears you out  1. True inflation does erode the real and perceived value, but so does allowing demand to be countered by wild price swings and bubbles, as then no one has a damn clue what it should be worth. Ultimately that is the same thing, loss of faith, loss of value. 2. Perhaps not, and I agree for the most part that it is indeed a revolutionary technology. That doesn't mean though that it's got everything right, and something else isn't going to replace it that does a better overall job. Look at almost any technological innovation in history, the first out the door is nearly ALWAYS succeeded by something else bigger, faster, better. 3. There are no loopholes as such, but there are actions which you can take which cover the short term "bumps", yet allow the long term to pan out as the market commands. This is something I'm working on and is one of the unique features of eMunie (damn, I knew this thread would keep spiraling here  )
4. Yes I am referring to the Karl Manx labor theory of value, and no I haven't developed a model that uses it as its inefficient and not required for what our crypto "movement" as a whole is trying to achieve. I was stating that Bitcoin resembles very closes that theory, whether intended or not I do not know, but regardless it is a consequence of the POW used to secure the network. 5. Agree also, it has lost it, but that wasn't the point I was trying to make. It doesn't matter if it has lost that decentralized aspect or not, fact remains it kickstarted an entire industry which revolves around disruptive decentralized technology, so its still genius I misunderstood item 4. I thought you meant eMunie, when it was the other way around.  |
|
|
|
As far as I am concerned, I am responding directly to your statements. No, you aren't, you are responding to what you think I said. You conflated my opinions on bitcoin the protocol/code and bitcoin the economic system even though I carefully separated them. You also claimed that I said something like "satoshi fractured the community" which is definitely not what I said. I said he set a bad precedent - anonymous head of a pyramid scheme is what I was implying based on the prior sentence. I did not say that Satoshi fractured it, but that his precedent led to the inevitability of it. If you say so. |
|
|
|
rugrats, I'm not going to devolve way off topic with you. I was speaking to Fuserleer as someone who I know recognizes the same thing. I'm done arguing about bitcoin with fanatics, I spent about 2 years doing it already, feel free to look at the posting history of etlase2 (save the scammer that used it to scam someone recently after the purchase of it). My account being banned has nothing to do with it. I didn't miss the third part of your quote, it isn't relevant so I ignored it.
As far as I am concerned, I am responding directly to your statements. And thanks for calling me a Bitcoin fanatic - I feel all warm inside. I don't think I am going to scour through your post history just to find something that can substantiate your arguments. Also, the third part of my quote is relevant because it counters your accusation of Satoshi fracturing the community.
1. I think IX's point is that demand is not constant and can move up or down. BTC has a constant supply generation that cant react to, nor cares about demand. If you have a moving demand, but the supply is fixed, then it's down to the other variable in the equation to take up the difference, which is price.
2. That is similar in parallel to Gold, except we know the supply parameters of BTC, we don't with Gold. The end result is the same though, no real control over supply of Gold just as with BTC, so the price is the only variable that can move.
3. Another similarity with BTC & Gold, is that while there is not control over supply, both can be bought and hoarded en mass leading to a bubble, and nothing can be done about it.
4. The above was one of the main reasons I decided to develop eMunie as opposed to doing something with BTC (plus the fact that the economic model is based on the medieval theory of "Value By Labour")
5. From a technical standpoint Bitcoin is genius. As a tool to kickstart to decentralization of wealth, its genius. From an economic standpoint, it sucks.
Fuserleer, I must confess that Ix's dismissive attitude towards Satoshi, Bitcoin and the community as a whole was what prompted me to engage him in the first place. 1. I've heard similar arguments before, and I was interested to see which direction he will take. Resolving the pressure of demand with inflation (creating new product units) diminishes both the real and perceived value of the product. I think we've all learned that from fiats, yes? 2. The single similarity doesn't really justify the "barf" remark. Bitcoin is revolutionary. It's a fact. 3. I think the same can be said of any product - unless someone has found a loophole in the law of supply and demand. 4. I take it you mean the labor theory of value? I am very interested to see how you've developed a currency model using ltv. I'll probably check it out. 5. I disagree. Bitcoin has lost one of its central tenets - decentralization, which has effectively crippled its wider adoption. However, Satoshi's entire model as a whole is still revolutionary, as was his code. |
|
|
|
I completely and absolutely disagree.
