Obyte: Totally new consensus algorithm + private untraceable payments

[tarmo888]

Parsing the semantics of "most" doesn't change the fact that distribution is pretty fukt.

So currently maybe 30-50% of bytes held by scammy ICOs?

Bitcoin airdrop was fukt idea, since Steem attestation, there has been 1 year vesting contract, so if people still sell and somebody hoards them, it is out of Byteball control. Welcome to cryptocurrencies, everybody can do anything with their money.

Kind of funny how you call bitcoin coinbase distribution method shitty a few posts ago, but byteball is basically owned by ICOs with a few crumbs now going to account farmers and bot netters, while bitcoin has the widest and truly the fairest distribution of any coin in all likelihood (you can't fake proof of work, you gotta burn to earn).

So, go try and earn with mining Bitcoin and let us know how much you got. It is long time ago past the threshold where everybody could participate.

[1713964118]

1713964118

[1713964118]

1713964118

[jwinterm]

Parsing the semantics of "most" doesn't change the fact that distribution is pretty fukt.

So currently maybe 30-50% of bytes held by scammy ICOs?

Bitcoin airdrop was fukt idea, since Steem attestation, there has been 1 year vesting contract, so if people still sell and somebody hoards them, it is out of Byteball control. Welcome to cryptocurrencies, everybody can do anything with their money.

Kind of funny how you call bitcoin coinbase distribution method shitty a few posts ago, but byteball is basically owned by ICOs with a few crumbs now going to account farmers and bot netters, while bitcoin has the widest and truly the fairest distribution of any coin in all likelihood (you can't fake proof of work, you gotta burn to earn).

So, go try and earn with mining Bitcoin and let us know how much you got. It is long time ago past the threshold where everybody could participate.

There's estimated to be over one million unique miners, 200k on slush pool alone:
https://www.buybitcoinworldwide.com/how-many-bitcoins-are-there/

But you don't need to mine, you can buy, because mining has certain fixed and ongoing costs meaning there's economics behind what miners are willing to sell for. You can talk shit all you want but it's infinitely better than the clusterfuck byteball began as and the new clusterfuck it's morphed into with one guy making it up as he goes along.

[JesusCryptos]

Max Kordek (or actually Lisk Foundation) owns 17 377.989853045 GByte

You continue to demonstrate your ignorance
https://blog.lisk.io/financial-report-2016-7e68cdd13b12 Dec 31, 2016
https://explorer.byteball.org/#XCQ3LC6BSRGLPKC6LDQBTHZBKHLGIS5B  62242 GByte Dec 1, 2018

Not sure why these numbers don't match, but 62k is still 9.4% of current circulation supply and 6.2% of total supply.

If he did buy 45k as additional for the Lisk Foundation then it's great, at least someone influential believes in Byteball and doesn't come to whine here all the time.

Seems they did get more because 2017 report shows more than 2016 https://blog.lisk.io/financial-report-may-2017-ee51f2a6570b

Interesting, did anyone investigate, by checking the byteball addresses of those large holders of concurrent projects, if it is them to have constantly dumped bytes over the months?

[pineapple express]

Max Kordek (or actually Lisk Foundation) owns 17 377.989853045 GByte

You continue to demonstrate your ignorance
https://blog.lisk.io/financial-report-2016-7e68cdd13b12 Dec 31, 2016
https://explorer.byteball.org/#XCQ3LC6BSRGLPKC6LDQBTHZBKHLGIS5B  62242 GByte Dec 1, 2018

Not sure why these numbers don't match, but 62k is still 9.4% of current circulation supply and 6.2% of total supply.

If he did buy 45k as additional for the Lisk Foundation then it's great, at least someone influential believes in Byteball and doesn't come to whine here all the time.

Seems they did get more because 2017 report shows more than 2016 https://blog.lisk.io/financial-report-may-2017-ee51f2a6570b

17377 GByte in the 1st round. There were 10 rounds.

[Thul]

Max Kordek (or actually Lisk Foundation) owns 17 377.989853045 GByte

You continue to demonstrate your ignorance
https://blog.lisk.io/financial-report-2016-7e68cdd13b12 Dec 31, 2016
https://explorer.byteball.org/#XCQ3LC6BSRGLPKC6LDQBTHZBKHLGIS5B  62242 GByte Dec 1, 2018

Not sure why these numbers don't match, but 62k is still 9.4% of current circulation supply and 6.2% of total supply.

If he did buy 45k as additional for the Lisk Foundation then it's great, at least someone influential believes in Byteball and doesn't come to whine here all the time.

