Re: [AXIOM] AxiomMemHash, Schnorr Sigs Implemented, APOS 3.0, AXH 2.0 Proposed

Unfortunately with crypto it is a matter of damned if you do and damned if you dont for a dev. If a dev does not make a post, fudders take advantage of that and post that the dev has disappeared and is a scammer. If a dev does make a post then fudders take advantage of that and try to take apart the dev based on his post. The only certainty in crypto these days is fud.

If a dev decides to make a post he needs a thesaurus, dictionary, linguist, elocutionist and a tech manual because every word will be analysed and taken apart. I am a strong believer of less is more and wise men speak because they have something to say - fools because they have to say something (Plato). Fools and scammers will try to say as much nonsense, empty promises and impossible things as they can to cause hype and to make a quick profit. Scammers are after the low hanging fruit. I am thinking more and more that it is best for devs to stay quiet and only speak or post when there is something useful to be said. In the last case the worst that can happen is the fudders fud the price down and when something useful is posted eventually, then the price goes up again quickly and the fudders say ****!, ****! I sold at such and such a low price.

The dev could be a scammer which would be very disappointing, but then he would have been long gone after taking his profit and be already posting under a new name. On the other hand the answer can be as simple as that the dev is working on solutions and will go to market when the solution is finished being coded and tested and perhaps there are also production issues as per the IRC quote becuause nothing in life is perfect. It is an interesting and noble field to try and code something to be GPU resistant because if that can be done with a great level of success it could mean a more equal processing of POW blocks for a greater number of people by using CPUs. The dev probably made an unfortunate choice of words and was over-confident when he launched the coin to use absolute words like "foolproof" instead of using a more tempered "resistant". Sometimes the best tests are conducted under real life conditions where there are people that actually test the assumptions and break it. Sometimes it takes 2 or 3 or more attempts and adjustments to get a theory right. Ill be watching to see what the dev comes up with in his research in this field and if he gets it right it would be a valuable contribution to the crypto body of knowledge.

I could be wrong of course, and perhaps naive, but maybe the dev is following the second option. If the dev is in fact just keeping quiet until there is something to deliver, he is wise and following the approach that I would recommend for alt-coins currently.