Satoshi created a revolutionary currency model - if you call that a "bad precedent", perhaps you're on the wrong side of the wall. 1. It's not revolutionary, it copies gold with a highly accelerated timescale and the 2. inability to cope at all with demand. The concept and the structures realized in code - absolutely brilliant, no question. The monetary system - barf. There was no "community" before Satoshi - he built the community based on a generational leap in socioeconomics theory and cryptographic utility. 3. A community that has a few thousand people that will rabidly support bitcoin to the ends of the Earth and are unwilling to even discuss alternative systems without foaming, a few thousand more that are trying to engender their own rabid fanbase, and a bunch of people that are taken for a ride. Meh. A consensus-based unregulated digital currency that exists independent of the existing fiat currency system sans traditional gatekeepers, and as I've said earlier, based on a generational leap in socioeconomics theory and cryptographic utility - you barf at this as if even a remotely similar, competing technology exists before? Your have a strange definition of revolutionary. 2. "inability to cope at all with demand" Please elaborate. I''m curious to see which end you'll be leaning towards. It would be good if this doesn't veer towards your own crypto. 3. I realize your earlier account was banned, which would explain your intense dislike of the Bitcoin community as a whole. However, it doesn't change the fact that said community exists because of Satoshi. You originally accused Satoshi of "fracturing" the community, oblivious to the fact that he created the community and said "fracture" occurred long after he's left the scene. The fact that you keep returning here to promote your crypto shows you too want to leverage the knowledge/wealth of the community. Am I wrong? Further, I noticed you missed the third part of my quote. I'll just repost it to keep the discussion in perspective. Fyi, I'm excited to see how you will substantiate your rather extreme positions.
I think Satoshi set a very bad precedent, and he also knew it. Instead of uniting a community, it is totally fractured based on greed.
I completely and absolutely disagree. Satoshi created a revolutionary currency model - if you call that a "bad precedent", perhaps you're on the wrong side of the wall. There was no "community" before Satoshi - he built the community based on a generational leap in socioeconomics theory and cryptographic utility. As far as "fracturing" the community, Satoshi made his position quite clear during the early days with BitDNS (the precursor to Namecoin). I think it would be possible for BitDNS to be a completely separate network and separate block chain, yet share CPU power with Bitcoin. The only overlap is to make it so miners can search for proof-of-work for both networks simultaneously.
The networks wouldn't need any coordination. Miners would subscribe to both networks in parallel. They would scan SHA such that if they get a hit, they potentially solve both at once. A solution may be for just one of the networks if one network has a lower difficulty.
I think an external miner could call getwork on both programs and combine the work. Maybe call Bitcoin, get work from it, hand it to BitDNS getwork to combine into a combined work.
Instead of fragmentation, networks share and augment each other's total CPU power. This would solve the problem that if there are multiple networks, they are a danger to each other if the available CPU power gangs up on one. Instead, all networks in the world would share combined CPU power, increasing the total strength. It would make it easier for small networks to get started by tapping into a ready base of miners.
The advent and, subsequently, abuse and corruption of alternative cryptocurrencies is a byproduct of capitalism, human greed and the apathy of the forum administrators. |
|
|
|
No one with half a brain would take this talk by you even half serious after you pulled the old tried and tested (a billion times before) someone stole my bitcoin scam.
AFAIK he didn't close up shop and refuse to make any refunds afterwards, but the exact opposite... And to the OP, most of this stuff is common sense (although I don't get the tone or the point of 7), but there aren't many people with common sense on bctalk. As an outside observer of the bitcoin and altcoin economy, it makes a lot of sense if you viewed the whole thing as a pyramid scheme from the beginning. I think Satoshi set a very bad precedent, and he also knew it. Instead of uniting a community, it is totally fractured based on greed.I completely and absolutely disagree. Satoshi created a revolutionary currency model - if you call that a "bad precedent", perhaps you're on the wrong side of the wall. There was no "community" before Satoshi - he built the community based on a generational leap in socioeconomics theory and cryptographic utility. As far as "fracturing" the community, Satoshi made his position quite clear during the early days with BitDNS (the precursor to Namecoin). I think it would be possible for BitDNS to be a completely separate network and separate block chain, yet share CPU power with Bitcoin. The only overlap is to make it so miners can search for proof-of-work for both networks simultaneously.
The networks wouldn't need any coordination. Miners would subscribe to both networks in parallel. They would scan SHA such that if they get a hit, they potentially solve both at once. A solution may be for just one of the networks if one network has a lower difficulty.
I think an external miner could call getwork on both programs and combine the work. Maybe call Bitcoin, get work from it, hand it to BitDNS getwork to combine into a combined work.
Instead of fragmentation, networks share and augment each other's total CPU power. This would solve the problem that if there are multiple networks, they are a danger to each other if the available CPU power gangs up on one. Instead, all networks in the world would share combined CPU power, increasing the total strength. It would make it easier for small networks to get started by tapping into a ready base of miners.
The advent and, subsequently, abuse and corruption of alternative cryptocurrencies is a byproduct of capitalism, human greed and the apathy of the forum administrators. |
|
|
|
1. Yes, yes, yes! 2. All easily faked, unfortunately. 3. Yes. While a lot of people lie, most will usually wilt under scrutiny. Unless they are pathological liars or psychopaths. 4. Helpful, but inconclusive. 5. Yes. 6. Ooh, this stings! " No real developer, that was proud of what they were doing would run a project from here with a 1000 page thread" 7. You didn't number it, so I am having trouble responding. here are some tips for telling the difference between serious & fake developers:
I've been working on a possible scorecard, just for sh*ts and giggles: http://minkiz.co/posting/Cheers Graham Graham, I saw your response to a new member requesting for help on wallet nodes a few days ago. You took the time to write a lengthy response to him. I thought that was really nice of you. Was browsing from a phone at the time, so I couldn't commend your gesture then (typing with my thumbs tend to make English sound like Swahili). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
