 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 »
|
|
Can't wait for this!
This question is for DeFi Marine (lead dev). We all know the REBv1 code was audited by Hacken, and they failed to identify the exploit that allowed over 60ETH arbitraged out of the liquidity pools. With this in mind, has your opinion concerning the value of audited smart contracts decreased? Secondly, and more specifically concerning REBv2, will you have REBv2 audited? If not by a third party, would it be a possibility for you to show which lines in the smart contract have changed from REBv1 to REBv2? This could serve as a quasi-audit, as REBv2 investors could trust that everything other then the new lines of code have been audited by Hacken.
|
|
|
|
The last date in the RoadMap is July 31st, 2020 - Datamine DeFi Network Alpha. So what next to the project, is there any further plans?
Updated roadmap coming by the end of the week. |
|
|
|
Lmao Potato. Let me chime in next time DAM pumps in price, and I'll use the price to prove my point like you are. Smh... resorting to price movements to validate your own misguided opinion. Tendies must be one of the best tokens in the world with that logic.
I’ll be waiting. The real question is, will it pump higher than the current price AND sustain? Oh look at DAM and FLUX's price! Wow! DAM up nearly 200% since this post and FLUX over 100%! Let me use this price movement to invalidate any claims you have against it! Hahahaha. Seriously though. Resorting to price actions as a means to validate/invalidate one's arguments is redundant and unconvincing. Doubly so when it's a low liquidity token like FLUX and DAM. Move on with your life Mr. Potato Head, and wallow in another missed opportunity.  Cheers! |
|
|
|
|
Lmao Potato. Let me chime in next time DAM pumps in price, and I'll use the price to prove my point like you are. Smh... resorting to price movements to validate your own misguided opinion. Tendies must be one of the best tokens in the world with that logic.
|
|
|
|
Alright, let's just set the record straight. This dude who brought these concerns is a verified scammer, going by multiple online aliases. This steemit article is just one example of the crooked games' he's played. https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@exposer/cryptomedicated-or-james-edwards-and-chayleh-tracey-fraud-exposed-or-picture-proof. His concerning was with the "approve" function in the code inside the ERC777 standard that gives it compatibility with ERC20 (from my non-technical perspective, I'm not a coder). Someone in our community put it like this; Alice says to Bob, "I approve of you spending this $20."
"Thanks Alice! I'm going to go spend all of it immediately on BWK. That coin has a great future!"
"Wait, Bob, before you do that, I've changed my mind. I now only approve of you spending $7."
"Sorry, Alice, I already spent it all."
Does this sound like an exploit, or did Alice make a poor decision in approving Bob to spend her money?
So this exploit, actually can't be exploited because nothing in the DAM-FLUX ecosystem utilizes the "approve" function. See for yourself, go trade a regular ol' ERC20 on uniswap, and you'll notice you must approve it. Trading FLUX and DAM do not require this, as per ERC777. So this is currently unexploitable. Now Hodl has mentioned that later today he'll be replying in a long form to address this concern. Again remember who brought these allegations forward; a toxic member of the crypto community who has a history of scams, evidence fabrication and has had his accounts banned several times (why he's changed his aliases so often). A great twitter to see more on Librehash, is ProofOfFraud on twitter, a twitter account created to expose Librehash. Now this is flat out dishonest, and misleading. Abra's entire platform was it's interaction with traditional securities markets. You could "purchase" stock, ETFs and the like with crypto on Abra. That's what's gotten them into hot water with the SEC. To insinuate that their platform is anything the Datamine Network is absurd. |
|
|
|
(which could have been provided in a more respectful way though). I personally got some information I needed.
Yeah I guess since he was pretty hostile and troll-esque in the Discord server (which led to him getting banned) I had a pretty short fuse with him on here. My wife says I've been getting less patient over the years, and perhaps I should be a little more patient, and a little more tactful in my approach; doubly so on a public forum like Bitcointalk. Apologies Potato, at the end of the day we can often forget on the other side of the computer is another human being. I wish you all the best. (Just some honesty and less fud spreading would be appreciated haha) |
|
|
|
avoids the N+X question
I didn't avoid it, and I addressed it in my response to you. I'll explain again; burning is just another mechanism to increase the minting rate, ie; you get a larger chunk of the global mint rate by increasing your burn. Similiar to adding a new mining rig to the global hashrate of a typical PoW coin. The N+X question is framed in a way that misunderstands the entire premise of Flux. Will the supply of Flux continue to increase? Yes, proportionally to the global burn rate. This WILL be price deflationary, until an equilibrium is reached. But, yes, the N+X understanding would imply that, if demand remains unchanged, the price will continue to deflate. It's almost as if... every cryptocurrency that has more supply being created is under this same pressure created by more and more supply though... HMMMM.  Masternodes, mining, staking: all these forms of supply increase are deflationary. Flux is not an exception to this. Burning won't be the only use case for Flux either. Keep bumping the thread. |
|
|
|
Since my initial post, FLUX's value has fallen from $16.69 to $5.42.
