If the project can't be successful, lisk will be dumped below ico price, lisk investors you should know this, so let it be successful, otherwise you will lose bitcoin value from lisk dumping.
At this price, ARK is actually a pretty damn good deal. I mean, we're no slackers here and we expect to develop a lot of really good Bridged Blockchains for ARK. right now 1 Lisk gets you a little more than 14 ARK. 14 for 1! I mean, what is a sidechain anyways? It's just another blockchain that ARK can bridge. |
|
|
|
Submitted Blogs of ARK! Good luck, looking foward, almost reach the threshold!
Thanks! |
|
|
|
one question there, For Ark Smartbridge, its something to link different Blockchain and work together am i right?
IS like
NXT could be link and use on CounterParty, EThereum platform am i right?
I think the best explanation for the smartbridge concept that you can find is the Smith and Crown article. They took a lot of time to research Ark and asked tons of questions before writing it. https://www.smithandcrown.com/ark-smartbridging-blockchains/is my summery correct? smart bridging only works if other coins chain their code? without that i won't work? right? yes, each other coin will have to have an "encoded listener" set up to handle the actual bridging. I think of them like toll booth speed passes on bridges. Cars with them can speed by but the data gets recorded as it passes the toll booth area (encoded listener). Future iterations we'd like to be able to increase the efficiency with ability to bridge without the listeners through API and other methods that can be added to other blockchain core code. But yes, you are correct basically at this time. As far as I read this in order for some service to use smartbridge (bitcoin / ethereum) if we take an example core wouldn't need to implement anything ( it would of course make a lot of things easier ), but eg. there is a service that bridges bitcoin and ethereum so someone creates an account at that service eg. and the service is linked to ARK blockchain and the user has ARKs and wants to purchase a ticket on some other platform that has ethereum or bitcoin as payment method. This service then generates an unique ID for this customer and he initiates the TX with that ID in the smartbridge field and it triggers the TX on customers behalf. Another approach could also be since bitcoin addresses and ethereum addresses and LISK addresses are unique some service could "listen" to vendorfields and if customer would want to send for example 2 BTC on some address and that would cost exactly for instance 10000 ARKs he would include that bitcoin address in vendorfield send 10000 to that service and as that service would listen to ark blockchain it would see that and said oh look there is 10000 ARK TX with venorfield with bitcoin address now I need to send 2 BTC to that address on my customers behalf - there are a lot of combos how this could be used as said. Or a format for vendorfield some service would use like bitcoinaddress-ethereumaddress-25 would mean exchange from my bitcoin address to ethereum address and send 25 ethereum to it. I don't know if I wrote that right, but there are many possiblities with this also for services to communicate with each other not just blockchains or maybe I'm reading this all wrong  someone from ARK team should correct me. Yup, you basically hit the nail on the head 🎯. A lot of this is what we were thinking also for our first general bridging features. |
|
|
|
All Happy Thanksgiving day!!! I hope Black Friday will bring a large influx of investment in ARK.
YOU TOO! Happy Thanksgiving! |
|
|
|
one question there, For Ark Smartbridge, its something to link different Blockchain and work together am i right?
IS like
NXT could be link and use on CounterParty, EThereum platform am i right?
