Bitcoin Forum
August 17, 2018, 04:00:03 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.2  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 [86] 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 ... 1003 »
  Print  
Author Topic: BYTEBALL: Totally new consensus algorithm + private untraceable payments  (Read 1110818 times)
cryptodv
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 882
Merit: 501


btcstakes.com


View Profile WWW
December 13, 2016, 02:02:53 AM
 #1701

Total byteball supply is 1 Quadrillion? wtf??

            ▄▄████▄▄
        ▄▄██████████████▄▄
      ███████████████████████▄▄
      ▀▀█████████████████████████
██▄▄       ▀▀█████████████████████
██████▄▄        ▀█████████████████
███████████▄▄       ▀▀████████████
███████████████▄▄        ▀████████
████████████████████▄▄       ▀▀███
 ▀▀██████████████████████▄▄
     ▀▀██████████████████████▄▄
▄▄        ▀██████████████████████▄
████▄▄        ▀▀██████████████████
█████████▄▄        ▀▀█████████████
█████████████▄▄        ▀▀█████████
██████████████████▄▄        ▀▀████
▀██████████████████████▄▄
  ▀▀████████████████████████
      ▀▀█████████████████▀▀
           ▀▀███████▀▀



.SEMUX
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
  Semux uses .100% original codebase.
  Superfast with .30 seconds instant finality.
  Tested .5000 tx per block. on open network
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
█ █
1534521603
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534521603

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534521603
Reply with quote  #2

1534521603
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1534521603
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534521603

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534521603
Reply with quote  #2

1534521603
Report to moderator
CryptoSporidium
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 393
Merit: 250


View Profile
December 13, 2016, 04:17:33 AM
 #1702

I think my proposal is bulletproof.

Not really my friend. Who decided small breasts are a disadvantage? If we exclude sailors, which anyway make a minority in crypto world, I am sure most smart and sophisticated people would prefer small breasts. So I say, less points for small breasts!  Grin

Now go back to the drawing table and invent an even fairer distribution of nascent anarcho-capitalist currencies. ( LOL! )

Seriously, asking for ultimate fairness in a system fundamentally based on scarcity is beyond discussion.


Good point, lets revise my proposal then. Breast distribution of 20% starts with the smallest stake going to the perfect breasts (two large ripe perky mangoes), stake gets proportionately larger as claimants breasts deviate from the 'ideal' pair, both larger and smaller, I like it!

In all seriousness, PoW is the best method, but just too wasteful. If you're going to give away coins with possible future value there has to be something of value given in return. It'd be great if the value wasn't restricted to $$ only, as that opens up the distro to the widest possible numbers, but free coins don't work (too easy to game, too much dumping, no community), and ICO's smell bad and attract scammers. Airdropping on BTC holders will 'work', but one day some smart people will devise a really good method of proof of XXXXX that attracts a lot of people, isn't easily gamed, and appears open and reasonably fair. The distro method is really important, but it's still not a priority for coders who lead most projects. The best method for Airdropping hasn't been worked out yet.
windows88
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84
Merit: 10


View Profile
December 13, 2016, 04:49:35 AM
 #1703

good project, closely watching and will participate
dfox101
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 531
Merit: 500



View Profile
December 13, 2016, 05:23:09 AM
 #1704

The distribution model has become such a distraction it dominates the community conversation, should be speaking more about the merits of the technology and platform.

Yes all people are greedy and wish to get more, in a more "fair" deal to himself.

Talking about tech stuff, I have a question: since there's no fixed block time, the tx happens as it comes, isn't that should be instant confirmation if there are enough activity going on? What is the delay of the confirmation? it heavily depend on the network activity?


It is not instant, it takes a few minutes and depends on the overall activity in the network: the more activity, the faster.

Why it is not instant? say if there are 1000 tx per second in the network, my transaction once done will be covered within a second by 50 other transactions, isn't that after 1 second my transaction will have 50 confirmations? If we put 10 confirmations as confirmed, isn't my tx is confirmed after less than 1 sec?
cryptohunter
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1024



View Profile
December 13, 2016, 07:32:19 AM
 #1705

Come on ....of course the more hash power you have the more coins you will mine. That's not at all what I am saying is it?

