|
I guess the real step forward will happen when Bancor will be ready also as a gateway to FIAT and for inter-chain transactions. Then the range of ESSENTIAL functions will be complete. Until then Bancor may possibly suffer the fact of being subordinated to the Ethereum platform.
|
|
|
|
It's painful to look like a coin loses its value at such pace  50% per week?) is it already floor? or will we go down until it becomes worthless? It's blood in the streets everywhere in cryptos these days, my guess is that people are selling alts with the intention of going to FIAT until the bloodbath is over. |
|
|
|
|
Is there no ANN thread for Neurogress? The link to the ANN does not work. Moreover, how long will the ICO last?
|
|
|
|
we will update client asap , if you have such question above ,just follow it
we are working at one key bounty function now . will be released soon.
airdrop will open soon and will burn next 10M MTNC before release new version/
Good to hear that something is boiling in the pot. Dev Activity is badly needed now to resume attention to the coin, which I'm sensing had a bit faded lately. All the best! |
|
|
|
Simply create a new wallet using the "Use a hardware device" option (DO NOT have the Ledger wallet app open, and make sure you have already connected your Nano S, entered the PIN and opened the BTC app).
Sorry, something that I don't understand: you say "DO NOT have the Ledger wallet app open" and then "make sure you have already connected your Nano S, entered the PIN and opened the BTC app" - are these two statements not in cotraddiction? If the BTC app has been opened is the Ledger wallet also not open? I have not the Nano S but have the HW.1 and it should be the same, when you connect your wallet to the USB port of the PC, this means the wallet is connected but not the bitcoin app. You have to open from the programs menu the bitcoin app. So see the difference, it is not the same. Ok, I've got it. it's not the same. But still, how can you have the BTC app open while you are not having the Ledger wallet open? He says ""make sure you have already connected your Nano S, entered the PIN and opened the BTC app" which means that at that point also the wallet will be open ("when you connect your wallet to the USB port of the PC, this means the wallet is connected") and he says "DO NOT have the Ledger wallet app open". See the contraddiction? |
|
|
|
|
It is not really feasable that admins can check all the posts which are made. No way. We are speaking of thousands and thousands of posts every day, I guess. Moreover, this would mean the only the opinions which those few admins like would get merited - the effects long term would be terrible.
The way that has been chose is the best one I think, the only problem is the strong deflation of sMerits - there simply are not enough sMerit circulating in the system. Since it is difficult to get them, people tend not to give them out easily. This can and should be improved.
|
|
|
|
Simply create a new wallet using the "Use a hardware device" option (DO NOT have the Ledger wallet app open, and make sure you have already connected your Nano S, entered the PIN and opened the BTC app).
Sorry, something that I don't understand: you say "DO NOT have the Ledger wallet app open" and then "make sure you have already connected your Nano S, entered the PIN and opened the BTC app" - are these two statements not in cotraddiction? If the BTC app has been opened is the Ledger wallet also not open? |
|
|
|
The price and volume of f0me trading appear to be better than yesterday being trading at 9 sat, who is behind the price movement though i am sure it is not the developer but it could either be the takeover team or an individual willing to acquire more coin before the take over. I will be watching this development and see how it is going to be unfold.
This is surreal. It that will go on we will have a zombi coin surviving and even thriving for totally mysterious reasons  In fact, the crypto-space is often so much detached from reality, that everything can become possible, including the close-to-impossible. |
|
|
|
|
The android wallet has still to be fixed as far as synchronization of blackbytes is concerned. No matter how many times I reinstall it, I never manage to have all blackbytes synchronizing properly on my android multisig wallets.
|
|
|
|
|
I was not aware of this contest, otherwise I would have taken part to it. When was it announced and when has been the deadline?