I think the best explanation for the smartbridge concept that you can find is the Smith and Crown article. They took a lot of time to research Ark and asked tons of questions before writing it. https://www.smithandcrown.com/ark-smartbridging-blockchains/is my summery correct? smart bridging only works if other coins chain their code? without that i won't work? right? yes, each other coin will have to have an "encoded listener" set up to handle the actual bridging. I think of them like toll booth speed passes on bridges. Cars with them can speed by but the data gets recorded as it passes the toll booth area (encoded listener). Future iterations we'd like to be able to increase the efficiency with ability to bridge without the listeners through API and other methods that can be added to other blockchain core code. But yes, you are correct basically at this time. |
|
|
|
Don't forget, ARK testnet will be releasing soon  If testnet releases, but the fund it not reaching 2000 BTC, what will happen? Will you continue the development without fund? I think impossible, or decrease/cancel the threshold(maybe the best choice) You guys devote so much, but if the ico failed, what a pity.  We will give everyone a chance to refund their exchanges. After we give everyone enough time, we will launch our mainnet and either distribute to those who did not refund or consider other options. ARK will launch regardless of TEC funding. But if this TEC fails, we will NOT be having another TEC for this project and bonuses will most likely not be as generous. yes, if it fails will be a pity for sure. Hopefully we can convince a couple of large participants to get us to that point You can't, 100% refund: To be successful, the ARK Token Exchange must reach at least 2000 BTC total valuation. Otherwise, ARK-TEC participants are fully refunded.ark whitepaper, page 13 of 24 https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B36tqs76dKFZU2tMNEd3U3ZlQzg/viewUh yes we can. 100% refund can be also giving 100% an opportunity for refund. If you want us to refund it to the address you sent it from, many would not even get a refund as many sent it from exchanges. If you want your exchange back, go for it. But you can't make a judgement call for everyone else because you interpret our text in a way you want. |
|
|
|
Don't forget, ARK testnet will be releasing soon If testnet releases, but the fund it not reaching 2000 BTC, what will happen? Will you continue the development without fund? I think impossible, or decrease/cancel the threshold(maybe the best choice) You guys devote so much, but if the ico failed, what a pity. We will give everyone a chance to refund their exchanges. After we give everyone enough time, we will launch our mainnet and either distribute to those who did not refund or consider other options. ARK will launch regardless of TEC funding. But if this TEC fails, we will NOT be having another TEC for this project and bonuses will most likely not be as generous. yes, if it fails will be a pity for sure. Hopefully we can convince a couple of large participants to get us to that point |
|
|
|
Don't forget, ARK testnet will be releasing soon |
|
|
|
one question there, For Ark Smartbridge, its something to link different Blockchain and work together am i right?
IS like
NXT could be link and use on CounterParty, EThereum platform am i right?
yes, but not at a high level currently. We have a node that we call "encoded listeners" that comb through the smartbridge data. When a node associated with a specific blockchain is triggered, it can then process the trigger that's found in the smartbridge on the other blockchain. This will be the core of the ARK network and eventually be more advanced than this and one day not even require encoded listeners. |
|
|
|
This project is middle of bubble season.
So I am afraid of the mining.
cheer up devs!
I hope to see the miracle !
from wan
I believe in Miracles  But probably wont need a miracle. Just a Thanksgiving surprise? Happy Thanksgiving everyone in Murica!  |
|
|
|
18 days is still a long time, anything can happen, 100% threshold can be met now if today LSK price jump to 0.0003121 The other possibility is lisk huge pump to make the average price higher to reach 2000 BTC, but it is unrealistic, raise as more as possible coins is the most important thing. yes, maybe a combination of both is the best option! |
|
|
|
yeah, stop asking me about refunds and start helping us reach threshold |
|
|
|
Is there anything already implemented in ARK? I see nice pictures and nice phrases, but it seems to me everything is on the paper and nothing concrete is done. Do I miss something or this is just the way ICO works?
https://github.com/arkecosystem |
|
|
|
(…)
You are now having internal team discussions about possibly launching with less than full funding and taking people along for the ride who have not requested a refund. That implies that a failure to reach full funding may require active requests for refunds by supporters. This is totally different than the ARK team automatically reversing donations to their original BTC or Lisk address and surrendering all funds entrusted to you.
I hope you succeed in raising your required funding. However, it must be crystal clear to everybody beforehand on what will happen if you do not.
