drawingthesun
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1015
|
 |
May 23, 2017, 12:29:11 PM |
|
......But a whale who owns 1000 BTCs or 10,000 or 100,000 would never be able or be willing to spread all his BTCs on so many different addresses and go through the process of linking them all to the bot.......
This can easily be automated. |
|
|
|
|
|
.cryptic.
|
|
May 23, 2017, 12:32:52 PM |
|
......But a whale who owns 1000 BTCs or 10,000 or 100,000 would never be able or be willing to spread all his BTCs on so many different addresses and go through the process of linking them all to the bot.......
This can easily be automated. The point he tries to make is, not everybody would go through the pain of automation, even though its technically possible. |
|
|
|
|
|
D3m0nKinGx
|
|
May 23, 2017, 01:32:23 PM |
|
Little bit of a rise today  |
.
| .
| .
▬◇
▬◇▬◆
▬◇▬◇▬◆
| .
| | .
| | .
| | .
| .
◇▬
◆▬◇▬
◆▬◇▬◇▬
| .
| .
|
|
|
|
|
bobo012
|
|
May 23, 2017, 01:50:38 PM |
|
Little bit of a rise today Distribution getting nearer. And this time with 20% |
|
|
|
|
crema
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 58
Merit: 0
|
|
May 23, 2017, 01:53:02 PM |
|
The idea to distribute byteballs among as many people as possible is excellent, but the dev could improve the way in which it's implemented. At the moment the big BTC whales are getting the biggest slices of the cake. There's nothing bad in that, except that this is an obstacle to a fair distribution of coins. Whales are just getting the gift and since they are already rich then they forget about bytes until they eventually will decide to dump them at some point, crashing the price and hurting the moltitude of the latecomers. A way to improve the fairness of distribution would be to diminish progressively the quantity of bytes given for every BTC after the first BTC that the bot finds on each address. In other words: if you have up to one BTC in one linked address you get the max amount of bytes per BTC. If you have more than one BTC in the linked address you get a bit less for the second BTC, and even less for the third BTC, and so on. This way, big BTC holders will statistically get proportionally less bytes than little BTC holders. Of course, if you want to get the max quantity of bytes you can always spread all your BTCs through different addresses and link them all to the bot, and for sure this is what I'd do since I don't own too many BTCs. But a whale who owns 1000 BTCs or 10,000 or 100,000 would never be able or be willing to spread all his BTCs on so many different addresses and go through the process of linking them all to the bot. The result would be a more homogeneous distribution of the coin and I think that this would benefit the project. Anyone who likes my idea is welcome to tip me with some bytes, or some gigabytes, or even terabytes, if you prefer  My address: 7BO67BNRHQZ6P32U7YIIB4MFOW4JGRNU STFU this system can be gamed. A whale just has to distribute their BTC between many addresses. Also, the current system is already fair. The more BTC you have the more BB you are entitled to, very simple. Why on Earth should all people receive equal amounts no matter what is their stake in the Bitcoin pie? People are not equal, this is a fact whether you like it or not. Some took a greater risk by investing into BTC early on, they should be rewarded more for that risk. You almost sound like some crazed social justice warrior. Your idea would be absolutely unfair. I would suggest that Tonych also distribute to the holders of other crypto-currencies, according to a capitalization total criterion, for example greater than $ 10 billion. In this case, owners of XRP and ETH. This would greatly diversify the holders base. |
|
|
|
|
|
D3m0nKinGx
|
|
May 23, 2017, 01:53:31 PM |
|
Little bit of a rise today Distribution getting nearer. And this time with 20% Yep right on schedule with previous price trends, maybe hit a new ATH for trex |
.
| .
| .
▬◇
▬◇▬◆
▬◇▬◇▬◆
| .
| | .
| | .
| | .
| .
