Guys I'd like XMR and hodl some. But what about new alts as Spectre and Sumo for example? And I think we see new in this year. Can XMR successfully compete with such novics? Yes, great XMR community and solid history are good. But young and ambitious coins may well crowd out veterans  What you think? I think you should learn about how privacy coins work instead of asking the speculation thread. If you believe low cap and potential are synonymous and that every claim is attainable, you are going to buy a lot of shitcoins. Research cryptography and how crypotcurrencies work rather than letting some shill tell you how, "____coin has the best privacy ever!" based on nothing but some anonymous dev who can't even explain how it will work, nor the last project he/she worked on. If it sounds too good to be true, ask for a whitepaper and check with someone you trust to see if it passes the smell test. If someone is telling you don't need proof or that the returns are too big to pass up on, they are likely just trying to get you to buy their bags and don't care what happens to you or your savings. Buyer Beware should be too obvious to need repeating, but greed and naiveté gets the best of even the most rational investor/speculator when they are first getting into crypto. |
|
|
|
Thanks for all these updates generalizethis. Really appreciate it.
Imo IOTA is by far one of the safest bets out there. Probably it will still take some time until people realize that. At the end of Q1 most will have gotten it I think.
Thank you. Feel like cryptimus prime did us all a favor with this thread and keeping the news flowing is the least I could do in return. IOTA's e-crown proposal: https://www.nyteknik.se/tekniknyheter/article6893800.ece/BINARY/IOTA%20Foundation |
|
|
|
Hahahaha! I see that guide was created because you were screeching about Dash being garbage when it was $7.00 a coin, back in April of 2016. Value rose to almost $1500 a coin before the end of last year. Sick call! Hope isn't a plan. How will the flaws be fixed? And don't sell me by the same genius who built them into the coin. Show me a plan, a white paper, anything but marketing spiel and vague promises. Amateur hour is over.
Does that sound familiar everyone? Same things he was saying about Dash are the same things he keeps saying about XSpec. Amateur hour indeed. Dash is still a shitcoin and evolution turned out to be a lot of hot air--guess what that reminds me off. But dash did create masternodes, which is brilliant at keeping coins off the market, so at least they had a working innovation that they could put a white paper to, unlike some other shitcoins. |
|
|
|
Generalizethis is a Monero shill who comes into every XSPEC thread, and most other privacy coins, to discredit them. Just check his post history, he is bias just like everyone else. It should tell you something if hes so scared of Stealth Staking. He claims this could land XSPEC into the Top 20 of coins if its successfully implemented. My bet? I'll keep what I have in XSPEC and roll the dice. Could the developers be dishonest? Of course. You lose some money and move on. However, if Generalizethis is correct, if Stealth Staking is properly implemented XSPEC is going to explode in value. It would be the first coin with stealth staking, making it much more valuable than Monero (Monero is a great investment as well).
Regarding the FUD that he is spreading, ask yourself this: Why would a developer, who is funded by community donations alone, release how they figured out Stealth Staking before actually implementing it? That just gives the chance for more properly funded teams to use the tech and implement it before XSPEC has the chance. Why would a team completely give up their competitive advantage just to please some people spreading FUD on a forum? They wouldn't, and I wouldn't expect them to. So my view is that I'm going to invest into XSPEC believing that they are true to their word. Worse comes to worst I lose my initial investment if I don't take profits along the way. Best case scenario? XSPEC explodes and a bunch of money is to be made. All investments are gambles, and from what I've seen the developer say on XSPEC discussions I'm going to take him for his word since they've delivered so far. XSPEC is already a working coin with default stealth addresses coming soon. The team claims they will release Stealth Staking and a sort of Whitepaper for Stealth Staking targeted for Q2 of this year. Not too long to wait.
Feel free to believe the FUD, or take a gamble like you do on all other investments, and have the opportunity to get an early adopter advantage on a coin that could be easily a top coin if the developer follows the roadmap. Always do your own research.
I see you've been reading my guide: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1430839.0The trade secret argument doesn't fly for coins in the top 20, so why should it fly for an unknown coin with an unknown dev? Seriously, you need a better excuse, people aren't that dumb (at least not the ones with money to invest). I get the greater fool strategy, but come on--to me it looks like you want the investor money that goes with the claim, but not to have to supply any explanation how it's supposed to work--that's called having your cake and eating it too. Either drop the claim or supply an explanation, not difficult (attacking the attacker is a lame way to deal with a problem you created). |
|
|
|
Most people don't even know what those technical details mean.
So to simplify.
SpectreCoin - low market cap.
Monero - high market cap.
Spectrecoin tech is better than Monero tech.
Which cryptographer told you that? |
|
|
|
Summary from Moscow Meetup from an attendee (quoted material in italics): Hey! Just came back from IOTA Moscow meetup! Some of the news from the talk/presentation of Cfb and Max Minchenkov:
--IOTA will move from PoW to Network-bound PoW in the future. It's an unique thing and details are not available.