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the buying opportunity, getting some right now.
unless you get 250k BTX every monday, we are still having troubles, since that much is given freely every week. 7% and 8% airdrop is proving to be very bad... I still wish we continued 3% whole year. I vied for this at one point... but we should have distributed all the coins all at once rather than prolong the pain. The biggest mistake of this coin was pre-mining and even doing airdrops. Additionally, dropping to BTC holders proved to be ineffective at best. We should have taken our medicine and moved forward but instead of that we prolonged and compounded the problems. All coins at once would have not helped the growth of the adoption base, which is crucial for the success of a coin. To keep 3% monthly to some extent would have been better, but on the other side it would have slowed down distribution. |
|
|
|
The Pundits Were Wrong, Bancor Solves A Big Problem, and is Scaling RapidlyBancor hit the market with a splash in June, 2017, when it raised a (then) record $150 million in an ICO. At it’s core, Bancor is a set of formulas that solves the liquidity problems faced by most tokens. Bancor works by creating a token that is connected to shared liquidity pools on the blockchain. The way the math works, the formulas are essentially hard coded two way price elasticity of demand functions. If it sounds complex, it is because it is complex, but so are many algorithms. There’s been a lot written about Bancor, most of which has been negative. The most notable negative story was Emin Gün Sirer’s “Bancor is Flawed”, which was a 29 point takedown of Bancor. While Bancor Product Architect Eyal Hertzog penned a well written response to each of the Emion’s 29 points, I found it odd that not one of Emin’s 29 points directly addressed the set of formulas that power Bancor, which is really the only thing that matters (IMHO). Now it appears that the tide of public sentiment for Bancor is turning, as the market focus shifts from hypotheticals, to what is actually happening. Last week, Coindesk featured the article “Bancor Bounce Back?” which highlighted that Bancor’s volume rose from “…$3 million per week in November to $37 million per week in January”. Below I look at some additional data which speaks to the rate at which the Bancor platform is scaling. https://medium.com/crypto-oracle/the-pundits-were-wrong-bancor-solves-a-big-problem-and-is-scaling-rapidly-38a696c9e211 Excellent article with reporting very satisfying data. Bancor was destined to a slow start since most of the people cannot understand anything different from what they have already learnt to recognize. But now it seems the gear is starting to move faster and faster forward. |
|
|
|
|
Well, it has been a long ride, we've started to promote the Spectiv project eight months ago, and finally we should now receive our deserved tokens. Let's hope the project will deliver a successful platform.
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure if there's another thread for this already, or if this belongs in a different section. So basically I thought it would be helpful to post up your Bitcoin address in this thread in the event that your account gets compromised later on down the road. You can simply make a new alt account, sign the address that your original account posted here, and have irrefutable proof that you're the actual owner. It's not 100% guaranteed that you'll get your account back, but it's a pretty good start. Of course, if your account is compromised, the hacker could just come back to this thread and edit/delete whatever address you post here, so that's why I'm asking people to quote the address posted by the preceding user in this thread. Here's mine:
1FLnpvdXL6ooBpFj2LHqZxQsrxn2voj5uv
Here is my btc address: 12VMyj6YumEQcMe1oPaGaMASNHqJMwrnyP This is my BTC address: 14H7o4DwdobkH3RP82fT6CVyfDSaqs5s43 Very good idea by the way. I hope I will never need to use this service though |
|
|
|
I see that you want to rename the coin. Take in consideration that a good name is totally crucial for the success of a coin. 90% of the coins have a banal nonsensical name and this is a guarantee for their rapid oblivion. If we chose a banal name a rapid oblivion will be the destiny of this coin too, since it won't trigger imagination of people. and community won't grow. F0me on the other side is a truly excellent name, for a number of reasons I won't discuss now. The fact that the community wants to have nothing to to with the scammish inventor of this coin is quite a trivial argument to dismiss this name (unless a better name is found, of course). A lot of coins have kept their original name after that their creator has vanished. Bitcoin included, by the way (even though Satoshi didn't disappear with a couple of stolen BTCs, he just disappeared with a million of near-to-instamined BTCs  ) |
|
|
|