◇▬
◆▬◇▬
◆▬◇▬◇▬
| .
| .
|
|
|
|
|
D3m0nKinGx
|
|
May 23, 2017, 01:55:01 PM |
|
The idea to distribute byteballs among as many people as possible is excellent, but the dev could improve the way in which it's implemented. At the moment the big BTC whales are getting the biggest slices of the cake. There's nothing bad in that, except that this is an obstacle to a fair distribution of coins. Whales are just getting the gift and since they are already rich then they forget about bytes until they eventually will decide to dump them at some point, crashing the price and hurting the moltitude of the latecomers. A way to improve the fairness of distribution would be to diminish progressively the quantity of bytes given for every BTC after the first BTC that the bot finds on each address. In other words: if you have up to one BTC in one linked address you get the max amount of bytes per BTC. If you have more than one BTC in the linked address you get a bit less for the second BTC, and even less for the third BTC, and so on. This way, big BTC holders will statistically get proportionally less bytes than little BTC holders. Of course, if you want to get the max quantity of bytes you can always spread all your BTCs through different addresses and link them all to the bot, and for sure this is what I'd do since I don't own too many BTCs. But a whale who owns 1000 BTCs or 10,000 or 100,000 would never be able or be willing to spread all his BTCs on so many different addresses and go through the process of linking them all to the bot. The result would be a more homogeneous distribution of the coin and I think that this would benefit the project. Anyone who likes my idea is welcome to tip me with some bytes, or some gigabytes, or even terabytes, if you prefer My address: 7BO67BNRHQZ6P32U7YIIB4MFOW4JGRNU STFU this system can be gamed. A whale just has to distribute their BTC between many addresses. Also, the current system is already fair. The more BTC you have the more BB you are entitled to, very simple. Why on Earth should all people receive equal amounts no matter what is their stake in the Bitcoin pie? People are not equal, this is a fact whether you like it or not. Some took a greater risk by investing into BTC early on, they should be rewarded more for that risk. You almost sound like some crazed social justice warrior. Your idea would be absolutely unfair. I would suggest that Tonych also distribute to the holders of other crypto-currencies, according to a capitalization total criterion, for example greater than $ 10 billion. In this case, owners of XRP and ETH. This would greatly diversify the holders base. As in linking ETH / XRP addresses? Those may just end up being the same users that also linked their BTC, it wouldn't really distribute better, just going back to the rich getting richer concept  |
.
| .
| .
▬◇
▬◇▬◆
▬◇▬◇▬◆
| .
| | .
| | .
| | .
| .
◇▬
◆▬◇▬
◆▬◇▬◇▬
| .
| .
|
|
|
|
|
.cryptic.
|
|
May 23, 2017, 02:07:33 PM |
|
The idea to distribute byteballs among as many people as possible is excellent, but the dev could improve the way in which it's implemented. At the moment the big BTC whales are getting the biggest slices of the cake. There's nothing bad in that, except that this is an obstacle to a fair distribution of coins. Whales are just getting the gift and since they are already rich then they forget about bytes until they eventually will decide to dump them at some point, crashing the price and hurting the moltitude of the latecomers. A way to improve the fairness of distribution would be to diminish progressively the quantity of bytes given for every BTC after the first BTC that the bot finds on each address. In other words: if you have up to one BTC in one linked address you get the max amount of bytes per BTC. If you have more than one BTC in the linked address you get a bit less for the second BTC, and even less for the third BTC, and so on. This way, big BTC holders will statistically get proportionally less bytes than little BTC holders. Of course, if you want to get the max quantity of bytes you can always spread all your BTCs through different addresses and link them all to the bot, and for sure this is what I'd do since I don't own too many BTCs. But a whale who owns 1000 BTCs or 10,000 or 100,000 would never be able or be willing to spread all his BTCs on so many different addresses and go through the process of linking them all to the bot. The result would be a more homogeneous distribution of the coin and I think that this would benefit the project. Anyone who likes my idea is welcome to tip me with some bytes, or some gigabytes, or even terabytes, if you prefer My address: 7BO67BNRHQZ6P32U7YIIB4MFOW4JGRNU STFU this system can be gamed. A whale just has to distribute their BTC between many addresses. Also, the current system is already fair. The more BTC you have the more BB you are entitled to, very simple. Why on Earth should all people receive equal amounts no matter what is their stake in the Bitcoin pie? People are not equal, this is a fact whether you like it or not. Some took a greater risk by investing into BTC early on, they should be rewarded more for that risk. You almost sound like some crazed social justice warrior. Your idea would be absolutely unfair. I would suggest that Tonych also distribute to the holders of other crypto-currencies, according to a capitalization total criterion, for example greater than $ 10 billion. In this case, owners of XRP and ETH. This would greatly diversify the holders base. We could use this for great marketing. Lets say keep x% for the user base of 1 coin, which we select through general voting on twitter or something like that. The marketing part will be done by the big holders of each coin then It would be difficult to do the distribution for other coins, I guess. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
serje
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1232
Merit: 1002
|
|
May 23, 2017, 08:26:24 PM |
|
I can't sync my wallet! Installed the light version and the full version!