Rich guy wants to rent hash he has to pay the same as you to rent hash.

Rich guy wants BB he gets magnitude more than you will for putting the same effort in of linking his BTC whale account.

Can you see here that BB is less fair than POW?

I can't reverse time and circumstances that made him rich and you poor can I? Life maybe was not fair but in crypto you can make things a little more fair for the poor (non BTC whales)

I am saying to you that this method will ensure that he (rich guy) will put the same effort and cost as you into BB and get magnitudes more coins. Where as if it was POW to get 2x more coins than you he will have to spend 2x more? If he spends the same as you he will get the same.

Yes there will be argument he owns his farm and you are renting hash - so what he had to buy the hardware. FYI I have a tiny amount of rigs in my house and will get far less mining than I will by linking my BTC accounts.

Also lots of hash whales tend to rent hash now on launches. Most GPU huge farms stick to high volume coins to unload and pay electricity and hardware loans anyway.


Well you are right about the rich guy need to spend btc to buy hash power, but if it is a profitable operation (like for example when zcash was launched), isn't rich guys will get a lot more profits than the poor guys? so what's the diff between the distribution proposed here? It's the same as the example of bank interest someone gave before.


1. If it is guaranteed to be profitable then rent more hash sell BB and make profits. The same option there for everyone.
2. It will not be a guaranteed profit.
3. the point is everyone has to put the same in to get the same out with POW
4. This method you put the same effort in as a whale and get 10000x less.

It is very easy to see why this way is very unfair. In simple terms this method gives the whale with 1000x more BTC a 1000x more byte ball than you but you take the same risk and put the same effort in.

You simply can not view it like I am linking my 20BTC and getting something for free it does not work like that.


I have explained clearly why POW is more fair many times already in this thread please review these points and think it over.

This coin simply magnifies how much richers the rich guys are over the poor with no risk and no cost to them.

If all alts had been distributed since 2012 like this none of you guys would own a lot lot less alts and the BTC whales would own mostly all of them. All without them investing 1 cent or any effort.


Seccour
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1619
Merit: 1004


Bitcoiner, Crypto-anarchist and Cypherpunk.


View Profile
December 13, 2016, 08:06:52 AM
 #1706

Come on ....of course the more hash power you have the more coins you will mine. That's not at all what I am saying is it?

Rich guy wants to rent hash he has to pay the same as you to rent hash.

Rich guy wants BB he gets magnitude more than you will for putting the same effort in of linking his BTC whale account.

Can you see here that BB is less fair than POW?

I can't reverse time and circumstances that made him rich and you poor can I? Life maybe was not fair but in crypto you can make things a little more fair for the poor (non BTC whales)

I am saying to you that this method will ensure that he (rich guy) will put the same effort and cost as you into BB and get magnitudes more coins. Where as if it was POW to get 2x more coins than you he will have to spend 2x more? If he spends the same as you he will get the same.

Yes there will be argument he owns his farm and you are renting hash - so what he had to buy the hardware. FYI I have a tiny amount of rigs in my house and will get far less mining than I will by linking my BTC accounts.

Also lots of hash whales tend to rent hash now on launches. Most GPU huge farms stick to high volume coins to unload and pay electricity and hardware loans anyway.


Well you are right about the rich guy need to spend btc to buy hash power, but if it is a profitable operation (like for example when zcash was launched), isn't rich guys will get a lot more profits than the poor guys? so what's the diff between the distribution proposed here? It's the same as the example of bank interest someone gave before.


1. If it is guaranteed to be profitable then rent more hash sell BB and make profits. The same option there for everyone.
2. It will not be a guaranteed profit.
3. the point is everyone has to put the same in to get the same out with POW
4. This method you put the same effort in as a whale and get 10000x less.

It is very easy to see why this way is very unfair. In simple terms this method gives the whale with 1000x more BTC a 1000x more byte ball than you but you take the same risk and put the same effort in.