Seems they did get more because 2017 report shows more than 2016 https://blog.lisk.io/financial-report-may-2017-ee51f2a6570b

17377 GByte in the 1st round. There were 10 rounds.

--------------------------------
I wished that someone would develop a clon that would be consistently oriented towards benefits, i.e. integrate a decentralised, uncensurable marketplace into the project.

The currency is distributed through discounts on goods and services sold. Both the dealer and the customer benefit from this.

Such a project would quickly become very popular.
Something like https://bitify.com/, in contrast to it however censorship resistant and free of charge.

Don't none of you know any capable programmers who want to earn a lot of money with a coin project that can finally be used? 

[tarmo888]

Max Kordek (or actually Lisk Foundation) owns 17 377.989853045 GByte

You continue to demonstrate your ignorance
https://blog.lisk.io/financial-report-2016-7e68cdd13b12 Dec 31, 2016
https://explorer.byteball.org/#XCQ3LC6BSRGLPKC6LDQBTHZBKHLGIS5B  62242 GByte Dec 1, 2018

Not sure why these numbers don't match, but 62k is still 9.4% of current circulation supply and 6.2% of total supply.

If he did buy 45k as additional for the Lisk Foundation then it's great, at least someone influential believes in Byteball and doesn't come to whine here all the time.

Seems they did get more because 2017 report shows more than 2016 https://blog.lisk.io/financial-report-may-2017-ee51f2a6570b

17377 GByte in the 1st round. There were 10 rounds.

http://transition.byteball.org/ shows that XCQ3LC6BSRGLPKC6LDQBTHZBKHLGIS5B had BTC balance 8467.98998896, which at 0.00625 would have been only 52.924937431 GByte.

Does anybody still think that Bitcoin airdrop was great distribution or that 1 address equals 1 user? That what happens when you airdrop to addresses without KYC.

[tyz]

I wished that someone would develop a clon that would be consistently oriented towards benefits, i.e. integrate a decentralised, uncensurable marketplace into the project.

The currency is distributed through discounts on goods and services sold. Both the dealer and the customer benefit from this.

Such a project would quickly become very popular.
Something like https://bitify.com/, in contrast to it however censorship resistant and free of charge.

Don't none of you know any capable programmers who want to earn a lot of money with a coin project that can finally be used? 

I doubt that such shops really have a big impact. It's just that the willingness to pay with crypto currencies is low because everyone speculates on it. That's one of the biggest problems of all. You can see it well at Bitcoin. The number of ways to pay with Bitcoin has increased considerably in the last two years, but some shops have already abolished the payment method because there was little interest. Why should it be any different at Byteball?

[Thul]

I wished that someone would develop a clon that would be consistently oriented towards benefits, i.e. integrate a decentralised, uncensurable marketplace into the project.

The currency is distributed through discounts on goods and services sold. Both the dealer and the customer benefit from this.

Such a project would quickly become very popular.
Something like https://bitify.com/, in contrast to it however censorship resistant and free of charge.

Don't none of you know any capable programmers who want to earn a lot of money with a coin project that can finally be used?  

I doubt that such shops really have a big impact. It's just that the willingness to pay with crypto currencies is low because everyone speculates on it. That's one of the biggest problems of all. You can see it well at Bitcoin. The number of ways to pay with Bitcoin has increased considerably in the last two years, but some shops have already abolished the payment method because there was little interest. Why should it be any different at Byteball?

A decentralized, non-censurable marketplace should, of course, offer products and services that are not available through the regulated Fiat markets.
This is still a real market gap, in the sense of real cryptoanarchists (yes, there should be in the flood of speculators, and in the end they are the ones who give the crypto currencies a value at all).

"Because of this, Braun criticizes the emphasis that bitcoin supporters often place on mainstream adoption, arguing that many newcomers within the industry do not share the cryptocurrency’s underlying political ramifications.

“I’m not criticizing that more people use it per se, but they kind of water it down and then the whole revolutionary aspect gets lost,” Braun said."
https://www.coindesk.com/crypto-anarchists-are-building-tools-to-resist-the-state-in-eastern-europe

The dream of many Cryptos, like Byteball, to enter the mass market is far from reality (and you recognize this quite rightly).
The mass of sheep stays with Fiat and buys further on ebay and amazon with paypal and credit card.

Cryptoanarchists (and only they can really do anything with free(!) crypto currencies) are urgently looking for a solution for an unregulated market.

The unregulated market is growing exponentially. There you only pay with crypto currencies.
Unfortunately, there are so far only centralized solutions that do not cover the full range of possibilities and are expensive and vulnerable.

Those who are not as stupid as the Byteball team and align themselves accordingly will have catapulted a clone of this project very quickly into the Top 10.