None would like to sync! Any tips will be great fully appreciated!
Thank you!
|
Space for rent if its still trending
|
|
|
jwinterm
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3164
Merit: 1116
|
|
May 23, 2017, 09:11:37 PM |
|
Anyone with a full node setup their own db of addresses yet? I'm curious to know what percentage of byteball airdropees have yet to move a single byte...
|
|
|
|
|
|
22naru
|
|
May 23, 2017, 11:19:07 PM |
|
I can't sync my wallet! Installed the light version and the full version!
None would like to sync! Any tips will be great fully appreciated!
Thank you!
i have some issue with sync aswell on full version client ... i would like to hear some tips or where we can search to fix this problem. cheers |
|
|
|
|
Birkensekt
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
May 24, 2017, 04:50:54 AM |
|
Did anybody know if its possible to export history in lite wallet for android? Is there a data file or a anything else?
Thank you for help.
|
|
|
|
|
|
dreamhouse
|
|
May 24, 2017, 06:05:02 AM |
|
Is GByte trading at Bittrex? I see the chart but no bid/ask... weird.
Also any formal market for Blackbyte?
|
|
|
|
|
|
naska21
|
|
May 24, 2017, 06:10:38 AM |
|
Is GByte trading at Bittrex? I see the chart but no bid/ask... weird.
Also any formal market for Blackbyte?
Yes, it is trading and everything is OK for me, all bid/ask are visible. As to blackbytes there is no formal market, only p2p |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hyena
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2114
Merit: 1015
|
|
May 24, 2017, 07:02:37 AM |
|
I would suggest that Tonych also distribute to the holders of other crypto-currencies, according to a capitalization total criterion, for example greater than $ 10 billion.
In this case, owners of XRP and ETH.
This would greatly diversify the holders base.
We could use this for great marketing. Lets say keep x% for the user base of 1 coin, which we select through general voting on twitter or something like that. The marketing part will be done by the big holders of each coin then It would be difficult to do the distribution for other coins, I guess. Marketing, maybe. But is it morally right? None of the alts would even exist if there wasn't for BTC. Show some respect to the software thanks to it you have your stinking ETH vaporware and other scamcoins. Also this would be a debate nightmare which shitcoins to include in that basket and which not. Clearly anyone could just pump out their BTC clone, rename it and expect to receive free BB. And wait what? You mentioned centrally owned and managed private ledgers such as ETH and XRP?! Do you know that the owners of those coins would be the mother of all whales? The distribution is good as it is. Let BB market itself. The whole altcoin game is about getting more BTC anyway. We just pretend that ETH is so good, but behind the curtains everyone just tries to get more BTC out of it. |
|
|
|
|
bobq
|
|
May 24, 2017, 07:28:44 AM |
|
The idea to distribute byteballs among as many people as possible is excellent, but the dev could improve the way in which it's implemented. At the moment the big BTC whales are getting the biggest slices of the cake. There's nothing bad in that, except that this is an obstacle to a fair distribution of coins. Whales are just getting the gift and since they are already rich then they forget about bytes until they eventually will decide to dump them at some point, crashing the price and hurting the moltitude of the latecomers. A way to improve the fairness of distribution would be to diminish progressively the quantity of bytes given for every BTC after the first BTC that the bot finds on each address. In other words: if you have up to one BTC in one linked address you get the max amount of bytes per BTC. If you have more than one BTC in the linked address you get a bit less for the second BTC, and even less for the third BTC, and so on. This way, big BTC holders will statistically get proportionally less bytes than little BTC holders. Of course, if you want to get the max quantity of bytes you can always spread all your BTCs through different addresses and link them all to the bot, and for sure this is what I'd do since I don't own too many BTCs. But a whale who owns 1000 BTCs or 10,000 or 100,000 would never be able or be willing to spread all his BTCs on so many different addresses and go through the process of linking them all to the bot. The result would be a more homogeneous distribution of the coin and I think that this would benefit the project. Anyone who likes my idea is welcome to tip me with some bytes, or some gigabytes, or even terabytes, if you prefer My address: 