You simply can not view it like I am linking my 20BTC and getting something for free it does not work like that.


I have explained clearly why POW is more fair many times already in this thread please review these points and think it over.

This coin simply magnifies how much richers the rich guys are over the poor with no risk and no cost to them.

If all alts had been distributed since 2012 like this none of you guys would own a lot lot less alts and the BTC whales would own mostly all of them. All without them investing 1 cent or any effort.



You're taking no risk omg.

PoW is less fair than this distribution because you have to invest in hardware or rent and no guaranty of money back. So only those who have money to risk or hardware will participate.

Here you just have to have some BTC and you will have free Byteball regarding on how many you have. You don't have to take a risk and it's fair. You have more BTC, you will have more byteball.

Whales will have more byteball than other people bouhou. Yeah so what ? In PoW it will be the same thing and exclude more people than the current distribution.

So stop with your PoW, you're the only one that want it and the dev will not change his mind.

" If all alts had been distributed since 2012 like this none of you guys would own a lot lot less alts and the BTC whales would own mostly all of them. All without them investing 1 cent or any effort. " - Don't jump to conclusion like that because you don't and can't know.

cryptohunter
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1024



View Profile
December 13, 2016, 08:49:59 AM
 #1707


"fair launch POW" will not be fair at all, it favors people with more hash power thus those with more BTCs (they can buy hash power at places like nicehash). ICOs even worse, it put priority to those who have more BTCs and satisfy first the greedy of the dev, instead of encouraging dev to do a better work. And many garbage coins and promises on the papaer are created this way.


Fair launch POW favours nobody at all. You all have to contribute the same effort to mine. The only real variable is cost of electricity and over a short mining period that does not mean much.  

Of course if you have more money you can rent more hash? but you are actually being charged the same as anyone else. You are actually spending money you are not getting coins for free however rich you are. This method is giving you a LOT more FREE coins just because you are rich and have more BTC you do not have to spend your BTC to get it. So you are getting hugely unfair advantage at no cost or risk at all.

...

Of course PoW favors big guys with hash power. Just look at other coins for PoW, who got the most of the coins? Go to a pool and look, big guys got it all. For a small guy like me, I'd prefer what Tony defined for distribution. The distribution is not once for all, but several distribution and also count the BBs you have. So it is fair.


Come on ....of course the more hash power you have the more coins you will mine. That's not at all what I am saying is it?

Rich guy wants to rent hash he has to pay the same as you to rent hash.

Rich guy wants BB he gets magnitude more than you will for putting the same effort in of linking his BTC whale account.

Can you see here that BB is less fair than POW?

I can't reverse time and circumstances that made him rich and you poor can I? Life maybe was not fair but in crypto you can make things a little more fair for the poor (non BTC whales)

I am saying to you that this method will ensure that he (rich guy) will put the same effort and cost as you into BB and get magnitudes more coins. Where as if it was POW to get 2x more coins than you he will have to spend 2x more? If he spends the same as you he will get the same.

Yes there will be argument he owns his farm and you are renting hash - so what he had to buy the hardware. FYI I have a tiny amount of rigs in my house and will get far less mining than I will by linking my BTC accounts.

Also lots of hash whales tend to rent hash now on launches. Most GPU huge farms stick to high volume coins to unload and pay electricity and hardware loans anyway.



Please stop with your PoW. You want to move from a distribution model where anyone can gets byteball for free to one where you have to either mine yourself or rent hashpower. Who the hell do you think will rent hashpower ? People with a lot money because people with a tiny amount are not going to risk it.

The current distribution method is more fair than PoW because :
You don't risk your money : in PoW you have to either mine yourself - so you pay hardware and electricity or rent it, so both case you pay
Anyone can join easily : two methods to link your BTC address and there is lot of tutorials - not the case for PoW, it's not that easy to mine even with tutorials for a guy lambda
Easy to put handle for the creator : creating a PoW coin just to make an initial distribution, then make a snapshot, then distribute the real coins is to much work for nothing.


move from a distribution model where anyone can gets byteball for free

you speak like everyone gets the same amount of BB? the rich get ALL of the Byteball practically and the poor get basically nothing even though they put in the same effort.