[bobq]

I'd like to resume the discussion on the theme of the default unit of Byteball, since Tony has finally made his point on this in the recent AMA session on Reddit, which people can fully read here:

https://np.reddit.com/r/ByteBall/comments/9yfbvt/i_am_tony_byteball_founder_and_lead_developer_ask/

I had expressed my opinion in June in this post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1608859.msg40547826#msg40547826

and this is Tony's opinion as expressed during the AMA:

It would be unthinkable for Bitcoin to change their SI base unit, so altcoin changing it would look even more scammy. Imagin Bitcoin changing from BTC to mBTC, priced under dollar and listing total supply as 21 000 000 000 mBTC. People should be educated to read total supply and display units instead.

So, without changing the supply size, everybody (exchange, bot, user) can still decide individually what display unit makes most sense for them. Exchanges have decided for GBYTE, most bots for MBYTE. New user wallets start with Byte, but users can pick anything they like.

Base unit is Byte because on code level, if you want to send amounts, you need to convert amounts into Byte. Same is for Bitcoin satoshi and Ethereum wei.

My reply to Tony's statements are the following:

1. It would be also unthinkable for Bitcoin to change its name, yet Byteball is just planning to do otherwise and rebrand. To compare Byteball to Bitcoin is useful only if we focus on the technical aspect of both, in which case Byteball can be considered a true peer of Bitcoin, possibly having actually a much better tech. But to extend the comparison to other realms - like brand, adoption rate, etc - it doesn't make any sense because there there's still a true abyss between Bitcoin and Byteball, so what's good for Bitcoin is not at all necessarily good for Byteball.

2. Even though it is theoretically true that "everybody (exchange, bot, user) can still decide individually what display unit makes most sense for them", in the practice this is not true at all. Once again, here we have the big gap between theory and reality, a huge intellectual trap. Coinmarketcap and Exchanges have set the unit standard of GBYTE and now this is the unit 99% of people have in mind when thinking at Byteball. Everyone I know who is aware of Byteball is thinking in terms of Gigabytes. Nobody has a true choice because on mass scale people don't make choices and this is why the science of sociology was born (Gustave Le Bon has put it down already one century ago). Same for "People should be educated, etc.." - sorry my friend, in the history of the world nobody has ever managed to educate A CROWD, and this is why MSM has now been turned into a tool of mass manipulation. You can manipulate a crowd, you cannot educate it. Let's forget the idea of educationg people in thinking in terms of an unit which is different from the one promoted by CMC and Exchanges.
And as I've explained more in detail in my June post, to think in terms of Gigabytes means to think in terms of Million of Dollars - that's not how I would design a currency seeking mass adoption. As for the people who are programming bots in MBYTE, they are a little minority of tech guys. 99% of people will stay stuck with the GBYTE unit which was chosen for them. This could result lethal for Byteball adoption. As I've said in June, I don't care about the price, I care about perception and coherency and avoiding cognitive dissonance. To seek mass adoption with a currency which unit is expressed in "million of dollars" by 99% of adopters is sheer cognitive dissonance. Comparing to Bitcoin here it makes no sense because the two coins are not peers due to Bitcoin's huge first mover advantage.

A final consideration:

While undoubtedly value for a coin is generated in accordance with the principles of Metcalfe's law, we should always keep in mind that there are also other factors beyond adoption which are a cause of value, otherwise neither the Weimer Republik or Zimbawe would have ever experienced hyperinflation. These factors involve causes pertinent to monetary, financial, sociological and psycological sciences, all of which should be taken in consideration when designing a new currency. And when rebranding it and adjusting its path.

[Thul]

And as I've explained more in detail in my June post, to think in terms of Gigabytes means to think in terms of Million of Dollars - that's not how I would design a currency seeking mass adoption.

They may seek mass adoption, but they will not find it. The mass is the wrong target group for free crypto currencies.

From the point of view of someone who is only interested in the benefits of this currency, it is irrelevant whether the base is GB, MB or KB. - The only important thing is that you can use it. And an externally visible benefit will also convince the speculators and let them generously overlook small things like the basic unit.

[PinchClock]

Trust.Zone, an anonymous VPN service, now accepts payments in Byteball Bytes.  Private, secure and anonymous browsing, with a 10% discount for Byte holders! 

>> https://trust.zone/ <<

[Thul]

Trust.Zone, an anonymous VPN service, now accepts payments in Byteball Bytes.  Private, secure and anonymous browsing, with a 10% discount for Byte holders! 

>> https://trust.zone/ <<

KYC Byteball sheep do not need anonymous VPN service. 

[whotheff]

Trust.Zone, an anonymous VPN service, now accepts payments in Byteball Bytes.  Private, secure and anonymous browsing, with a 10% discount for Byte holders! 

