|
2
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: IOTA - Unmoderated thread
|
on: February 28, 2017, 07:22:10 PM
|
Could you elaborate?
I already did, you're getting tiresome. ramble ramble Yeah see you in 6 months when IOTA is still shit and has even more bigger promises for you. Don't be upset about the debate. The IOTA shills and core players like to troll anybody who dare to interrupt the noble cause of luring money from idiots. The business model is rather simple: get as much money from the poorly informed naives and noobs as possible by talking up the coin price with all kind of nonsenses like the Microsoft Azure "partnership". As a side effect of the scam at least David try to create something tangible. We must acknowledge that as a rare and admirable quality in the cryptocurrency swamp. Nothing is black and white. Even the scammy IOTA could end up as a positive development if they develop a novel solution. You are correct about PoW. There is no place for PoW in IoT. More generally speaking, the applicability of blockchain within IoT is limited. I described the issues of blockchain with IoT at the beginning of this topic in many posts. |
|
|
|
|
3
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Do you think "iamnotback" really has the" Bitcoin killer"?
|
on: February 28, 2017, 06:50:08 PM
|
Buyer buys a software token. He gets what he buys on that day same as any other owner of tokens selling his copy of the software, not future promises. A free market.
Is it the same model that David and CfB did with IOTA, labelling the token as a software? Ostensibly IOTA sold future promises, a timeline, etc. Afaik, the IOTA blockchain software wasn't even running live when they sold tokens. Afaik, it wasn't even possible transfer tokens to another party for some time until after tokens were sold. True. I didn't consider this point. To provide with you income I assume your tokens would come from a premine. Premine should be OK in this corrupt swamp what cryptocurrency movement became. You will not be able to get a lot of distributed coins without doing significant work (or paying someone to for you). In essence my distribution scheme is a "proof of work" but not a computational Proof-of-work.
Several developers have been working on this. Some try to attach charitable activity to the coin. Others require large amount of verifiable artistic work. Satoshi's proof of work leads to centralization of influence and it is clearly a problematic method. With your skills you should be able to create a competitive and attractive method. |
|
|
|
|
4
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Do you think "iamnotback" really has the" Bitcoin killer"?
|
on: February 27, 2017, 01:30:44 PM
|
Buyer buys a software token. He gets what he buys on that day same as any other owner of tokens selling his copy of the software, not future promises. A free market.
Is it the same model that David and CfB did with IOTA, labelling the token as a software? In the past you were very critical of the IOTA software sell approach by saying such packaging is still violation of certain financial regulations mainly in the US. Right now I have no view what is wrong or right terms of legality, just try to understand your approach. Personally, I welcome you don't take the ICO route and I am sure many will do and support you, but what is the difference if you premine and sell the coins as a "software". |
|
|
|
|
5
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Martin Armstrong Discussion
|
on: February 27, 2017, 01:19:41 PM
|
|
Anyone who day trade on the stock market and buy subscription from Armstrong - I do both - understand that Armstrong is pretty much useless for traders. His political and historical views are entertaining, his view could provide some contextual information. Thus, the subscription worth the little money what he charges, but from a day trader viewpoint he is useless. He couldn't even get right the recent Trump rally where even an idiot could make infinite money by moving the stop losses up. Never mind stock trading which is a difficult one, but Armstrong was wrong about everything like Brexit and Trump. Still, a smart fellow on some subjects like history and perhaps on understanding the nature and implications of sovereign debt crisis.
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: IOTA - Unmoderated thread
|
on: February 27, 2017, 01:08:58 PM
|
Only fake news to dump your worthless IOTA to newbies, you greedy bastard.
