No need to be rude.

Like a snowball. Byte. Ball. More transctions more balls.

Nem is closed source right?

Rounds are done every full moon, ie every month. The 1% does not receive compound interest. The other 1% can technically be gamed, the success of the game depends on how few persons buy into Byteball, the more people install the wallet, the lower the success of gaming the final 1% distribution.

Tony never claimed 2%, he only claimed 1%, and that is still valid, 1% is kept for him, the rest is distributed, just because it went form 0.7BTC to 0.0625 doesnt mean he will retain more, it means there will be more distribution rounds.

Byteball is better, no miners, massive scale, nano payments, finality and not just probability of confirmed payment. Does not require a Proof-of-Work, unlike IOTA which is a waste since IoT device can generally hardly do work at all, some struggle with making even https connections, so requiring an IoT device to do PoW is retarded to say the the least. While with Byteball an IoT device can be a full member of the network like any other light wallet, and if it can make https it can perform signatures to send and receive all functionality of Byteball.

Also, it works faster the more it is used, an idea which a IOTA developer cannot actually comprehend.

It is like the eternal question even from 2009, "what is bitcoin"? Like the ship, if each wooden part is replaced one by one, is it still the same ship? If each consensus rule is upgraded/forked, is it still bitcoin? Philosophoraptor wonders.

What will you point out? That you just lack reading comprehension or is your mind incapable of understanding? Does lower mean upper to you? How is a lower bound a limit? Can you explain, that would be great.

My initial statement which you tried to "prove wrong" is in fact "proved right" by tonych, in fact, you had previously insinuated Byteball doesnt scale to which tonych stated and I repeated "DAG has no architectural limits".

The more units there is posted, the higher the throughput. The more transactions, the confirmation time is faster, decreases. Not as you insinuated that more transactions would lead to some kind of congestion and increase/more-waiting for finality/confirmation.


So, this is a fantastic story, isnt it?

Get over your hurt ego, me and my employer, we not gonna use IOTA for an IoT project, we use Byteball, thats it.

And leave this thread, people and me included are really tired of your shit.

It seems to me your mind is incapable of comprehending Byteball. So you cant "scratch the surface", so please, leave this thread and stick to IOTA.

Im not a Byteball dev and so far he hasnt pointed out a single flaw.

I too have and still continue to look for weaknesses, but at least have read the whitepaper and looked at the source-code before asking for clarifications. Apply critical thinking.

Then there is a difference in asking for clarifications about some issue/potential weakness, or as CfB was saying "Your btc-oracle feature is overkill and over-engineered" and "Byteball is a blockchain not a real DAG" comparing Byteball to blockchains like Ethereum and Monero, now the latest "DAG structure implies limit on tx/s", all of this is just FUD and not "pointing its flaws", but alas not all visitors have the necessary skills to judge this so I do.

I am the brown monkey in the picture.

Someone with more knowledge and skills.

Well that explains a lot.

If you dont want to justs be FUDing and trolling, and is actually "scratching the surface, analyzing", explain why the scenario in your picture would imply a limit in how many transactions/units can be handled. Cant just insinuate your pictures mean there is a limit while not explaining why. Ill wait...

It is not really necessary for you to FUD here. Is it?

Your veiled attempts now at being nice to Byteball by "scratching the surface, asking questions analyzing internals" is ridiculous, reminds me of Eric Cartman "just asking questions, bro". If youre such a good programmer, on such a high shiny horse, analyzing Byteball internals, developing IoT non-scam coin, you would see the answer to your questions faster than it took you to color the pictures.

No, you have to try harder, your troll-post isnt even worthy of a real counter-argument.

Ill give you a IOTA-style counter-argument. OK, its simple, just pick a Main Chain by random selection (Like IOTA Monte-Carlo tip selection algorithm), then ask developers to resolve any issues and make a "milestone-database" to build upon.

Its still nice you are trying to spread distrust in Byteball ability to scale, now with pictures and colors. How quaint.

Now it sounds just like people who told Satoshi back in 2008, "but you cant solve Byzantine generals problem thats impossible".

Yes you can, the seed will only restore the bytes, not any blackbytes or other private assets. Id go for solution, install full wallet on another device, pair them as multi-sig or transfer all bytes and blackbytes to the new full wallet, then remove light wallet and install full wallet on that device, then send them bytes and blackbytes back.

Dont you have more important things to do, such as updating the accounting book, I mean, the database of IOTA?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1216479.msg18269407#msg18269407

And how long has your IOTA-coin been in production? "Consensus algorithm" still the same as middle-ages.

It is a database, but not a blockchain database, as LevelDB in bitcoin. In fact, this implementation stores the dag in a SQL database.

Each wallet does not have to store the full dag, you can select to run a light wallet, in that case it wont use basically any storage aside from your keys and private assets.

The advantage is all the features listed on byteball.org and being a DAG it has no architectural limit on scaling, only implementation and hardware is limiting.

Oh, I see you dont know the words you are attempting to talk with. Hilarious.

Not salty, just telling you the absurdity of criticising javascript from safety and software security perspectives, when C and C++... well. I dont even know why I bother.

Actually you arent even criticising javascript on any technical point you're just parroting nonsense, FUDding.

Do not use it, you can keep using other coins and avoid javascript software.

I suggest you begin with not visiting bitcointalk.org anymore as it contains javascript, and the Chrome or Firefox web-browsers as they contain an even heavier javascript interpreter and possibly even with Just-in-Time-compilation. That would be great, thanks!