I think to keep in line with the originally agreed upon terms and conditions, the logical way would be to send the funds back automatically, unless an investor states explicitly not to, so pretty much the opposite of people requesting refunds. You'll still have a lot of unhappy customers, that wouldn't have wanted a refund, but were too lazy to be bothered with reading the email announcement they probably got. I don't know if giving them like a weeks time to send funds in again could be considered as a second ICO (or TEC). One way or another, announcing willingness to presume with the project and to pay out tokens for those faithful souls who stayed in for the ride may boost confidence of those on the fence, thus result in donations from those who were afraid to invest in the project due to its unclear future, rendering any musings about what would happen if the aim wasn't reached, moot. the problem with this is because when you send from an exchange, sometimes you cannot refund back to the same address since it's not associated with you. we would be refunding poloniex hotwallet but with no account to reference where it was going to. the only way to really refund everyone would be to allow them a way to input a refund address that we can send it can actually be processed to. we would not be doing a second TEC at all if this one should fail, we will distribute a different way. Regardless the path we take, it will make some happy and some angry. We are just doing it the fairest way we think we can. True, but there is still a difference between automatically implying, that unclaimed refunds are still considered as investments, or giving investors the opportunity to actively state that they want to stay investors. That's what I was getting at. And I agree, there is no way to make everybody happy. Oh yes right, I was also thinking the first question before you can see a box where you input the withdrawal address they will have to answer a question before being able to withdrawal from the TEC page. Q: Do you want a refund or stay a participant? A1: I want a Refund. A2: I want to stay a participant in the ARK TEC. Choosing A2 will show you the withdrawal feature and A1 will allow us to count them as a participant. That way we can determine also who want's to stay a participant, who does not and who just didn't answer and need more contacting. We will make sure as many people as possible will be notified of this. It might not be exactly this word for word but we will give everyone an opportunity to choose. |
|
|
|
(…)
You are now having internal team discussions about possibly launching with less than full funding and taking people along for the ride who have not requested a refund. That implies that a failure to reach full funding may require active requests for refunds by supporters. This is totally different than the ARK team automatically reversing donations to their original BTC or Lisk address and surrendering all funds entrusted to you.
I hope you succeed in raising your required funding. However, it must be crystal clear to everybody beforehand on what will happen if you do not.
I think to keep in line with the originally agreed upon terms and conditions, the logical way would be to send the funds back automatically, unless an investor states explicitly not to, so pretty much the opposite of people requesting refunds. You'll still have a lot of unhappy customers, that wouldn't have wanted a refund, but were too lazy to be bothered with reading the email announcement they probably got. I don't know if giving them like a weeks time to send funds in again could be considered as a second ICO (or TEC). One way or another, announcing willingness to presume with the project and to pay out tokens for those faithful souls who stayed in for the ride may boost confidence of those on the fence, thus result in donations from those who were afraid to invest in the project due to its unclear future, rendering any musings about what would happen if the aim wasn't reached, moot. the problem with this is because when you send from an exchange, sometimes you cannot refund back to the same address since it's not associated with you. we would be refunding poloniex hotwallet but with no account to reference where it was going to. the only way to really refund everyone would be to allow them a way to input a refund address that we can send it can actually be processed to. we would not be doing a second TEC at all if this one should fail, we will distribute a different way. Regardless the path we take, it will make some happy and some angry. We are just doing it the fairest way we think we can. |
|
|
|
First I believe Ark will get their minimum threshold but if these doesnt happen I will leave my ico funds because I believe in the project.
YO CAPO! Thanks for the support dude! |
|
|
|
he said it's possible but he has to implement a way to handle it. We're not going to stop or delay development right now to facilitate a trade. Thx! much appreciated. If it is too much trouble than don't worry, I totally understand. Like I said, I don't blow up on people unwarranted. If you were wearing my shoes and knew what I know about the real situation. You'd be pretty steaming also if you thought that there was legitimate sabotage being played out on your project.