People with a lot money because people with a tiny amount are not going to risk it.

You take risk and you may get reward or may lose money? how is this unfair? People who are poor get rich taking risk, man rish were once poor and took a risk. You take the same risk as anyone else and you gain the same as anyone else. Nobody gets a cheaper shot at BB than anyone else.


You don't risk your money : in PoW you have to either mine yourself - so you pay hardware and electricity or rent it, so both case you pay


This is where I think most people are missing the point or not understanding. Let me give you an example to help you work this out. This will be a very simple example.

Let's imagine every alt since the start was distributed in this way.


BTC whales are now - LTC whales - DOGE whales - every alt whales - they still have all their BTC they never need to spend any so they will OWN the whale share and nobody else ever has a chance to own alts or gain a large share unless whales choose to sell their alts to others and increase the value and holdings of their BTC giving them even more power on the next BB type distribution.


Now with POW

BTC whales are NOT whales in every alt. Most BTC whales are anti alts because they view them as competition. Sure some BTC whales have invested (swapped some of their BTC for some alts) this reduces their BTC holdings and ensures they can not be whales in every alt and still remain a BTC whale forever.


'Just because you get  something for "free" does not make it "fairer" than if you invest or work to get it. Can you not understand this?

This is a very short sighted view.

Right now anyone holding alts and involved in alt coins should pray this method does not take off. Your share of the altcoin sphere will reduced to fragments of the crumbs you already hold. Or if you hold a lot of alt coins (not crumbs) this method is even more damaging to you than you realise.

Anyway I have explained in clear terms how you can not simply give the most to the already richest and give the least to the already poorest and make it fair. It will become clearer if other alts distribute this way.

This was proposed in 2013 and everyone in the alt community refused it. Why? because back then people understood that this method of distribution is the only way BTC whales will control everything forever because they take NO risk to be whales in every alt. Most BTC whales will not risk their BTC on mining alts or investing in ICO so they don't automatically become whales in every single alt forever so other people get a chance to get some alts and built some value in it themselves even if they have to invest from the start. WHen wales hear they are now wales in everything with no risk they will love it because they will be able to crush every alt at will with the resulting value always going back to BTC where they own the whales share.

Your view is like saying there is a race with shit prizes and amazing prizes first there get the best prizes. YOu (the poor) get a free lift 0.005% of the way.... the whales get taken to the finish line for free.

 Then you  (the poor) saying that(the above way) is better than having everyone paying the same amount for their lift per mile per vehicle. Faster vehicles cost everyone the same amount so you want to go faster you all have to pay more.

It is crazy. Sure the rich can PAY to be taken to the finish line faster whilst you may not choose to spend that money risking the prizes are of enough value to warrant spending this expense. But they (the rich) have to pay to get the best prize. You could pay the same amount as them and get the good prizes. Nobody even knows if the good prizes are that good only that they are better than the shit prizest so many of the rich may not bother to pay and will walk like you or not even enter the race.

This current method is just you saying ok it's fair the rich are taken free of charge to the end of the race and the best prizes for no cost to them and guaranteeing the poor get the shit prizes.

You are thinking to yourself I get something for free anyway. You do not. If in an economy the rich just keeping getting more and more and the poor get less and less (even for free) the disparity becomes so great that everything in that economy (crypto markets in this case) become more and more and more unobtainable for the poor.

I'm hopeful this explanation will help you see the that your idea of "fair" is totally unfair once you look at the larger picture. Please read over everything and give me an example with some depth that shows you have taken a look at the bigger picture.

How about this idea then would you approve of this.

For every BTC address that exists you just get an equal amount of BB? sure the rich can split thier address down and down to more. But that is effort and hassle. Maybe the poor man will think his time is worth less so he will take time to split his wallets down and down to get more bb?

tonych is a math guru and very smart guy. What about some other distribution that uses the bitcoin chain. How about you take the average BTC in an address and the further from that average the less you get? I know for sure a smart person like tonyCH could easily invent and execute a way more fair manner of distribution than what it currently is.


