SMART Coin Observer

Quote from: psionin on November 30, 2016, 09:23:41 AM

So it seems that Doge is actually fairly conservative in terms of the number of coins being produced - $3K a day is not much for a popular international currency, such an amount is very small compared to some of the other counterparts. And the percentage goes down over time since it's a constant, which is at 4.9% now rather than 5.25% initially at the end of the launch.

I think there's definitely demand for micro transactions, which are not that feasible with Bitcoin due to the high fees, and since Doge costs only 1 DOGE per transaction, with the additional benefit of being much faster than Bitcoin, is there any other currency better suited for this purpose? Perhaps Litecoin, but there's not much else out there with enough adoption and community support to be practical.

Quote from: sidhujag on February 05, 2017, 05:39:17 AM

You can add syscoin to that list.. it may be the first merged mined coin with hash rates up to btc levels for fair tests of segwit.. it is on 0.13.2 with the next release in a few weeks.

Why do i want segwit in sys? Simple.. schnorr sigs for advanced multisig aliases. Also lightening networks will allow for auction types of.offers and other cool stuff.

Re: how many of you are investing in chronobank ico?

Quote from: Huge Black Woman on February 07, 2017, 04:16:02 AM

I tell you diss. Ain't no penicillin' on this earf gon' touch the gonnorhea this coin got. Its gonnorhea is itself infected wit' Lyme disease, which is in turn comin' down wit' AIDS. This ain't no unnerstatement, this shit's ba-aa-aa-aad. It don't take no microbiologist nor microeconomist ta know dat. You all is gon' lose yo money fasta then a jerry-atric blue hair momma wit' Alzheimers an' takin Valium fo' sleep. You be lookin' in the fridge for it.

All o' you who buy this crazap git wat you deserve, which is a little lighter inna fanny pack.

ZEC vs ZCL, what makes one better?

Quote from: languagehasmeaning on January 30, 2017, 07:55:36 AM

Quote from: Djinou94 on January 30, 2017, 01:35:54 AM

If you want to compare ZEC/ZCL compared it with BYTECOIN and MONERO
One is a scam the second a fork and see which one wins now ?

Interesting comparison but I think a 20% dev mining tax for 4 years (ZEC) is different than a 80% premine (BCN)

I prefer ZCL over ZEC and of course love XMR and dislike BCN

Quote from: Djinou94 on January 30, 2017, 01:35:54 AM

If you want to compare ZEC/ZCL compared it with BYTECOIN and MONERO
One is a scam the second a fork and see which one wins now ?

Most Brazen Altcoin Scams?

Quote from: francisthecrusher on February 06, 2017, 03:37:07 AM

Bytecoin was very elaborate:

The dev used some buggery in the hash algo code which basically artificially slowed down mining (though not for him of course). At the same time, he claimed the coin had been used on the dark web for 2 years before announcing on the clear web (to justify why 2 years of coins had already been mined at launch). Then the devs went on to start MinerGate.

People really are falling HARD for the Chronobank scam https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1783168.0

also XEM is the least dev'd platform / $ evaluation

--

Re: ICO analysis demands

Quote from: zidorov on January 31, 2017, 07:54:31 AM

Hi guys!

We are a team of enthusiasts of crowfunding.

We believe that funding free from legacy institutions can bring a life to completely new products and services that will change the world to be a better place!
But a lot of scam and low quality projects will waste the resources and discredit the ideas.

So we're conducting a research on how a typical crypto-asset investor usually find, analyze and use information on ICOs during all of its steps (pre-ICO, ICO, post-ICO stages). We're planning to revise our current development plan to reorder features releases. The most wanted functions and services will be released ASAP in our service to help investors rate ICOs efficiently.

All tasks could be grouped into some categories:
1. information retrieval (monitoring and participating: slack, tweets, forums, news sites, github activity, blockchain data collection etc)
2. information processing and analysis (automated text analysis, data mining etc)
3. reporting and alerting
4. portfolio management
5. social interactions and knowledge sharing

A lot of these tasks are done nowadays manually or with inefficient tools.

Some of topics to discuss:
1) what is the most painful or time-consuming tasks when analyzing an ICO?
2) what should be done by a human and what could be automated?
3) how to encourage experts to share knowledge or results of analysis?
4) how to divide an ICO analysis work among experts to speed up analysis of one ICO?
5) how to prevent a scam or conflict of interests from an expert?
6) should an expert earn by sharing its profitable portfolio with [paid] followers?
and any other related topics.

