Bitcoin just broke $520 and is heading for the moon, products are being manufactured and sold, there is a data centre mining at 100 TH, shares are trading and Ken has told us he's working on something important. He hasn't posted an update which confirms he's too busy right now.
Whatever happened to no news is good news?
If Ken buys the HashFast ASIC IP we all become millionaires. |
|
|
|
|
No worries.
I'll stop bringing it up.
|
|
|
|
I'm not really sure about the Darknote defenders, it's a fact of life that new technology comes out often decimating the old. This is that time. Bytecoin could of had it sure, but greed ruined them, greed unravels all. Monero's based on a technology that makes Darkcoin look like a toy, even the creator of CoinJoin (the tech Darkcoin is based on) has admitted this CryptoNote tech is far stronger than CoinJoin and works. [1] The creator of the fundamental tech of Darkcoin admits the tech in Monero is superior. I am unsure why there is even an argument in favour of Darkcoin at this point, except it's got great "pumping" power. Yeah, let us build a future on top of it's ability to pump and pump. Give me a break. [1] Remember gmaxwell is talking about CryptoNote based technologies here, this includes Monero. Also I believe gmaxwell devised CoinJoin. If he says this then any argument Darkcoin fans have is now 100% void. extremely interesting thread...what struck my eye was the slow validations which can cause a major clog with transactions when Dark Coin (based off of CoinJoin) gets bigger, right? The more coins transacted the slower the confirmations am I right in saying that?
No, not in a meaningful sense. Validation is very cheap. You do run into block size limits if you're trying to transact too much at once, but any privacy system is limited in its privacy by transaction volume. "Dark Coin" really strikes me as pointless. The whole idea in coinjoin is that coinjoin is already part of the design of Bitcoin. There is no advantage in having a new and different system. If you're going to do something incompatible, losing Bitcoin's network effect in the process, then you can do something much stronger. It also depresses me somewhat to see people talking about darkcoin (or even zerocoin/zerocash) when bytecoin has a privacy system with much better properties than CoinJoin (it's similar to CJ except you safely join with offline coin holders, and all users are participants), something made possible by the fact that it doesn't have to fit within the existing Bitcoin network, and it's completely practical, reasonably performant and deployed for some time now. But strangely, it's virtually unheard of... Bytecoin's privacy properties are in some sense weaker than zerocoin's— since its like a supercharged coinjoin— but the cryptography is much stronger and much more efficient, so in practice I'd expect it to have better anonymity just due to it being much more practical (also as evidence to it existing as a deployed system). ... so yea, if you actually are interested in privacy technology in a non-bitcoin system, Bytecoin seems to have pretty much nailed it. Hey guys, can someone explain me like I am five the differences between Bytecoin and Monero?
ByteCoin is a currency used exclusively by a community of highly private, intelligent and respectable people. In trying to respect their desire to remain a closed community, Monero was created with the intent to achieve mass adoption. The entire point of an anonymous currency is that you're mixing with the world helping break any linkage between coin movements. I can assure you they never intended to keep themselves closed forever, just long enough to build up their stacks. Hey guys, can someone explain me like I am five the differences between Bytecoin and Monero?
Both are the same, Bytecoin has a 2 year chain where most of the coins have been mined, but it was only 'released' 9 weeks ago. Monero is a movement to bring this technology to the worlds people without having the vast majority of the currency owned by a small few. Also the Monero client and miners are all far faster than Bytecoin, the Monero developers have moved fast to prove themselves competent and able. Monero's hashrate is vastly greater than Bytecoin's, indicating the community at large agrees with this assertion. |
|
|
|
|
What I want to know is why did someone buy past 0.0002?
I feel they are not fully aware of the current situation.
It's either an unfortunate soul (99.9% chance) or an insider that knows we are going to the moon (0.1% chance).
|
|
|
|
Dam! Just looked at the last price per share  Still too high! |
|
|
|
No update?
Ken forgot again. Oh well. |
|
|
|
div received holy jesus .2362 per share.
Isn't that a 94,000 bitcoin dividend?  |
|
|
|
I was thinking Mintpal would list this unique, innovative coin today. But instead they're adding another PoS clone. BC AC WC CINNI COMM XLB and now SYNC, what's the point of so many clone with different supply ?