I don't know all the facts & I'm no one to judge you so I will refrain commenting further on who's right and wrong... what's done is done... But trust me mate, I seriously doubt there is any legitimate sabotage being played out. Both project could mutually benefit from each other since it takes two flints to make a fire. Unity is strength. . . & when there is teamwork and collaboration, wonderful things can be achieved. Maybe it's all psychosis but then again maybe it's not. We'd be happy to be cordial and have our MD talk with Max, but it's their turn to initiate since Max hasn't accepted our invitations to talk. Well, I hope I don't sound too patronizing here, but this situation could have been better solved with diplomacy. Even if I suspected sabotage, as long as there is no hard evidence I can point at, I'd keep my trap shut. I mean, what is there to gain from stirring it up? Do you think, you'd be keen on talking with people accusing you of sabotage? I wouldn't. Additionally, I've come to the realization, that in 90% of fights, there are at least two idiots and that if one of them wouldn't have been just as much of a dickhead than the other, there wouldn't have been a fight in the first place. I'm not saying that this is the case, but truth be told, in my eyes, the ARC project doesn't come off too well. Not because I think you are in the wrong here, but simply because I as a bystander can't judge who is in the wrong and who isn't. This would have been one of this times, where sucking it up and looking like the bigger person would have made just as much, or even more. Another question: Do you guys think about repeating the ICO, in case it fails? Are there other paths you think about? Or is this project dead, once you don't get the funding you need? totally understandable and possibly we could have done a different bonus level. We did assume that it would be a big boost for lisk price and that we would be helping them out also but it didn't work out that way. I get it man, people don't like me because I will speak the truth regardless of the consequences. But remember, I don't make all the decisions here and sometimes it's good to have people who don't take crap from people. To some people, being real to themselves is more important than image. Maybe a lot care about how the world views them, but I don't. That's why I am comfortable with the way I am. I am satisfied with who I am and that's all that matters in life. to answer your additional question, If this TEC fails to reach the target and after whatever refund thing we have to go through. We may launch with what funding we have after those who want a refund get one. But probably we won't do another TEC in the way that we are doing it now. ARK will continue even with zero funding. |
|
|
|
Why?
There is an abundance of cannabis coins already......
Smells like a blatant money grab.......
Quite simply put, we feel we have a superior platform to the digital assets currently out there, and believe we can execute with greater success than the alternatives. Not to be overly critical, but given the length of time that the other coins have been functioning, they have seriously disappointing results. We have a strong team and solid concept, and we've already laid the groundwork for our initiative within the industry. If you haven't done so, I'd encourage you to give our whitepaper and business plan a read through. superior platform for cannabis sales is a big fail. You need to FOCUS on TOP Genetics. I am in the Cannabis industry of California, I see people with ideas like this all the time and there's more non-crypto related cannabis apps already. Having quality Flower Consistently > More funding And in the cannabis industry, the best flower is never grown in a cannabis factory but in small batches by people who love what they do not just for money but for medicine that will never give you any of their product. |
|
|
|
The threshold will not be met? All funds will be refunded?
Yes sadly that is the case. If we don't have 2000 btc by 11 DEC then we will issue an opportunity for refunds to all participants. Everyone at ARK understandably do not wish for this to happen as we have spent a very long time on our project so far in preparation for our TEC and would be pretty devastating to have to refund everyone, but that is what must be done. We have discussed the possibility of refunding those who would like to have a refund and also still launching with the amount of people who do not request a refund or after all refunds, we will can sell tokens ourselves from mainnet over time as we are developing during mainnet. We might have to refund everyone, but it will not kill our project. We will just have to figure out some other method after refunds are completed per the agreement. Escrow Agent Mal here, watching from the sidelines. Please (re)state for the record the exact actions that will be followed by the ARK team (and any required actions by investors) if 100% project funding is not reached by Dec 11. You are now having internal team discussions about possibly launching with less than full funding and taking people along for the ride who have not requested a refund. That implies that a failure to reach full funding may require active requests for refunds by supporters. This is totally different than the ARK team automatically reversing donations to their original BTC or Lisk address and surrendering all funds entrusted to you. I hope you succeed in raising your required funding. However, it must be crystal clear to everybody beforehand on what will happen if you do not. Looks like everyone is on the same page here! Let's get this funded and avoid having to refund anything.
thanks for helping get everyone on the same page |
|
|
|
he said it's possible but he has to implement a way to handle it. We're not going to stop or delay development right now to facilitate a trade. Thx! much appreciated. If it is too much trouble than don't worry, I totally understand. Like I said, I don't blow up on people unwarranted. If you were wearing my shoes and knew what I know about the real situation. You'd be pretty steaming also if you thought that there was legitimate sabotage being played out on your project.
I don't know all the facts & I'm no one to judge you so I will refrain commenting further on who's right and wrong... what's done is done... But trust me mate, I seriously doubt there is any legitimate sabotage being played out. Both project could mutually benefit from each other since it takes two flints to make a fire. Unity is strength. . . & when there is teamwork and collaboration, wonderful things can be achieved. Maybe it's all psychosis but then again maybe it's not. We'd be happy to be cordial and have our MD talk with Max, but it's their turn to initiate since Max hasn't accepted our invitations to talk. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