If we find a strong demand we will start an ICO to be funded by early adopters which will receive service access tokens (probably a Waves Platform will be used to issue tokens).

We are welcome you to discuss what your need when dealing with ICOs!

----
How to analyze an ICO project going to be scam or not?

Quote from: dihari on February 08, 2017, 03:49:30 AM

As we know, new coins is born almost every week. ICO is inviting peoples to invest on their project with the promise of big return.
But we have seen many of them disappeared without a trace after hold fund from investors. This make a decrease in the level of trust to invest on new project from new developer.
How do we know if some project is going to be scam? What factors make it different with "good future" project?

Quote from: fikihafana on February 08, 2017, 07:08:44 PM

Quote from: Slark on February 08, 2017, 04:05:56 AM

I will tell you the truth. If the scam is good enough you won't be able to spot it that easily. There are however some clear indicators that we are dealing with fraudulent developers:

1. Unrealistic or hyper optimistic goals.
2. Stolen, copied whitepaper or paper without technical details.
3. No transparency, no real names behind the coin, no social media accounts, or fake LinkedIn profiles.
4. Self Moderated thread is usually slightly suspicious too, but that is rather minor fact, might be a way to deter idiots and trolls.
5. No real purpose, or project overly similar to already existing ones.

6. do not trust "SOON" words, if dev say it too much
7. Dev not answer many critical question
8. Dev delete some post without reason

Quote from: wavespump on February 09, 2017, 12:59:34 PM

Quote from: barnaba on February 09, 2017, 12:43:20 PM

I see lot of ICOs with such called escrows but:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escrow

"An escrow is an account established by a broker for holding funds on behalf of the broker's principal or some other person until the consummation or termination of a transaction"

I just wonder why people tolerate in ICOs where main product is software tolerate a very simplified escrow which is escrow called but have little to do with escrow?
OK you get some Tokens or simplified coin before new one is developed, but this is not a consummation of transaction or agreement.

Right now the best escrow transaction example are holidays, where you pay to travel agency when you come back from holidays. Because they bankrupt to many times leaving people on the AirPorts on they back home or in worst situations.

How escrow for ICOs which are not assets like http://digix.io or hardware related like https://bnktothefuture.com/pitches/2893/_embs-ether-mining-backed-security-fund.html
??

In my opinion escrow for strongly software related ICOs should be an institution or software house which will have in mind keeping good reputation - like software house working often with Venture Capital and similar.

Escrow should release funds after reaching milestones after proper Quality of Service tests and Software tests.
Reaching part of milestone results in receiving part of funds. After bugfixing and patches. With IO or DO decisions can be also altered by community...

Why not ?

You are right, only a few projects(Stratis&Lisk) use the escrow mode like you said, which releases partial fund after specific milestone has been done).

Most scam projects use poor escrows, best example is: Bittrex and breakout, breakout shit had 3 ico and scammed more than 700 BTC fund, their first ico was scam, but bittrex was still escrow for them, Bittrex only asks: normal blockchain, wallet and coin distribution,breakout finally released nothing on the roadmap and turned out to be a scam.

Another example: Opair scam and SebastianJu. Most people know this scam lied to escrow. Additionally, recent story of ASC team scammed 3 famous escrows(Lauda, yahoo and minerjones) by cheating a vague escrow term.

Does Litecoin have a future?

Quote from: rokkyroad on February 08, 2017, 10:02:01 PM

I have no clue what Litecoin will do. All I know is if I have to baghold something I prefer it to be ltc.

A.
There is a mindset among the greater Bitcoin development world, known as 'Bitcoin Maximalism'. It refers to the opinion that building apps upon Bitcoin, and its’ particular blockchain, is the best and most efficient way of going forward, and other crypto currencies, and their respective blockchains, will eventually succumb to the Network Effect.

- Butters 'antiBitcoin Maximalist' coiner

verses

B.
"Because any appcoin must compete with Bitcoin, there is inherently an aversion to holding the appcoin rather than Bitcoin. This means that an app can always improve by transitioning to use Bitcoin instead [of] the appcoin. Since we are talking about open source projects, it is always possible for anyone to fork an existing app and make the changes himself."