--smart contracts are in development. ETA is this year. It will be done not like eth smart contracts, but done in functional programming paradigm/style.
--Max Minchenkov said that IOTA are doing a solution together with CISCO for an undisclosed oil company, where IOTA will provide software and CISCO hardware. No ETAs or any other info.
--Ternary hardware is still in development. It will be ternary CPU and Li-Fi. No ETAs or any other info.
--Cfb is more on hardware part now, other team members do work on IRI. Original post from Russian attendee: https://www.reddit.com/r/Iota/comments/7r23e0/summary_iota_moscow_meetup/ |
|
|
|
Certainly now it is Monero , but Spectre is the best one for privacy , and in future it can cost more expensive than now.
Monero cryptographers are actually studying SPECTRE to see if it can be implemented in Monero, but it is this SPECTRE https://medium.com/@avivzohar/the-spectre-protocol-7dbbebb707b5You may be talking about spectrecoin which is a shitcoin with dubious claims (specifically anonymous staking). |
|
|
|
All Coins are created equal. But I like Zcash coin. Zcash is the first open, permission less cryptocurrency that can fully protect the privacy of transactions using zero-knowledge cryptography.
What? If you could just slap a privacy label on a coin and call it a day, we wouldn't need threads like this at all. How they are designed separates them and that's why we discuss it. Zcash has optional privacy which has lead to this http://jeffq.com/blog/on-the-linkability-of-zcash-transactions/You can't just assume they work equally well--there's no way I'd use Zcash for a Tx I needed to keep private--at least not in its present state. After sapling I may use it, but I won't hold it for any significant time as there is no way to audit the coin supply and someone could successfully multiply the supply X fold and reduce the value of each coin. That issue has remained unsolvable. Never mind that it's a corporate coin and there's dev tax and significant down pressure on the price due to the amount of coins yet to be mined. None of these coins are equal as they are designed differently, have different devs, different emission schedules, and so on. TBH, most are shitcoins that will never see use on the darkmarkets, which is where the real use happens--at least in the early phases. If you are just going to hype a coin for speculative purposes, then sure, they are equal for your purpose, but that will never be a long term use case and has nothing to do with how well the coin works, only how well it is hyped. |
|
|
|
this is super old news man. Iota is still broken af
What's old news? The office was anounced in the last 24 hours. As for IOTA being broken, it's being used right this very moment. |
|
|
|
Please check this Spectrecoin (XSPEC)
- Innovative first ever in Crypto 'Stealth Staking'
I don't know about the other claims, but that's likely vaporware given that it's an anonymous dev making the claim without any code or a whitepaper stating how he/she plans on doing it. |
|
|
|
It's not a scam and claiming that it's a scam is just trolling.
Simply, if they don't manage to get anonymous staking working, it just means that they bite more than they could chew. It does not mean it's a scam.
Stop bullshitting everyone.
Most crypto projects show their work--this is the expectation, not the exception. I'm not lowering the standard--especially when it's such a bold claim. If they didn't want the scrutiny, they should have held off on the claim until they were prepared to release a whitepaper. I know this angers scammers, but it is just the way it works. If they removed the claim (or even better, proved it), I'd remove the poll. You're not the first one attempting something like this and your thread won't make a difference. You just think it will. Everybody wants to feel relevant. The truth is, most people are not. I don't care. Some spectrecoin shills contradicted me in another thread and I'm making a case that I am correct. Me being right and proved so a few months from now is enough. Most everything on this forum has no long term effect, not even a short term effect, assuming that I think differently is your mistake. TBH, you asking me to remove the poll means you probably think it has more influence than it could possibly have. Just let it die and stop posting--it's really that simple. I just want the last word and the ability to raise this thread up from the dead after it's proven that anonymous staking was vaporware. |
|
|
|
It's not a scam and claiming that it's a scam is just trolling.
Simply, if they don't manage to get anonymous staking working, it just means that they bite more than they could chew. It does not mean it's a scam.
Stop bullshitting everyone.
Most crypto projects show their work--this is the expectation, not the exception. I'm not lowering the standard--especially when it's such a bold claim. If they didn't want the scrutiny, they should have held off on the claim until they were prepared to release a whitepaper. I know this angers scammers, but it is just the way it works. If they removed the claim (or even better, proved it), I'd remove the poll. |
|
|
|
Right, maybe I don't understand this part but is it not anonymous already? You buy Xspec You transfer them to a private address. This is now an anonymous wallet. You stake via Tor with your anonymous wallet. How is that not anonymous staking? Or is this not what is being discussed here?  AFAIK anonymous staking does not exist in any coin. It's a pretty major claim--especially from a dev team no one knows and who does not put forth how they intend to achieve it. |
|
|
|
municipalities? Why do they need iota? Think it's in the link. |
|
|
|
XMR has best privacy, for now Soon Spectre will have default private wallets, so it will be on par with XMR HOWEVER (and I wonder how people cannot see this) Spectre uses staking (via Tor), not Proof of Work It is much, much, much harder for an evil entity to outlaw or tax POW mining, than OBFS4/TOR routed staking. AFAIK they are working on staking via mobile devices too. NO hardware that needs to be shipped, consumes electricity, generates heat....NO mining pools that can be attacked. Nothing, just encrypted connections to other peers! If you read scary news such as China mining ban, lovely Munchkin calling BTC wallets "Swiss number accounts" that need to be destroyed, and other crap like that, it is a miracle that Spectre is so much cheaper than XMR.  Of course XMR is more mature. But is that a reason for a 100 fold price difference? Problem is no one has created anonymous staking, and apparently the market doesn't think spectrecoin's dev (whoever that is) can do it.--other than the noobs well represented in this thread. I wouldn't pay 1/1000th for some anonymous dev's unbacked claim, but that's me. |
|
|
|
At first glance it looks like generalizethis is trolling, but if you look at the bigger picture, it appears generalizethis is actually participating in the shills as there is now a poll concluding that spectre is not a scam and another highly visible spectre thread.