Let's discuss not only POW but other bitcoin based free dispersal methods.

To those saying we should discuss the tech and not focus on the initial distributional method. I suggest you look at dash. They could and should have taken over BTC really they were so far ahead of the curve. Why did they not??

Because everytime that coin is mentioned or they try to talk about their new tech they are drown out by those who want to talk about their initial distribution. That project is hamstrung by that forever and I believe no serious investors or business will touch it on the basis of that.

Get the initial distribution wrong and make it look like a scam to enrich only the already rich and face being a pariah coin forever.

Dash has done way better than most coins that are pariahs only because to be fair the instamine has been used to develop the coin somewhat. Sure evans and his pals extracted a ton for themselves but a reasonable amount was reinvested into the coin and developement has been strong. However it will never be the coin it could have been if they took that in a premine fairly and allowed fair POW mining from the start.

This current method to me is much worst than dash's was. Luckily the dev team took the huge share. Here whales, exchanges and other ICOs will take it all with the dev not having much (that we know of unless he runs other projects , is a whale or runs an exchange Smiley )  so the huge whale amounts will not go to development as some did with dash. It will simply be used to pump and dump over and over extracting BTC from investors.

So how about it then

Find the average BTC held in wallets on a snapshot and the further from that amount you are the less you get? would that no be fairer?

Would it not be possible to even inversely reward BTC ownership. The less you have (say minimum 0.1 BTC) the more BB you get. Im sure someone as smart as tonych can think of something much fairer than it is now.

Let's reward the poor for once? or reward the average guy? lets not always reward the rich.

Let's invite some smart people to find a fairer way to use BTC holdings to distribute alts if that's a great idea. Some maths boffin could probably devise something that is actually quite fair but I suspect it would need to be on a random date snapshot or one close to announcement to prevent gaming. Even then trying to game it requires effort does it not? splitting you 50000Btc into 0.1 wallets to claim could be quite a pain in the ass. Better than just giving them whale shares for nothing. Make them work for it if they have to be whales in all new alts.




cryptohunter
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1024



View Profile
December 13, 2016, 08:57:36 AM
 #1708

Come on ....of course the more hash power you have the more coins you will mine. That's not at all what I am saying is it?

Rich guy wants to rent hash he has to pay the same as you to rent hash.

Rich guy wants BB he gets magnitude more than you will for putting the same effort in of linking his BTC whale account.

Can you see here that BB is less fair than POW?

I can't reverse time and circumstances that made him rich and you poor can I? Life maybe was not fair but in crypto you can make things a little more fair for the poor (non BTC whales)

I am saying to you that this method will ensure that he (rich guy) will put the same effort and cost as you into BB and get magnitudes more coins. Where as if it was POW to get 2x more coins than you he will have to spend 2x more? If he spends the same as you he will get the same.

Yes there will be argument he owns his farm and you are renting hash - so what he had to buy the hardware. FYI I have a tiny amount of rigs in my house and will get far less mining than I will by linking my BTC accounts.

Also lots of hash whales tend to rent hash now on launches. Most GPU huge farms stick to high volume coins to unload and pay electricity and hardware loans anyway.


Well you are right about the rich guy need to spend btc to buy hash power, but if it is a profitable operation (like for example when zcash was launched), isn't rich guys will get a lot more profits than the poor guys? so what's the diff between the distribution proposed here? It's the same as the example of bank interest someone gave before.


1. If it is guaranteed to be profitable then rent more hash sell BB and make profits. The same option there for everyone.
2. It will not be a guaranteed profit.
3. the point is everyone has to put the same in to get the same out with POW
4. This method you put the same effort in as a whale and get 10000x less.

It is very easy to see why this way is very unfair. In simple terms this method gives the whale with 1000x more BTC a 1000x more byte ball than you but you take the same risk and put the same effort in.

You simply can not view it like I am linking my 20BTC and getting something for free it does not work like that.