- Daniel Krawisz

asset platforms bottom line

fees
___________

https://www.mynxt.info/charts/fees_per_day.php

14500*365=5292500

s0 litecoin national costs about $21.6M /yr to operate

Quote from: OBAViJEST on March 03, 2017, 12:30:23 AM

We all know 99% of ICOs end up to be garbage - only a few coins tend to live long enough to be considered 'worthwhile' (maintaining or rising above the ICO price).

What does the community think keeps these coins alive, instead of the usual result of those buying into the ICO dumping upon launch?

the intent of SMC is to facilitate just that.
REPUTABLE icos

currently boiler room boys run the show.

Quote from: superresistant on March 07, 2017, 11:17:33 AM

Smart contract isn't something new, far from it. So many people has been learning solidity scripting language in the past years but the only time I was given the opportunity of using a smart contract, I didn't and saved myself from one of the biggest fiasco ever in crypto : the DAO.

Right now I just did a smart contract unexpectedly for a real use case and it went like :

That's it. I literally had no idea I was doing a smart contract if I wasn't told it's a smart contract.
I needed to trade with a total stranger on the Internet, the escrow wasn't available so we just did a smart contract through the chat box.

That's how smart contracts should works : for a real use without being aware you're doing a smart contract.

Quote from: BitcoinNational on March 12, 2017, 10:28:02 AM

your list is shit, but i will still quote it.
HUM BUG!

Quote from: Prosperityforall on April 15, 2015, 10:22:48 PM

I've been intrigued with the prospect of anonymous coins so I decided to make this list of all known anononymous coins and their anonymity systems compared to one another.

God/Emperor Tier(Most anonymous coin):

Monero - This coin uses something called Cryptonote, which is at it stands, the most anonymous system available. Cryptonote is unrivaled in terms of fungibility ability and secure anonymity while also having completely different code than Bitcoin, so it's not a bitcoin clone as almost all other coins are. Monero has no premine or instamine, has a very large, active community, and a large dedicated dev team of 7(lucky #).

Prince Tier

Shadowcash - This coin uses the Ring Signatures supplied in Monero/Cryptonote, it also uses Shadow Tokens to help with anonymity as well, and it's all done on the Bitcoin codebase, it is an initial fork of Bitcoin. However this coin had just 14 days available for mining, so it has what's called a fastmine.

Court Official Tier

Darknote - This coin uses the same Cryptonote system Monero has, which means it's anonymity system already surpasses many other coin's who uses mixers, tumbler, and etc. It has a small community and dev team. This coin was originally called Ducknote before the name change.

Clown/Jester Tier

Dash - This coin uses masternodes to deliver anonymity. However, there are a few huge issues with this coin, it has had an enormous instamine where 2million+ coins were emitted in 2 days to a few miners at it's release, and then have the large coin ouput reduced by more than 300% by it's developers. This means that the extremely early miners who mined on the first 2 days recieved 10% of the entire coin supply all to themselves. Dash was originally named Darkcoin, then renamed to Dash, in what's most likely an attempt to try and shake off the initial scam it had by it's developers(It failed).

Navajocoin- This coin uses centralized mixers to mix users coins, which destroys the entire point of being decentralized.

and more to come.

Feel free to post about the various, almost endless anonymous coins available.

Quote from: misterbigg on March 12, 2017, 06:16:50 PM

Ripple replaces mining with a system of "validators." These special nodes use consensus to agree in which transactions to include in the next ledger. Their decisions are broadcast through the network as messages signed with their public key. Each node (computer running the rippled software) in the RCL network is responsible for deciding its "UNL" (which stands for Unique Node List). This list controls which validators the node cares about.

For everyone on the network to agree on the same ledger chain, there are various rules about how the UNL should be formed. Specifically that there should be a minimum amount of overlap of people's UNLs. We won't get into that here.

The most important factor in choosing this UNL, is to make sure that you pick validators which are not colluding. There is a set of rules and best practices for validators to enforce this. The most important is that validators must be publicly identified. For example, if hypothetically Microsoft is running a validator then it should publish its public key in a way that certifies Microsoft is under control of the validator. An easy way to do this is to put a text file with the public key at the company's domain, reachable via HTTPS with a known certificate. For example at https://microsoft.com/ripple.txt

Now I am looking at this masternode system of Dash and it seems to be that its essentially the same as Ripple validators (with minor technical differences). But in Dash, the masternodes identity is secret. This is exactly the scenario that Ripple describes as insecure!

Am I missing something here?

Ripple Labs Employee since July 9th, 2013
https://github.com/vinniefalco