It should continue to fall until the ROI with DAM/Flux reaches a reasonable point. At 10$, with current DAM prices, was over 200% monthly ROI. Obviously, that will fall until it reaches reasonable levels. Also, thanks for continuing to bump the thread! |
|
|
|
I guess another question I have is 'why are there two tokens'. Why not have staking DAM create more DAM? Are there other projects out there with this 2-token approach?
I asked the main developer this question, and he put it like this:
DAM is your ticket into the ecosystem
FLUX is what is used in the ecosystem.
If we just had one token we could not have started with 0 FLUX.Flux has planned future use case on top of what it's already doing (have yet to be revealed). Another user described the relationship as a NEO-GAS, THETA-GAS and VET-VTHO sort of relationship. DAM has a static supply while Flux's supply is infinite, with a large majority of it being burned by users. I'm glad though my mining comparison helped you see what's going on here. I saw it from the beginning like this myself, since I was big into mining a few years back. I feel its once of the best ways to explain and describe this ecosystem. Cheers! |
|
|
|
I elected not to swap my BWK because I didn't want to forward the expense of my mistake onto others.
So you're salty because you're trying to exemplify a sort of self-righteousness? Alright pal. Obviously you have no idea what crypto ventures go through when trying to figure out initial token distribution. Hodl could've just launched his endeavor, but he decided to swap with disenfranchised BWK holders, since communities are tough to come by, and it solves the initial distribution issue so many tokens face.
To date, no one has bothered to rebut any of my initial concerns related to how the core mechanism of FLUX (burn N flux to get N+X flux) is inherently deflationary.
Are you senile? Again, I'll reiterate, this is simply a means to bring more tokens into the ecosystem, just like BTC mining. BTC mining is utterly worthless, and just "mines" ever-increasingly difficult equations to earn a bit of the new distribution. Flux is the distributive portion of DAM. What is there not to get? They aren't separate entities. Flux gains its value from the "lock in time", just like BTC gets its value from solving useless equations. Burning is irrelevant to the discussion, because its just another method of earning a bigger portion of the Flux distributions (think, having a bigger share of a mining pool). I mean either you're extremely new to crypto, or senile, or both perhaps; your claims are simply unfounded.
The phrase "savings account" implies a return on capital or at least preserved capital along with CDIC insurance automatically insuring deposits.
Now this is just nitpicking about marketing words. And lo and behold, this is still a very young project, and they've actually changed the marketing of a "savings account" to Money 2.0. Savings account never made much sense to me, and didn't really encapsulate what this project was. Also, it does give a return on capital, in terms of Flux and DAM. USD value will fluctuate, and anyone going into crypto, especially a low-cap project like this, will know this.
Don't use deceptive language to shill your shitcoin and maybe I won't be as persistent in calling this scam what it is.
You throw around scam and ponzi like it's going out of style. Who's getting scammed here? Because you don't think this cryptocurrency is worth anything? Well news flash for ya pal; welcome to any form of currency in the 21st century. It has value because we say it has value. USD has value, because we say it has value. BTC has value because we say it has value. DOGE has value, because we say it has value. None of these examples have any "inherent value". Looking at BTC and DOGE specifically, they're merely currencies, and do nothing more then facilitate transactions, and guess what! People value that! Newsflash, people also value the ecosystem surrounding DAM and Flux, and the intuitive take on staking/minting new tokens. The self balancing on chain demand system works, and people value that. Now, they've stated that other uses cases for Flux (which is the LIQUID token in the DAM/Flux ecosystem) are planned. Now you can kindly piss off with your "scam" and "ponzi" bullshit. |
|
|
|
The value of FLUX originates from borrowing a portion of the worldwide dividend mint rate when you burn FLUX. FLUX is simply a measure of time that can be transacted to reduce global inflation and increase dividend rates. Dividend rates can be increased by buying time.
Datamine is a new non-custodial and decentralized open source economic system that uses smart contracts to create Adaptive Money. FLUX is Money 2.0. Our dual token DeFi protocol generates dividends every 15 seconds.