I have explained clearly why POW is more fair many times already in this thread please review these points and think it over.

This coin simply magnifies how much richers the rich guys are over the poor with no risk and no cost to them.

If all alts had been distributed since 2012 like this none of you guys would own a lot lot less alts and the BTC whales would own mostly all of them. All without them investing 1 cent or any effort.



You're taking no risk omg.

PoW is less fair than this distribution because you have to invest in hardware or rent and no guaranty of money back. So only those who have money to risk or hardware will participate.

Here you just have to have some BTC and you will have free Byteball regarding on how many you have. You don't have to take a risk and it's fair. You have more BTC, you will have more byteball.

Whales will have more byteball than other people bouhou. Yeah so what ? In PoW it will be the same thing and exclude more people than the current distribution.

So stop with your PoW, you're the only one that want it and the dev will not change his mind.

" If all alts had been distributed since 2012 like this none of you guys would own a lot lot less alts and the BTC whales would own mostly all of them. All without them investing 1 cent or any effort. " - Don't jump to conclusion like that because you don't and can't know.


Read my latest post I try to give you further examples because I can tell from your replies you believe what you are saying but it is literally NOT true and your reasoning is flawed because you are failing to see the big picture.

Also let me hear your thoughts on the other BTC based methods of distribution that I have proposed.

Where you reward the poor or the average holder above the rich. This again needs to be a random snapshot or one very soon. Not that i think the BTC whales will start breaking their wallet balances down to smaller amounts. Not that it would matter anyway because the rich although they could create more and more wallets it will take effort  and time  and hassle so they would not bother. Also they are already getting the most and poorest the least so how could it get anymore unfair even if they try to game it?

Relaxedsense
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 809
Merit: 1002


View Profile
December 13, 2016, 10:49:31 AM
 #1709

Nothing is going to change before the 25th, deal with it.
Seccour
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1619
Merit: 1004


Bitcoiner, Crypto-anarchist and Cypherpunk.


View Profile
December 13, 2016, 12:24:53 PM
 #1710

Let's imagine every alt since the start was distributed in this way.

It's not the case so no problem.

You take risk and you may get reward or may lose money? how is this unfair? People who are poor get rich taking risk, man rish were once poor and took a risk. You take the same risk as anyone else and you gain the same as anyone else. Nobody gets a cheaper shot at BB than anyone else.

Ok. If a poor guy use 1% of is money to rent hashpower to mine byteball. Same thing for the rich guy. The rich guy will post the same effort as you, and he will risk the same share of his own money as you. And guess what ? He will still earn more than you.

How that shit is more fair that free distribution based on BTC balance ? Where the poor guy will be able to risk only 10% of his money, the righ guy could just risk 1% and get more Byteball. So much fairness wow.

Would it not be possible to even inversely reward BTC ownership. The less you have (say minimum 0.1 BTC) the more BB you get. Im sure someone as smart as tonych can think of something much fairer than it is now.

Let's reward the poor for once? or reward the average guy? lets not always reward the rich.

First it's not possible because a rich could just put his BTC on different addresses and get more Byteball. And the rich are rewarded like the average guy and the poor. 1 BTC will get you 1 gigabyte no matter the amount of BTC you have, so unfair right ?

The rich will be richer no matter what. So let's not fuck the poor with a useless PoW coin for the Byteball distribution because you don't like that fact.



Oh and as Relaxedsense say : Nothing is going to change before the 25th, deal with it.

Zer0Sum
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470
Merit: 1000


View Profile
December 13, 2016, 03:11:32 PM
 #1711

Nothing is going to change before the 25th, deal with it.

No one would work for 2 years on a project...
And then keep zero while handing 60-80% of the project to some random whales.

This coin is professional, some well known actors are behind it.
zanzibar
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 611
Merit: 500


View Profile
December 13, 2016, 03:37:09 PM
 #1712

Nothing is going to change before the 25th, deal with it.

No one would work for 2 years on a project...
And then keep zero while handing 60-80% of the project to some random whales.

This coin is professional, some well known actors are behind it.