That's very true from day one and the amount shilling in this thread indicates there is no change in that department. On the other hand, it seems at least David tries to create something tangible using the scammed money. The idiots and noobs who gave money to David could see the process as a crowdfunding exercise - they crowdfunded an ambitious and reasonably novel project. |
|
|
|
|
7
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: IOTA - Unmoderated thread
|
on: January 20, 2017, 02:58:34 PM
|
Please, before commenting, try to understand what people are writing about. You obviously didn't care to read my previous posts, to understand the context. Just for your information, I was not comparing Byteball to IOTA at all. In the quoted post I was merely replying to a person who told Byteball was easy to setup, thats the only reason I mentioned Byteball at all. I know Websocket and HTTP have no problems with NAT. But discussing Byteball connection method was out of my interest, and my posts were made barely about Iota, as I was interested in setting up a IOTA node behind NAT, and needed some info. I am glad you were able to look into the Github of BB and understand some things, regardless of your old age. That is great, but looks like your temper became worse with those years, and your manners are far from being the finest too. EDIT: well, a wild guess... your Russian roots could explain a lot  "complete nonsense", "plain stupid" - those sentenses remind me of the style of V I.Lenin's "philosophical" discussions. Did you read them a lot back then?  If not, then probably your teachers (in university or elsewhere) were poisoned with that style. You're absolutely correct. I didn't read your post fully, I read the first 1-2 sentences and jumped into conclusion without caring too much and understanding what you are saying. I was wrong too about the Byteball networking code. I checked it further and it doesn't use websockets. Doesn't matter a lot in this swamp of average 20 years old pathetic trolls who says what, but for the record I am just admitting, I was wrong about the Byteball code too. About the reading of Lenin, I can certainly claim a great experience in the subject  In Marx & Engles too. Thus I am a big opponent of totalitarian systems what Lenin and his comrades promoted. Thus I had high hopes for cryptocurrencies and blockchain. I couldn't foresee that charlatans, ICO bandits, fraudsters and criminals like Ryan Kennedy from Mintpal will take over blockchain. |
|
|
|
|
9
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: IOTA - Unmoderated thread
|
on: January 18, 2017, 04:45:09 PM
|
I can see you wrote this: the rich get ALL of the Byteball practically and the poor get basically nothing even though they put in the same effort.
What the distribution of Byteball was? How the rich could get more coins? To me yes. It is worse than a " fair ICO " the rich take the bulk of the coins as usual but this time there is no need to pay like with an ICO. You just magically take all the coins just because you are BTC rich with no risk at all to your BTC stash. Imagine all new alts distributed like this. Utterly unfair. Having said that I do not at all consider IOTA a fair ICO so both need to be cloned and distributed in a more appropriate manner. I see. I didn't know that Byteball was distributed based on BTC balance. Yes that is bollocks, I agree. |
|
|
|
|
11
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: IOTA - Unmoderated thread
|
on: January 18, 2017, 04:22:14 PM
|
Heavily supporting Byteball? I would read that again I am fully against Byteballs distributional model and have called for a clone and for it to be distributed more fairly.
Ok, sorry, I can see right now you are not impressed from Byteball. I am not up to date here lately. I clicked on your posts and it seemed you were complimentary about Byteball, but now I see you posted opinions like this: "I guarantee this project will be a pariah". That is not a compliment Shelby (the III) just said I have reading issues. Must be true then I am reading the Byteball white paper, it seems some way a good project. What is the problem with the distribution of Byteball if it was a free distribution model? |
|
|
|
|
12
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: IOTA - Unmoderated thread
|
on: January 18, 2017, 04:05:25 PM
|
Sorry to be the broken record this time, but is there any news as of late? Discussions and posts have slowed down the past few days here, on chat and in the official IOTA forum.
