IOTA - Permissioned ledger Russian extortion scheme

[Come-from-Beyond]

I don't have time to write up a detailed study. I made an observation and asked a question. Perhaps someone else would like to look more carefully.

It's only you and me who cares about this and I'm too lazy for this, so...

[smooth]

I don't have time to write up a detailed study. I made an observation and asked a question. Perhaps someone else would like to look more carefully.

It's only you and me who cares about this and I'm too lazy for this, so...

Yet, you stated that the data were incorrectly sampled and focused on a particular subset. I'm wondering how you know that.

For that matter, I'm also curious how you know what other people care about.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Yet, you stated that the data were poorly sampled and focused on a particular subset. I'm wondering how you know that.

I looked at those dates, they cover 2 months period which is 1/6 of a year. Both, Nxt and Iota, are innovative projects, so it's not surprising that they attract people. Common sense says that finding 10 users that registered within 2 months and got attracted by Nxt and Iota is not so improbable as you want to say. Resume: look my posts above.

[PondSea]

smooth if you have facts, present them.

I was in Qora, then NXT then iota but then i have been in BTC BTCD SC <insert Shitcoins> etc... Does this make me a sock puppet too?

[cryptohunter]

smooth if you have facts, present them.

I was in Qora, then NXT then iota but then i have been in BTC BTCD SC <insert Shitcoins> etc... Does this make me a sock puppet too?

Facts? this is a closed ICO with no transparency and no regulation. You don't get to look behind the curtain.

Ok, some people are going to be real investors. Looks to be a very high proportion of very new accounts and innactive accounts though.
That's the problem with unregulated ico with no transparency- Nobody can say.

Hence why the onus is on the ico to prove they are doing their best to distribute widely and not just share amongst a tiny percentage thus making it very easy to limit supply whilst pumping later on.

Coupled with the fact it's from the same people as nxt then you have to go that extra mile when running an ico not to be seen as doing the same thing as before.

This is why only POW with fair release is beyond question.

If you are going to have an ICO should be widely advertised as possible before and during the ICO and have a proportion of POW.

If it does not have those elements then it's wide open for manipulation and pumping.

[smooth]

I looked at those dates, they cover 2 months period which is 1/6 of a year. Both, Nxt and Iota, are innovative projects, so it's not surprising that they attract people. Common sense says that finding 10 users that registered within 2 months and got attracted by Nxt and Iota is not so improbable as you want to say.

What is your estimate of how many users I looked at to find those 10?

[Come-from-Beyond]

What is your estimate of how many users I looked at to find those 10?

In the list of users sorted by the date of registration? The same order of magnitude. Read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias and you'll get why your sampling was incorrect.

[smooth]

What is your estimate of how many users I looked at to find those 10?

In the list of users sorted by the date of registration? The same order of magnitude. Read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias and you'll get why your sampling was incorrect.

The sampling was not incorrect for what it was intended to accomplish. I looked at users active in promoting or expressing interest in IOTA to see if their backgrounds have surprising commonality.

Answer: I looked at 11 such accounts. The second or third I looked at was not an obvious hit, so I excluded it, but arguably it too could be included. They are all extremely similar relative to the population of currently-active forum users, and not just in terms of registration date, though certainly that.

Conclusion: The users expressing interest in IOTA are predominantly at best a narrow group with an unusually common background and forum activity history, and at worst a cheaply assembled group of sock puppets.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Conclusion: The users expressing interest in IOTA are predominantly at best a narrow group with an unusually common background and forum activity history, and at worst a cheaply assembled group of sock puppets.

Looks like you haven't read survivorship bias article. Well, not many people care about posts in this thread, so we can stop here. This will save my time on explanation why survivorship bias is applicable in this case.

[Days]

As usual Smooth the Monero/Aeon developer spamming other coins threads to prove that other coins are shit except the spam coins he supports; sock puppets accounts from Monero/Aeon party are different level in this forum.

My feeling is don't believe any POLL in this forum nor believe anything spammed by Monero people.

[Snail2]

As usual Smooth the Monero/Aeon developer spamming other coins threads to prove that other coins are shit except the spam coins he supports; sock puppets accounts from Monero/Aeon party are different level in this forum.

My feeling is don't believe any POLL in this forum nor believe anything spammed by Monero people.

Pretty much like that. Also depicting PoW as a non permissioned ledger is theoretically right, but in reality no longer true. In these days obtaining PoS coins and staking is much more affordable than mining.