He's not keeping zero, he's taking 1%
willowfoot
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 329
Merit: 252


View Profile
December 13, 2016, 04:10:00 PM
 #1713

So 35Rwwc9e2Mj7smFXJ1iXF826cMW3tqfz6x has 2578 BTC.
http://transition.byteball.org/

Looks like the top address is from an ICO
https://blockchain.info/address/35Rwwc9e2Mj7smFXJ1iXF826cMW3tqfz6x

This should be removed considering it is the same as an exchange.  Using other people's BTC to benefit.

Evidence here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1605144.msg16595419#msg16595419

I'm sure there are others as well...

Ghoom
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 170
Merit: 100


View Profile
December 13, 2016, 04:37:46 PM
 #1714

I think we should remove all "tx links" and keep only "signing links".
Seccour
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1619
Merit: 1004


Bitcoiner, Crypto-anarchist and Cypherpunk.


View Profile
December 13, 2016, 05:13:28 PM
 #1715

So 35Rwwc9e2Mj7smFXJ1iXF826cMW3tqfz6x has 2578 BTC.
http://transition.byteball.org/

Looks like the top address is from an ICO
https://blockchain.info/address/35Rwwc9e2Mj7smFXJ1iXF826cMW3tqfz6x

This should be removed considering it is the same as an exchange.  Using other people's BTC to benefit.

Evidence here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1605144.msg16595419#msg16595419

I'm sure there are others as well...


It's not other people's BTC anymore. The BTC are owned by the Komodo team's. People did invest in their ICO to get KMD back. So they have used their BTC to get something else in return, it's not their BTC anymore.

No reason to ban ICO address.

And the only reason exchange address are ban it's not because it use other people's BTC but because other people than the exchange owner were able to linked the address.

yvv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344
Merit: 1000

.


View Profile WWW
December 13, 2016, 05:22:51 PM
 #1716

So 35Rwwc9e2Mj7smFXJ1iXF826cMW3tqfz6x has 2578 BTC.
http://transition.byteball.org/

Looks like the top address is from an ICO
https://blockchain.info/address/35Rwwc9e2Mj7smFXJ1iXF826cMW3tqfz6x

This should be removed considering it is the same as an exchange.  Using other people's BTC to benefit.

Evidence here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1605144.msg16595419#msg16595419

I'm sure there are others as well...


It's not other people's BTC anymore. The BTC are owned by the Komodo team's. People did invest in their ICO to get KMD back. So they have used their BTC to get something else in return, it's not their BTC anymore.

No reason to ban ICO address.

And the only reason exchange address are ban it's not because it use other people's BTC but because other people than the exchange owner were able to linked the address.

ICO funds are in fact borrowed funds. ICO token is no more than acknowledgment of debt. These tokens are not earned by ICO starters, they are blown out of the air. Using ICO fund for snapshot is the same as exchange using user's money, no difference.

.
Seccour
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1619
Merit: 1004


Bitcoiner, Crypto-anarchist and Cypherpunk.


View Profile
December 13, 2016, 05:52:54 PM
 #1717

So 35Rwwc9e2Mj7smFXJ1iXF826cMW3tqfz6x has 2578 BTC.
http://transition.byteball.org/

Looks like the top address is from an ICO
https://blockchain.info/address/35Rwwc9e2Mj7smFXJ1iXF826cMW3tqfz6x

This should be removed considering it is the same as an exchange.  Using other people's BTC to benefit.

Evidence here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1605144.msg16595419#msg16595419

I'm sure there are others as well...


It's not other people's BTC anymore. The BTC are owned by the Komodo team's. People did invest in their ICO to get KMD back. So they have used their BTC to get something else in return, it's not their BTC anymore.

No reason to ban ICO address.

And the only reason exchange address are ban it's not because it use other people's BTC but because other people than the exchange owner were able to linked the address.

ICO funds are in fact borrowed funds. ICO token is no more than acknowledgment of debt. These tokens are not earned by ICO starters, they are blown out of the air. Using ICO fund for snapshot is the same as exchange using user's money, no difference.