This coin is a Bytecoin fork, aka a Bytecoin copy, nothing special about it...At least those PoS coins like Cinni don't copy Bitcoin down to the last coding like Monero has to Bytecoin.. There is something special about it, Monero has 0 days pre-mine, Bytecoin has 2 years premine. If you don't understand why that bothers some people, read Satoshi's paper and recall his intention for creating Bitcoin. Keyword: "Trustless." When 80% of the entire coin supply and 99% of the current coin supply is owned by pre-miners, then you cease to be using a trustless coin because they can manipulate the price forever. There is no free market, there is more centralised control in Bytecoin than the USD! |
|
|
|
Nevertheless it would be rather hard for Bytecoin stakeholders to use all 80% for "pump and dump" games. You know, they would be truly lucky if they had time to spend even 10% of emission to earn something on exchange rate changes before everything ends. But what will they do with the rest 70%? So much effort for the technology and coin itself, 2 years of mining and then just waste it all for a couple of thousands dollars, lol. Admit, those guys are not fools.
From that side 80% may be regarded as a kinda assurance for us. They probably will restrain exchange rate falling, because it's not good for them at first.
You probably don't agree, but CryptoCoins attracted many people because of their trustless nature. Knowing that an entity commands 80% of the eventual currency supply (and 98% of the current supply) defeats this trustless aspect doesn't it? Also, if Bytecoin had the same volume as Monero the developers could have cashed out 0.1% of their pre-mined stake for about $250,000 by know. If these CryptoNote coins take off, and with Bytecoin already worth $20,000,000 they could sell $40,000 worth of their stake per week and still command 90% of the entire economy by the end of the year. I don't care for people investing in Bytecoin, but as long as they know these facts. Advocates on the exchanges say that Bytecoin has 100 times growth ahead to entice people into buying. 100 times the current valuation of Bytecoin makes Bytecoin worth 25% of Bitcoin and makes the Bytecoin developers worth 2 million bitcoin, even richer than Satoshi. I can see thousands of newbies putting their life savings into this because of 100 times growth potential, and once that unravels it'll deal more bad press to CryptoCurrency in general and further restrictive regulations on CrytoCurrency trading. |
|
|
|
This is the scenario that seems problematic - for me at least. Even announcing such a plan could make Monero crash. It's too high a dependency in terms of investment.
If this were true, it would also crash all other anonymous coins. Bytecoin clones would immediately be inferior to the new "prototype". Non-bytecoin clones will not necessarily lag in comparison with a v2 of bytecoin. It depends what they use in terms of blockchain tech and where they are with their development. Ok now you're going a little overboard with this line of thinking. Bytecoin 2.0 is made by developers of Bytecoin 1.0 and worked with CryptoNote. CryptoNote developers may very well be working on Monero by now. Also Monero has first mover advantage for CryptoNote coins outside of Bytecoin. You're making some large assumptions here, what is this generation two technology you're talking about? If it's based on the current chain tech then Monero can easily add that on board. These Bytecoin developers do not seem to be the brains behind the technology, Bytecoin had many limitations that Monero fixed in weeks where Bytecoin had a year to fix it. I do see your point but this is just FUD: Bytecoin clones would immediately be inferior to the new "prototype"
|
|
|
|
Also, you guys are spreading this 80% pre-mine FUD and have no idea what you are talking about. There was no pre-mine, its just that coin was being mined for 2 years before it was every discovered and posted on this forum.
The chain is 2 years old. I highly doubt it's been around for two years considering the whitepaper wasn't released until a year ago. Also no one in the Crypto-coin community had heard of this amazing, revolutionary coin for the past two years whilst ten thousand underground hackers were mining and using it? How comes Monero has several times the hash power of this coin already overtaking the thousands of silent Bytecoin miners that evaded us for the past two years? You know what really happened? I'm 95% sure they mined the current chain during the past several months before being announced on this forum and publically for the first time. |
|
|
|
As I see it, having MRO take everything and upsetting the BCN devs by capitalizing on their work can backfire big time as they might "nuke" the clones and go with a V2 which heavily improves on V1. And then it's game over.