This is the community's responsibility. They can't expect a handful of people to create the tech, do all the marketing, do all the branding, do all the adoption work etc. and also be responsible for how active the current holders of IOTA is. Everyone should be doing their community part. A community cannot be established without the ability to exchange Iota, plain and simple. People will step up to fill specific roles but without Iota changing hands, users are stagnant. Rlh is far from a troll or inactive community member so I find your response a bit overly defensive and inappropriate. Ah, I see, this is why I was in touch with so many projects and start-ups for Ethereum half a year before launch, gotcha. LoL Scammer David boy has realised that not one real IoT business gives a monkey's about his crypto nonsense - no wonder nobody care as there is no IOTA IoT system nor ever will one exists, and the blockhain for IoT is a dead end proposition anyway -, so he is starting to blame the community for not creating the ecosystem. The scammer lured out $500k from the idiots, and then he blames the clueless investors - who bought the IOTA tokens for purely speculation purposes - for not creating an IoT ecosystem. The IOTA "investors" (i.e. idiots) know no more about IoT than my grandmother did before she died in 1969, but the scammer David boy expects the clueless "investors" make the IoT dream a reality. No startups makes any money in IoT, even more established businesses like Thingworx with its limitless resources unable to make any money in the sector, but the scammer blames the community for not delivering what he promised he will deliver. As I said from the beginning, there is zero chance a scammer who hides in the shithole of Belarus and a 27 years old wanker with zero relevant industry experience could make money with a blockchain solution in the corporate driven and hugely political IoT sector. Absolutely zero chance. No wonder there is zero progress in the IoT front since October when they presented the blatant IOTA IoT lie as nobody in the IoT world cares about the nonsenses of these two scammers. Still, the the scammer David boy blames the community for his total failure. What a wanker. Notice he spells realised not realized as the new altcoinUK. This is hacked or stolen for sure. Sure, and he spells sometimes organisation and other time organization, or centralisation vs centralization. What a fucking effective investigative journalist you would be I can see now that you are heavily supporting Byteball. I was not bashing Byteball. Bytaball seems a very nice project though I know very little about it, only what I read in the last 30 minutes. The Byteballs developers delivered a lot which is admirable. It is also admirable the Bytaball project was not distributed via an ICO. Still the websocket based networking of Bytaball is inferior to a peer to peer solution what normally a cryptocurrency project aims to be. Bitcoin, Skycoin, Ethereum, Gadgetcoin, most cryptocurrencies including IOTA aim to be a permissionless solution. The websocket based Byteball is not that. |
|
|
|
|
13
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: IOTA - Unmoderated thread
|
on: January 18, 2017, 03:46:00 PM
|
because they always delete my posts
The nodes outside of the lan don't have to connect to you, if you want run a local node/wallet. They only have to know your public ip in order to "allow" your access.
But the nodes you are connecting to have to be public, of course...
Edit: if you want to make your computer public available you have to configure your routers routing tables.
Thanks a lot for the answer! So the two nodes behind different NAT servers have no chance to connect. If I have my PC behind a NAT, and have no access to router to configure it, I have to search for peers running on public machines only... It looks like people should specify whether whey run public IP or not, when they ask for nodes in nodesharing channel... so there will be less issues. One more question: lets say I have access to router, so can forward traffic to my PC, but I do not want to forward all the traffic. Which port should I forward, so IOTA wallet can be connected from outside? In other words, which ports IOTA uses? Is it one port or many? TCP or UDP? Thanks for help. I know if this goes to technical, I'll have to go to Slack... I did not try IOTA, but with byteball there's no problem to run within a subnet, behind the NAT. The nodes communicate well and have no issue. Maybe I should try IOTA for that too. I also have Byteball wallet successfully running in a LAN behind a NAT... Actually with Byteball its easy, as it just works. With IOTA it would be tricky, as you have to manually find nodes, which are nowhere publicly available. You have to go to Slack, ask for nodes and somehow make sure you find only peers who run node on machines directly connected to Internet and running public IP address... As you need to find 5-9 nodes of that kind (involving a chat with every other node owner, just to find out whether he runs public IP or not and whether he agrees to connect to node like yours, expect about a week of setup time I am not complaining, as I understand it is the way it is, and there are good reasons for removal of auto peer discovery and introducing this notorious manual node search instead. For me the tech part is easy, chat part is tiresome. Hopefully light wallet comes soon. Do you realize what you are banging on about is plain stupid? I am a pernsioner old man and not a developer anymore, but even I can see the Byteball project uses this library https://github.com/bitpay/bitcore-p2p/blob/master/lib/peer.js. As you can see the bitcore peer module connects to the Bitcoin network via a websocket server. Websocket is a centralized solution. Meanwhile if I understood correctly the IOTA peers connect to each other directly without a central service provider. You compare apples with oranges. Do you realize at all that there is no NAT traversal needed as the websocket uses the HTTP protocol? https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6455 I am a long time critics of IOTA, but what you are banging on about is a complete nonsense. You are asking why a peer cannot be as convenient as a centralized, websocket based solution. Normally there is a tradeoff between usability and security. This is 100% NOT altcoinUK. This persons first language is certainly not English. Notify mods this is a hacked or stolen account and should be flagged. Wow you guys sink lower and lower. Nobody hacked the account. Everyone knows here my family is originally from Russia, and even I live in the UK English was never my first language. |
|
|
|
|
16
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: IOTA - Unmoderated thread
|
on: January 18, 2017, 03:32:05 PM
|
because they always delete my posts
The nodes outside of the lan don't have to connect to you, if you want run a local node/wallet. They only have to know your public ip in order to "allow" your access.