it should synchronize. because now the node will be located in another directory. Correct, second wallet is creating new file so it has to download ands sync it. Other option is to copy blockchain file from the first wallet folder. Can't you just have two masternodes in the same wallet? If I'm going to the masternode tab in the wallet I see that it is possible to add masternodes. In fact I've tried, and the only result is that the first masternode has stopped to work. No you can't. They have to be on separate folders and have their own files, hence why you have to add -datadir attrib to shortcut for second masternode. Thanks, I will try that. Now I've got another problem, after moving some staked coins out of the first masternode's address, which are necessary to build the second one, the first masternode has stopped to function. When I'm trying to launch it I'm getting a message: "Error could not allocate vin". I have exactly 50,000 coins at that address now. Moreover, even though I'm unlocking the wallet, after a while I find out it has locked itself again, without any action from my side. But this problem I have noticed already for a long time. I have solved the problem by re-doing from scratch both masternodes, and for both applying instructions on how to make multiple masternodes. At first it didn't work, even though I had exactly 50,000 on a single address as required, but I had send them to that address in two times. So I have then re-done it once more sending the 50,000 coins in one single time and then the masternode worked. I have mentioned it here so that people setting up a masternode wouldn't repeat my mistake. In the instructions it is not specified that you have to make one single transfer of the coins. Good to hear that you get it working. Yeah, maybe we need new more accurate instruction for newcomers, or even better - a video tutorial. A video tutorial would probably be the best option. And another issue that should be addressed is the fact that on some computers the wallets stop to run the masternodes now and then and they have to be relaunched manually. I'm saying on some computers since on one of mine computer it happens and on the other one doesn't. Big mystery. |
|
|
|
it should synchronize. because now the node will be located in another directory. Correct, second wallet is creating new file so it has to download ands sync it. Other option is to copy blockchain file from the first wallet folder. Can't you just have two masternodes in the same wallet? If I'm going to the masternode tab in the wallet I see that it is possible to add masternodes. In fact I've tried, and the only result is that the first masternode has stopped to work. No you can't. They have to be on separate folders and have their own files, hence why you have to add -datadir attrib to shortcut for second masternode. Thanks, I will try that. Now I've got another problem, after moving some staked coins out of the first masternode's address, which are necessary to build the second one, the first masternode has stopped to function. When I'm trying to launch it I'm getting a message: "Error could not allocate vin". I have exactly 50,000 coins at that address now. Moreover, even though I'm unlocking the wallet, after a while I find out it has locked itself again, without any action from my side. But this problem I have noticed already for a long time. I have solved the problem by re-doing from scratch both masternodes, and for both applying instructions on how to make multiple masternodes. At first it didn't work, even though I had exactly 50,000 on a single address as required, but I had send them to that address in two times. So I have then re-done it once more sending the 50,000 coins in one single time and then the masternode worked. I have mentioned it here so that people setting up a masternode wouldn't repeat my mistake. In the instructions it is not specified that you have to make one single transfer of the coins. |
|
|
|
"Crypto" it's from ancient greek, and it means "hidden".
So, to take off anonymity to something "hidden" is a contradiction. Of course the power will try everything to connect cryptoaccouts to people, so we need to act very carfully.
I guess this will be the endgame of the powerful circles, every wallet of every cryptocurrency linked to a phisical person, by law, and perhaps even by Windows. I would not be surprised if the next release of Windows would do that automatically, continuously scanning the PC for wallets and linking them to the owner of the Window license. |
|
|
|
This article is an absolute must read for everybody in the crypto world. I have been aware from the beginning of Bancor's adventure about the virtuous effects that Bancor would have had in contrasting the infamous pump & dumps schemes, but now this article shows a real case and many details. As I said, a must read. |
|
|
|
I don't see why the airdrops could not have continued at a reduced level or extended interval as part of the distribution method. If nothing else, it gives people a reason to look into Byteball and is easy to understand. I realize you always said the March airdrop may not happen, and can see moving away from rewarding BTC holders, but it would be interesting to see some data on how many new users these methods have attracted (sorry if it's somewhere I missed) versus the airdrop participation.
I realize that people blinded by greed cannot really get it: the purpose of the airdrop was to spread the coins to more and more people. It has worked for a while, it has then stopped to work. Alternative distribution methods are not much better? This only means we have to look for yet more different and better ways, not just go back to a method which have proved not to work any more. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