This is a really good point that I had overlooked myself. The only way to position MRO for the long term is if the core developers are Cryptographers that have the expertise to stay ahead of the Bytecoin developers. Otherwise a BCN 2.0 fair launch could be a problem. If I was a BCN 1.0 dev, I would dump my BCN making myself a millionaire, and restart with the official BCN 2.0 to continue with my passion of making an anonymous Crypto without having to be greedy anymore. How capable are the Monero developers? Although remember, at the end of the day hash power wins, if Monero keeps gaining the majority of CryptoNote coin hashpower, then they can be well positioned to take on BCN 2.0 |
|
|
|
80% pre-mine BCN is destroyed, so total coins are only 20% of normal supply - it's true?
You can still see addresses, just not who owns them and how they are linked. They could send the 140,000,000,000 premined Bytecoin to an unspendable address and it would be very obvious. I'm quite sure this hasn't happened. |
|
|
|
Msin is talking about an $100,000,000 IPO of MaidSafecoin that never happened and Ejinte is talking about a member of the community selling over-priced MaidSafecoin to people after IPO.
Huh? I never said the IPO was at $109Mil. I clearly state in my post that Maidsafe was being sold at 17k - 1BTC (per the link provided), which assumes a $109Mil MARKETCAP, not IPO. Sorry but the way I read your post reads it looks like you're implying that the Maidsafe IPO was at $100mil. At $6,000,000, the "current" price of $100,000,000 means someone is getting 16 times returns. How is that making sense with: " big IPO Crypto's never have good returns." Is 16 times return really that bad? |
|
|
|
Idk how the other shareholders feel but I'm cool with Ken keeping a portion of the divs seeing the btc price poped a lottle to shore some things up upon release of a simple finacial statement.
Things I would choose over Divs tomorrow. - A financial statement.
- A legitimate reason why the website is on the back burner.
- A serious plan for the foreseeable future.
- A list of people who are working for the company along with some type of verification for what they actually do.
- Legitimate information on a chip. If we are keeping People's Asic on board then I assume this is the endgame.
- # of boards we have sold. How much money we are in debt and what is our plan out of it.
I understand Divs are important. But I think everything I listed above is more important (at least to me). I am 99% sure that Ken will not do half of the things on that list, especially the employee part. That means all things considered, dividend payout is very important. |
|
|
|
@Zum can you connect these dots?
Oh Zum has connected all the dots, it's probably Zum buying up all the shares to 0.0002! |
|
|
|
Hence: Tor. Isn't TOR cracked? I think I heard something about it (maybe Dawden, maybe not)? You did hear something about it, apparently it's mostly FUD from the FBI and NSA. |
|
|
|
You two are conflicting each others points I think. Msin is talking about an $100,000,000 IPO of MaidSafecoin that never happened and Ejinte is talking about a member of the community selling over-priced MaidSafecoin to people after IPO. I'll address your posts below in turn. The IPO was a "$3,000,000 to $6,000,000" IPO, not $100,000,000. I'm not sure where your IPO figures are coming from, they are certainly incorrect! The controversy with the IPO was the two entry points (Mastercoin and Bitcoin) having different price points. That dude is doing everything he can to have newcomers paying overprice. He's involved in the Mastercoin foundation in someway, since he is an Administrator on mastercointalk. Very bad in my opinion. Whilst he if offering a price far above "market" [1] his service allows you to receive your MaidSafecoins to your wallet.
The only exchange I believe still does not allow for withdrawel of MaidSafecoin, please correct me if I am wrong.
Under these facts, his service offers something the market currently does not.[1] https://www.masterxchange.com/market.php?trade=500¤cy=maidEDIT: You can now withdraw from masterxchange |
|
|
|
Comments from the Bitcoin core developers mail list . . . - Referring to the subsidy for miners as "wasting it on miners" isn't going to garner you much favor.
The transactions are moved across the world by the nodes, and then kept secure essentially by the miners. So it's not wasted! But certainly half wasted! Nodes are so important and if the transaction volume picks up, eventually the security of the network will be in few hands because only a few people will have the chain. Even miners do not need the chain anymore. The chain keepers (nodes) have no incentives. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