Or perhaps I'm just pointing out that the devs have yet to prove how they are going to build anonymous staking. I've pointed out dubious claims before and have had to deal with armies of noobs (sock puppets), so nothing new in that regard. By your logic, Every car manufacturer that has claimed that they will set the bar higher than other manufacturers, Needs to release the complete technical white paper on said vehicle, Down to the drag coefficients, Type of bearings used, effective suspension geometry, Drive train specs... etc. Did you call tesla a scam when they said they were going to release a car that didnt use petrol as the energy source? Would it have been in tesla's best interest to release every specification on their ground breaking platform before they released it? No, Because the competitors that are MUCH more well funded could have used that template and implemented it prior to tesla ever having a working product. Simply just trying to use an analogous situation so that you can wrap your head around what is going on here. Doesnt seem like its that complicated, But it may just be a simple case of inflated ego/ignorance going on here. Regardless, Dont spread misinformation unless you have tangible proof that said coin is in fact a scam. If a car manufacturer promises a moonmobile that is powered by unicorn farts, yes, I would expect some explanation and I would call scam if they have no basis for making such a claim. Want to shut me up, post how anonymous staking works, you don't even have to explain it in detail, just a rough sketch. Right now it's a claim and nada--not even a dev identification to base an opinion on prior work. good god, even the lead developer tried to reason with you and went into detail why they aren't releasing this information at this time. let it go. I keep responding to you guy(s), though I'm sure some of the noob accounts are sock puppets. So maybe you should let it go. Anyone using the "trade secrets" argument should acknowledge that if you don't want to be called out for not showing how you prove your claim, then don't make the claim in the first place. Take the claim down and I won't bother scrutinizing it. But I'm sure you wont as that's the only interesting thing the coin has so no one will invest in it without the hope that a coin in the 200 rankings has a feature that could put it in the top 20. |
|
|
|
At first glance it looks like generalizethis is trolling, but if you look at the bigger picture, it appears generalizethis is actually participating in the shills as there is now a poll concluding that spectre is not a scam and another highly visible spectre thread.
Or perhaps I'm just pointing out that the devs have yet to prove how they are going to build anonymous staking. I've pointed out dubious claims before and have had to deal with armies of noobs (sock puppets), so nothing new in that regard. By your logic, Every car manufacturer that has claimed that they will set the bar higher than other manufacturers, Needs to release the complete technical white paper on said vehicle, Down to the drag coefficients, Type of bearings used, effective suspension geometry, Drive train specs... etc. Did you call tesla a scam when they said they were going to release a car that didnt use petrol as the energy source? Would it have been in tesla's best interest to release every specification on their ground breaking platform before they released it? No, Because the competitors that are MUCH more well funded could have used that template and implemented it prior to tesla ever having a working product. Simply just trying to use an analogous situation so that you can wrap your head around what is going on here. Doesnt seem like its that complicated, But it may just be a simple case of inflated ego/ignorance going on here. Regardless, Dont spread misinformation unless you have tangible proof that said coin is in fact a scam. If a car manufacturer promises a moonmobile that is powered by unicorn farts, yes, I would expect some explanation and I would call scam if they have no basis for making such a claim. Want to shut me up, post how anonymous staking works, you don't even have to explain it in detail, just a rough sketch. Right now it's a claim and nada--not even a dev identification to base an opinion on prior work. |
|
|
|
At first glance it looks like generalizethis is trolling, but if you look at the bigger picture, it appears generalizethis is actually participating in the shills as there is now a poll concluding that spectre is not a scam and another highly visible spectre thread.
Or perhaps I'm just pointing out that the devs have yet to prove how they are going to build anonymous staking. I've pointed out dubious claims before and have had to deal with armies of noobs (sock puppets), so nothing new in that regard. |
|
|
|
SpectroCoin is definitely NOT a scam.
I'm using them for a couple of years, they are very well spread in Europe, you can find them on QIWI terminals which are present almost in any mini market.
No idea if you are right, but spectr ocoin is not spectr ecoin. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