But the nodes you are connecting to have to be public, of course...
Edit: if you want to make your computer public available you have to configure your routers routing tables.
Thanks a lot for the answer! So the two nodes behind different NAT servers have no chance to connect. If I have my PC behind a NAT, and have no access to router to configure it, I have to search for peers running on public machines only... It looks like people should specify whether whey run public IP or not, when they ask for nodes in nodesharing channel... so there will be less issues. One more question: lets say I have access to router, so can forward traffic to my PC, but I do not want to forward all the traffic. Which port should I forward, so IOTA wallet can be connected from outside? In other words, which ports IOTA uses? Is it one port or many? TCP or UDP? Thanks for help. I know if this goes to technical, I'll have to go to Slack... I did not try IOTA, but with byteball there's no problem to run within a subnet, behind the NAT. The nodes communicate well and have no issue. Maybe I should try IOTA for that too. I also have Byteball wallet successfully running in a LAN behind a NAT... Actually with Byteball its easy, as it just works. With IOTA it would be tricky, as you have to manually find nodes, which are nowhere publicly available. You have to go to Slack, ask for nodes and somehow make sure you find only peers who run node on machines directly connected to Internet and running public IP address... As you need to find 5-9 nodes of that kind (involving a chat with every other node owner, just to find out whether he runs public IP or not and whether he agrees to connect to node like yours, expect about a week of setup time I am not complaining, as I understand it is the way it is, and there are good reasons for removal of auto peer discovery and introducing this notorious manual node search instead. For me the tech part is easy, chat part is tiresome. Hopefully light wallet comes soon. Do you realize what you are banging on about is plain stupid? I am a pernsioner old man and not a developer anymore, but even I can see the Byteball project uses this library https://github.com/bitpay/bitcore-p2p/blob/master/lib/peer.js. As you can see the bitcore peer module connects to the Bitcoin network via a websocket server. Websocket is a centralized solution. Meanwhile if I understood correctly the IOTA peers connect to each other directly without a central service provider. You compare apples with oranges. Do you realize at all that there is no NAT traversal needed as the websocket uses the HTTP protocol? https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6455 I am a long time critics of IOTA, but what you are banging on about is a complete nonsense. You are asking why a peer cannot be as convenient as a centralized, websocket based solution. Normally there is a tradeoff between usability and security. |
|
|
|
|
17
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: IOTA - Unmoderated thread
|
on: January 18, 2017, 03:29:09 PM
|
You could be correct Sergey. We will see. I am annoyed from the slow process too. The devs say they will deliver the software what was promised. They released lots of software last year, open sourced and the app is functional, which is positive and lot more what others do.