7BO67BNRHQZ6P32U7YIIB4MFOW4JGRNU STFU this system can be gamed. A whale just has to distribute their BTC between many addresses. Also, the current system is already fair. The more BTC you have the more BB you are entitled to, very simple. Why on Earth should all people receive equal amounts no matter what is their stake in the Bitcoin pie? People are not equal, this is a fact whether you like it or not. Some took a greater risk by investing into BTC early on, they should be rewarded more for that risk. You almost sound like some crazed social justice warrior. Your idea would be absolutely unfair. I would suggest that Tonych also distribute to the holders of other crypto-currencies, according to a capitalization total criterion, for example greater than $ 10 billion. In this case, owners of XRP and ETH. This would greatly diversify the holders base. We could use this for great marketing. Lets say keep x% for the user base of 1 coin, which we select through general voting on twitter or something like that. The marketing part will be done by the big holders of each coin then It would be difficult to do the distribution for other coins, I guess. Marketing, maybe. But is it morally right? None of the alts would even exist if there wasn't for BTC. Show some respect to the software thanks to it you have your stinking ETH vaporware and other scamcoins. Also this would be a debate nightmare which shitcoins to include in that basket and which not. Clearly anyone could just pump out their BTC clone, rename it and expect to receive free BB. And wait what? You mentioned centrally owned and managed private ledgers such as ETH and XRP?! Do you know that the owners of those coins would be the mother of all whales? The distribution is good as it is. Let BB market itself. The whole altcoin game is about getting more BTC anyway. We just pretend that ETH is so good, but behind the curtains everyone just tries to get more BTC out of it. I have nothing against the concept of rich people getting richer, I just was thinking at which way could favour the best distribution and thus the adoption of the coin. It is true that whales would distribute their BTC between many addresses, but as I said, they would not waste their time in creating the THOUSANDS of addresses needed to store one BTC each, even if this could be done with automation (but to create an automate system still needs time and skills), so in the end even if whales distribute their BTC between some addresses they would still end up receiving proportionally less coins than the little holders, which means more coins available for more people. And I also agree that the distribution also to holders of XRP and ETH and other altcoins would create mothers of all whales, and making the distribution process too complex, while the idea which I've suggested would be very easy to realize. |
|
|
|
|
bobq
|
|
May 24, 2017, 07:44:13 AM |
|
..
Is it because its impossible to know the users balance in GBB as its anonymous?
Yes, blackbytes are private as cash. They are meant to be used as cash, so peer 2 peer (No third party involved). The non-anonymous trading on a exchange would break this privacy (or anonymity if you got thru Tor). Therefore there is the Slack trading channel. Through the Byteball DAG, tony knows the addresses and amount of the bytes (analogous to Blockchain BTC). He can thus distribute bytes and blackbytes to the BB addresses (proportional to the byte amount, which he sees ->Snapshot) But the Byteball DAG (and tony) knows nothing about the Blackbytes. Real world example: “Everyone” can see what you have in your bank account. No one knows how much cash you have in your head pillow. So tony can not see if- or how many blackbytes you have. Actually, he could not send you blackbytes, because device pearing (p2p) is required. Therefore, it is absolutely necessary to link at least one BTC address to get blackbytes: By linking a Byteball address, one exposes their device address which is needed to send the blackbytes (Thanks to kaicrypzen who told me this ). This is the reason why you can only get blackbytes at linked BB addresses (and only for the amount available there).. This is truly amazing. Blacbytes are indeed the most anonymous cryptocurrency invented so far. You can't really get more anonymous than that. When the darknet catches on, expect Moon. I wonder how hard it is to forge them though because of this. It's impossible for public byteball to exist in two wallets (just like classic blockchain coins) because we can always know where each created coin is. How is this guaranteed for blackbytes? Bspus has put an interesting question here, but I didn't see any reply yet. |
|
|
|
|
