This message was too old and has been purged

[Evil-Knievel]

This message was too old and has been purged

[1714250854]

1714250854

[1714250854]

1714250854

[wonderloops]

I dont know man. I think you need to chill with all the fancy lingo.

[Cryptorials]

Good to see you taking charge of this EK.

[xxxgoodgirls]

EK I am happy you took it over. I believe this is such an interesting project.
How is the team composed at this moment? Will Dazza be a part of it?

[Evil-Knievel]

This message was too old and has been purged

[Dink]

Ek for transperency could you provide a short paragragh on how this change occured.  I support the transfer and hope Dazza joins as a participating member.  I see the ico deposit address has changed, I almost used the old address in a recent deposit, not sure if that would gave mattered.

[Videodrome]

hello,

good news here! congrats!

i saw you also move the founds, will the ICO rules remain the same?

thanks

[ttookk]

Just for the record, here is the old thread in case someone is confused what people talk about here  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1374480.0

The link leads to this exact thread...

[Kruemmelmonster]

um yeah you don't need to get paid. 625 BTC or 260.000$ is nothing right? oh shit i forgot you are a early adopter of BTC cough

[CB_project]

source code available after launch?

[Evil-Knievel]

This message was too old and has been purged

[Evil-Knievel]

This message was too old and has been purged

[cyberhacker]

Even if I am highly in debt right now, I am sure that this debt is just a drop in the ocean compared to what we as a community can achieve here.

I have an appointment now, I will resume the discussion about the algorithmic details from the other thread as soon as I am back.

sorry. you said you have hundreds of btc. now you are in debt.

[Dazza]

I dont know man. I think you need to chill with all the fancy lingo.

The announcement is incoherent.  This is not entirely EK's fault.  I don't know how long EK has had control of the project, but it cannot have been more than about a day before he posted this.  It was a shambles when he inherited it; it is not surprising that it still is.

In my opinion EK should make one, and only one rock-solid unbreakable commitment at this point.  And that is that anybody who has cotributed BTC so far can have their money back right now, no questions asked, and that this offer will remain in place until we can come up with a clear, coherent statement of what it is we are proposing to do.

Other than that, everything should be up for discussion, including the terms of the crowdfunding.  For example, I would like to suggest changing this:

Note, the coins that are given away in this crowdfunding will be the only coins in existence even if significantly less than 5 million coins are given away.

I would suggest that we allow for changes in the money supply, upon a 51% vote of the coin-holders.  For example, they might vote to pay workers more than 100% of the buyers' fees.  Why might they vote to dilute their own holdings?  Because they might hope to attract more miners and thereby expand the economy.  Of course there would have to be limits to ensure that minority coin-holders are not unduly disadvantaged.  Whether or not you like this idea, I think it should be open for discussion.

If I have anything at all to bring to this project, it is out-of-the-box thinking.  But what good am I to you, if the box has been locked and the keys thrown away before I ever arrived on the scene?

[Cryptorials]

.

Other than that, everything should be up for discussion, including the terms of the crowdfunding.  For example, I would like to suggest changing this:

Note, the coins that are given away in this crowdfunding will be the only coins in existence even if significantly less than 5 million coins are given away.

I would suggest that we allow for changes in the money supply, upon a 51% vote of the coin-holders.  For example, they might vote to pay workers more than 100% of the buyers' fees.  Why might they vote to dilute their own holdings?  Because they might hope to attract more miners and thereby expand the economy.  Of course there would have to be limits to ensure that minority coin-holders are not unduly disadvantaged.  Whether or not you like this idea, I think it should be open for discussion.

As long as the coin launches with the 5 million supply then I don't see what could be wrong with a majority vote changing absolutely anything.

But I very much disagree that this should be changed to attract more miners. Unless there is a lot more overhead for a miner performing the work compared to getting it done elsewhere the big advantage here is that the miner is already being paid twice - once with the fee for the work and once with the transactions fees in the blocks they mine. This will surely make mining more attractive than other coins?

Of course that depends both on how much efficiency needs to be sacrificed for security and therefore how much of the cost of mining is met by the market rate for the work done, and what the balance between the number of transactions and amount of submitted work being performed looks like, so I may well change my mind later, but as things stand I would argue against making a change to this.

Edit: In actual fact I think was being stupid there, because it will obviously be likely to have very little submitted work and very few transactions in the early days, so perhaps some coin generation may be necessary. But I think it should reduce to zero relatively quickly compared to other coins.

[Evil-Knievel]

This message was too old and has been purged

[Cryptorials]

Have you guys looked into Tau chain https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=950309.0 ?

There are some similarities to ELC such as 'proof of code execution' although I'm not sure if that is used to secure the chain or just get payment. I tried to follow Tau chain / Agoras a while back but a lot of the AI-type stuff just seemed overly optimistic to me.

[Evil-Knievel]

This message was too old and has been purged

[Evil-Knievel]

This message was too old and has been purged

[cyberhacker]

Even if I am highly in debt right now, I am sure that this debt is just a drop in the ocean compared to what we as a community can achieve here.

I have an appointment now, I will resume the discussion about the algorithmic details from the other thread as soon as I am back.

sorry. you said you have hundreds of btc. now you are in debt.

I did not express myself well, sorry.
I just meant that I have spent a lot on this project already.

understood.