Those who put money in an ICO just buy tokens. That's it. It's not their fund anymore. Since when an ICO is a loan ?

Definition of a loan : "a thing that is borrowed, especially a sum of money that is expected to be paid back with interest.". In a ICO there is no paid back and no interest.

yvv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344
Merit: 1000

.


View Profile WWW
December 13, 2016, 06:31:17 PM
 #1718

So 35Rwwc9e2Mj7smFXJ1iXF826cMW3tqfz6x has 2578 BTC.
http://transition.byteball.org/

Looks like the top address is from an ICO
https://blockchain.info/address/35Rwwc9e2Mj7smFXJ1iXF826cMW3tqfz6x

This should be removed considering it is the same as an exchange.  Using other people's BTC to benefit.

Evidence here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1605144.msg16595419#msg16595419

I'm sure there are others as well...


It's not other people's BTC anymore. The BTC are owned by the Komodo team's. People did invest in their ICO to get KMD back. So they have used their BTC to get something else in return, it's not their BTC anymore.

No reason to ban ICO address.

And the only reason exchange address are ban it's not because it use other people's BTC but because other people than the exchange owner were able to linked the address.

ICO funds are in fact borrowed funds. ICO token is no more than acknowledgment of debt. These tokens are not earned by ICO starters, they are blown out of the air. Using ICO fund for snapshot is the same as exchange using user's money, no difference.

Those who put money in an ICO just buy tokens. That's it. It's not their fund anymore. Since when an ICO is a loan ?


No, they don't just buy tokens. ICO investors give their money in return for different promises. ICO token is an acknowledgment that its holder will get promised reward in the future. It is essentially a loan. Ok, most ICO don't fulfill their promises, but they should.

But the main point is: whom do you want to distribute bytes to? To shitty ICO scams (most of them are) or to regular users? If you don't care, fine. Few ICO will get 99% of bytes, and this will be a darn wide distribution.

.
johny08
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1046
Merit: 1000


View Profile
December 13, 2016, 06:56:25 PM
 #1719

very controversial discussion here.
Seccour
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1619
Merit: 1004


Bitcoiner, Crypto-anarchist and Cypherpunk.


View Profile
December 13, 2016, 07:40:45 PM
 #1720

So 35Rwwc9e2Mj7smFXJ1iXF826cMW3tqfz6x has 2578 BTC.
http://transition.byteball.org/

Looks like the top address is from an ICO
https://blockchain.info/address/35Rwwc9e2Mj7smFXJ1iXF826cMW3tqfz6x

This should be removed considering it is the same as an exchange.  Using other people's BTC to benefit.

Evidence here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1605144.msg16595419#msg16595419

I'm sure there are others as well...


It's not other people's BTC anymore. The BTC are owned by the Komodo team's. People did invest in their ICO to get KMD back. So they have used their BTC to get something else in return, it's not their BTC anymore.

No reason to ban ICO address.

And the only reason exchange address are ban it's not because it use other people's BTC but because other people than the exchange owner were able to linked the address.

ICO funds are in fact borrowed funds. ICO token is no more than acknowledgment of debt. These tokens are not earned by ICO starters, they are blown out of the air. Using ICO fund for snapshot is the same as exchange using user's money, no difference.

Those who put money in an ICO just buy tokens. That's it. It's not their fund anymore. Since when an ICO is a loan ?


No, they don't just buy tokens. ICO investors give their money in return for different promises. ICO token is an acknowledgment that its holder will get promised reward in the future. It is essentially a loan. Ok, most ICO don't fulfill their promises, but they should.

But the main point is: whom do you want to distribute bytes to? To shitty ICO scams (most of them are) or to regular users? If you don't care, fine. Few ICO will get 99% of bytes, and this will be a darn wide distribution.


The distribution is done to those who own BTC no matter who they are. If shitty ICO scams linked their address okay cool for them, they will either probably dump it rapidly and/or it will promote Byteball to their communities.

Pages: « 1 ... 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 [86] 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 ... 1003 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!