Hm, either real altcoinUK sold his account or your marasmus senilis has progressed too much... No, not at all. I am supporting innovative projects or developers who I think can deliver. I do support Skycoin, Gadgetcoin, and of course Bitcoin. I was one of the first investors in Ethereum, check back in 2014 my predictions about Ethereum and why smart contract will be game changer. Everyone became rich who followed my advice about Ethereum. Though I had quitted this year ETH when the scammers and greed took it over. I supported the APEX boys in Moscow (turned out they are not serious at all). I supported Vericoin before it was obvious they are a bunch of wankers. I like crowdfunding and supporting good developers. I might start supporting IOTA if you keep delivering. All my predictions were spot on about IOTA terms of market, IoT and software, but I admire you and David are still working on IOTA. I have to admit that is lot more than it was anticipated. How would you support IOTA? I might use the software in some IoT installation. Or I might buy the software? Still there is not a lot blockchain based IoT software available. |
|
|
|
|
18
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: IOTA
|
on: January 18, 2017, 03:27:52 PM
|
The nodes outside of the lan don't have to connect to you, if you want run a local node/wallet. They only have to know your public ip in order to "allow" your access.
But the nodes you are connecting to have to be public, of course...
Edit: if you want to make your computer public available you have to configure your routers routing tables.
Thanks a lot for the answer! So the two nodes behind different NAT servers have no chance to connect. If I have my PC behind a NAT, and have no access to router to configure it, I have to search for peers running on public machines only... It looks like people should specify whether whey run public IP or not, when they ask for nodes in nodesharing channel... so there will be less issues. One more question: lets say I have access to router, so can forward traffic to my PC, but I do not want to forward all the traffic. Which port should I forward, so IOTA wallet can be connected from outside? In other words, which ports IOTA uses? Is it one port or many? TCP or UDP? Thanks for help. I know if this goes to technical, I'll have to go to Slack... I did not try IOTA, but with byteball there's no problem to run within a subnet, behind the NAT. The nodes communicate well and have no issue. Maybe I should try IOTA for that too. I also have Byteball wallet successfully running in a LAN behind a NAT... Actually with Byteball its easy, as it just works. With IOTA it would be tricky, as you have to manually find nodes, which are nowhere publicly available. You have to go to Slack, ask for nodes and somehow make sure you find only peers who run node on machines directly connected to Internet and running public IP address... As you need to find 5-9 nodes of that kind (involving a chat with every other node owner, just to find out whether he runs public IP or not and whether he agrees to connect to node like yours, expect about a week of setup time I am not complaining, as I understand it is the way it is, and there are good reasons for removal of auto peer discovery and introducing this notorious manual node search instead. For me the tech part is easy, chat part is tiresome. Hopefully light wallet comes soon. Do you realize what you are banging on about is plain stupid? I am a pernsioner old man and not a developer anymore, but even I can see the Byteball project uses this library https://github.com/bitpay/bitcore-p2p/blob/master/lib/peer.js. As you can see the bitcore peer module connects to the Bitcoin network via a websocket server. Websocket is a centralized solution. Meanwhile if I understood correctly the IOTA peers connect to each other directly without a central service provider. You compare apples with oranges. Do you realize at all that there is no NAT traversal needed as the websocket uses the HTTP protocol? https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6455 I am a long time critics of IOTA, but what you are banging on about is a complete nonsense. You are asking why a peer cannot be as convenient as a centralized, websocket based solution. Normally there is a tradeoff between usability and security. |
|
|
|
|
20
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: IOTA - Unmoderated thread
|
on: January 18, 2017, 02:34:11 PM
|
You could be correct Sergey. We will see. I am annoyed from the slow process too. The devs say they will deliver the software what was promised. They released lots of software last year, open sourced and the app is functional, which is positive and lot more what others do.
Hm, either real altcoinUK sold his account or your marasmus senilis has progressed too much... No, not at all. I am supporting innovative projects or developers who I think can deliver. I do support Skycoin, Gadgetcoin, and of course Bitcoin. I was one of the first investors in Ethereum, check back in 2014 my predictions about Ethereum and why smart contract will be game changer. Everyone became rich who followed my advice about Ethereum. Though I had quitted this year ETH when the scammers and greed took it over. I supported the APEX boys in Moscow (turned out they are not serious at all). I supported Vericoin before it was obvious they are a bunch of wankers. I like crowdfunding and supporting good developers. I might start supporting IOTA if you keep delivering. All my predictions were spot on about IOTA terms of market, IoT and software, but I admire you and David are still working on IOTA. I have to admit that is lot more than it was anticipated. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