I REALLY, REALLY hope you’re not a US citizen because - wow. FLUX isn’t money. It’s a cryptocurrency. There’s a difference. Legally, it’s property, not currency. Anyone based in the US trading this will be subject to IRS rules on property and not money. You’ve also only reiterated that the existing use case of FLUX is to serve as a ponzi mechanism. Burn flux to borrow the global mint tate? Aka: burn FLUX now to get MORE FLUX later. What did Bernie Madoff tell his “investors”? Give me money now to get more money later. You’re saying buy some FLUX now to get more FLUX later and you’re calling it money and you’re calling it a dividend. If you don’t appreciate the weight of your claims I’m sure some plaintiffs attorneys will when they subpoena Discord for your details. Good thing the main dev is Canadian and not an American.  Nevertheless, this is some next level troll or ignorance... not entirely sure which. You do realize, that you can burn your own Flux, and there's no claim you need to buy someone else's Flux? Also, the ponzi comparison's are getting old. Who's at the top of the pyramid scheme? Oh wait... nobody. Nobody is at the top, because it's not a pyramid scheme and there's no pyramid. Let's also throw in the fact that you can burn Flux, and your burn amount can be less then what the bonus mint will yield. So yeah, how's this a ponzi? It's actually ludicrous you're this mad about not swapping your 20k BWK. Go buy Stu's Bastion_Invest Token, or go take a look at how he's been dumping his DAM bags on the market. So your entire shtick is that it's a ponzi, yet it's nothing like it. Simply another spin on the distribution system; instead of using a GPU or an ASIC to do arbitrary calculations and earn a percentage portion of the block reward, you're staking DAM to create Flux, and have an option to burn Flux to increase your DAM's Flux yield. How is this inherently different? By your logic BTC and ETH are ponzi's because you can "burn electricity" to increase your mining yields. Sheesh this dude is a next level degenerate. |
|
|
|
When extra tokens are burned, this usually has a positive effect on the project and there is no oversupply of tokens, which can depreciate if there are too many of them. This approach is always appreciated by projects and investors.
The word "invest" implies an expected return. In the context of DAM, the "investment" is in a DAM token which "returns" FLUX tokens. Sounds cool. However, the only purpose of FLUX tokens is to be burned. So the real measurement of return will be return on capital (in the form of ETH, likely, or maybe USD). Let's do a thought experiment. Let's say you've got 1,000,000 DAM and are earning .01 FLUX every 15 seconds. Then you have all the multipliers except the 10x burn so now you're at .03 FLUX every 15 seconds. But you're soooo close to that 10x multiplier, so you buy some FLUX to burn it. Great - what's your reward? You get back MORE flux than you burned. You bought the FLUX to burn with ETH. For ease of explanation, let's say you paid .05 ETH for 1 FLUX to put you over the 9x burned / wallet balance ratio. Burning this 1 flux nets you an extra .27 FLUX every 15 seconds, so soon you've got 5 extra flux to sell to recover your .05 ETH. But you're profit seeking, and probably want to at least double your returns. This is Crypto, after all, and you're interested in a 200% return for about 10 minutes of work. So you sell your 5 FLUX at .03 ETH each for a total of .15 ETH, recovering the initial buy in plus a tidy 200% gain. The guy who bought one your 1 FLUX at .03 each for .03 ETH similarly has 1,000,000 DAM and are minting .03 every 15 seconds. Soon he's got 5 FLUX to sell to recover his .03 ETH. He's also profit motivated, but not unreasonable, and similarly wants a 200% return for a few minutes of work. So he prices his 5 FLUX at .018 ETH/each and they sell. He makes a 200% return and the cycle continues. This is the inherent deflationary mechanism in the burn to print model. No rational investor, who is seeking return on capital, is going to buy FLUX to burn it expecting a loss. The only people burning FLUX are doing so because they expect a return. The return won't be in FLUX, but in the base currency (ETH) in this case. You're just mad you got banned from the Discord for trolling. Keep it up buddy. |
|
|
|
|
So I've been with the old BWK gang (RIP) which has been swapped to Datamine. Crazy things going on... it hit 0.40 USD today... and only has a marketcap of ~6.6M. Now combine that with lucrative Flux token creation... Idk i'm starting to feel some FOMO. Anyone else check this token out?
|
|
|
|
|
Been with BWK since the beginning, it's been a bit of a ride thus far, but we can only go up from here!
|
|
|
|
|
Link to the Faust discord isn't working?
|
|
|
|
I get lots of rejects (20-40%) on Nicehash, any fix?  |
|
|
|
|