[r0ach]

Also depicting PoW as a non permissioned ledger is theoretically right

Which is what brings us to the point of this thread.  It's a wolf in sheep's clothing.  A coin pretending to be a permissionless decentralized currency but really isn't.  This system fooled many very smart people at first glance, we're talking many career mathematicians and PhDs, so don't feel bad whoever didn't figure it out till now.  For anyone who doesn't get it, "distributed" is not the same thing as "decentralized" and "permissionless".  Having said that, the distributed security part is also full of a lot of holes.  

If it was released today, it would just be another greater fool pump like NXT, then fade into obscurity never to be heard from again due to severe technical issues similar to Burstcoin or Cryptonite.  Attempting to improve on Bitcoin by a complete rewrite of the entire system is not a fly by night endeavor.  This thread will be extremely unpopular with all coins not utilizing standard PoW as Bitcoin does, because it also shows the terminal flaws of those other systems.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Having said that, the distributed security part is also full of a lot of holes.  

This is worth another 50 BTC bet which we'll do after sorting out the first one, right?

[winterzauber]

The problem with this bullshit post of r0ach is, its a pure FUD.

And I agree with rezilient

[Come-from-Beyond]

The problem with this bullshit post of r0ach is, its a pure FUD.

And I agree with rezilient

Well, if I can earn 100 BTC on his FUD - why not? If he has balls to accept the bets, of course.

[r0ach]

Having said that, the distributed security part is also full of a lot of holes.  

This is worth another 50 BTC bet which we'll do after sorting out the first one, right?

I'll be happy to accept that bet.  Anything with a probabilistic security model is by definition "full of holes".  It's designed to fail in other words.  The only thing that gives it any usability is it's fault or state recovery.  You're inherently trying to create a perpetual motion machine based on human incentivized desirability to constantly reboot the system afterwards.

The 50 BTC payment by one of you or your associates can be sent here:

13Vec94iVPETRahJjf9zWwoyuJV6uh2o1e

[LitcoinCollector]

[Come-from-Beyond]

Having said that, the distributed security part is also full of a lot of holes.  

This is worth another 50 BTC bet which we'll do after sorting out the first one, right?

I'll be happy to accept that bet.  Anything with a probabilistic security model is by definition "full of holes".  It's designed to fail in other words.  The only thing that gives it any usability is it's fault or state recovery.  You're inherently trying to create a perpetual motion machine based on human desirability to constantly reboot the system afterwards.

The 50 BTC payment by one of you or your associates can be sent here:

13Vec94iVPETRahJjf9zWwoyuJV6uh2o1e

"...which we'll do after sorting out the first one". One bet at a time. So, what about the first one? Do you accept it?

[r0ach]

Having said that, the distributed security part is also full of a lot of holes.  

This is worth another 50 BTC bet which we'll do after sorting out the first one, right?

I'll be happy to accept that bet.  Anything with a probabilistic security model is by definition "full of holes".  It's designed to fail in other words.  The only thing that gives it any usability is it's fault or state recovery.  You're inherently trying to create a perpetual motion machine based on human desirability to constantly reboot the system afterwards.

The 50 BTC payment by one of you or your associates can be sent here:

13Vec94iVPETRahJjf9zWwoyuJV6uh2o1e

"...which we'll do after sorting out the first one". One bet at a time. So, what about the first one? Do you accept it?

I did not receive payment for this one yet.

[cryptohunter]

As usual Smooth the Monero/Aeon developer spamming other coins threads to prove that other coins are shit except the spam coins he supports; sock puppets accounts from Monero/Aeon party are different level in this forum.

My feeling is don't believe any POLL in this forum nor believe anything spammed by Monero people.

Pretty much like that. Also depicting PoW as a non permissioned ledger is theoretically right, but in reality no longer true. In these days obtaining PoS coins and staking is much more affordable than mining.

How can obtaining coins at 3000% over ICO essentially be cheaper than mining fairly from the start? That does not have to be the case.

Yes of course it is cheaper if you are selling them to yourself for next to nothing then pumping them 3000% for others to buy. Of course that is far more affordable since you are getting paid a fortune just for having them.


It is impossible to get more than your fair share of the tokens/coins if you follow a fair release protocol on a POW launch. Please explain to me how it is at all possible.

ICO is a closed curtain behind which anything can be taking place.

POW is an open book you get to see exactly what is happening as it unfolds.

If someone can show me how you can gain unfair advantage on POW  with announced release, low initial block rewards, fast scaling dif, slow long mining period...  then go ahead and explain.