>> https://trust.zone/ <<

KYC Byteball sheep do not need anonymous VPN service. 

This service has to be in the Ann thread!
Not that many things are tradeable with Byteball.
Has anyone tried it?

[tarmo888]

I'd like to resume the discussion on the theme of the default unit of Byteball, since Tony has finally made his point on this in the recent AMA session on Reddit, which people can fully read here:

https://np.reddit.com/r/ByteBall/comments/9yfbvt/i_am_tony_byteball_founder_and_lead_developer_ask/

I had expressed my opinion in June in this post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1608859.msg40547826#msg40547826

and this is Tony's opinion as expressed during the AMA:

It would be unthinkable for Bitcoin to change their SI base unit, so altcoin changing it would look even more scammy. Imagin Bitcoin changing from BTC to mBTC, priced under dollar and listing total supply as 21 000 000 000 mBTC. People should be educated to read total supply and display units instead.

So, without changing the supply size, everybody (exchange, bot, user) can still decide individually what display unit makes most sense for them. Exchanges have decided for GBYTE, most bots for MBYTE. New user wallets start with Byte, but users can pick anything they like.

Base unit is Byte because on code level, if you want to send amounts, you need to convert amounts into Byte. Same is for Bitcoin satoshi and Ethereum wei.

What are you quoting is my opinion, not Tony's. OP on Reddit is the one who has the microphone icon behind their user handle. User who asked a question about unit sizes never got a reply from Tony, so I answered to 1 of 3 questions that this user asked. Their other 2 questions were in form of "When?", which I guess why they didn't get answered.

Since you missed that and trimmed first part of my answer, I am guessing you didn't get what I wrote you, so here same answer told in different way (maybe makes more sense):

GBYTE and BTC are the units that exchanges have decided to you and that's what is on CMC and it's this unit because that's how total supply is defined. Bitcoin decided for 21 million BTC and Byteball decided 1 million GBYTE. If you would change that unit on CMC to MByte, you would need to change the unit for total supply, so 1 000 000 GBYTE to 1 000 000 000 MBYTE. That would make Byteball to have 1 billion supply, which automatically would look shitty for some users because Bitcoin only has 21 million supply. But those who argue that price looks expensive, doesn't understand that it is normal to have higher price if supply is small.

Another thing you do not understand, it is up to exchanges and app developers to choose which unit they want to use, that makes most sense for them and their users. Bitcoin has thought about that, Litecoin too, many good Bitcoin wallets even have an option to change the units in the wallet the same way like Byteball does.

Some cryptocurrencies like Nano have not even thought about it yet, so they are wondering if they should change it now because it is not user-friendly for users to pay in amounts that have decimal places. https://www.reddit.com/r/nanocurrency/comments/9zqr03/weekend_discussion_shifting_the_decimal_place/

Good Bitcoin wallets and Byteball wallet doesn't have to do that, this feature is already built-in. Changing a base SI unit would be step backwards into 90s, that is not how the units displaying should work.

If you would be developer then you would understand that Byteball works the same as Bitcoin and Ethereum, in code you use only bytes, like on Bitcoin you use satoshis and on Ethereum you use wei. This enables the dapp or bot developer to let users decided what is the unit displayed on UI.

It is not feasible to change the ticker on CMC every time price reaches some level and then drops to some other level. GBYTE is only default for CMC and existing exchanges, it is not default in any other way. And it's not about what is default, GBYTE, BTC is the unit in which the supply is defined, changing that will change how supply is displayed too.

[DVRSX CEO]

Interesting concept. Good to see something new and innovative, not just the same thing over and over. Interested to see how this project does in a few months time.

[tarmo888]

A decentralized, non-censurable marketplace should, of course, offer products and services that are not available through the regulated Fiat markets.
This is still a real market gap, in the sense of real cryptoanarchists (yes, there should be in the flood of speculators, and in the end they are the ones who give the crypto currencies a value at all).

Cryptoanarchists (and only they can really do anything with free(!) crypto currencies) are urgently looking for a solution for an unregulated market.

The unregulated market is growing exponentially. There you only pay with crypto currencies.
Unfortunately, there are so far only centralized solutions that do not cover the full range of possibilities and are expensive and vulnerable.

Those who are not as stupid as the Byteball team and align themselves accordingly will have catapulted a clone of this project very quickly into the Top 10.

Can you name something that is not possible to buy with fiat currencies? Because, only thing that I can come up with is illegal stuff.

Blackbytes are not meant for illegal stuff, it's private because of privacy (privacy doesn't equal illegal). Cryptocurrency that has option to do public or private transactions are not 100% anonymous and not suitable for illegal stuff (use cash for that sh|t instead). It is just disaster waiting to happen for those who think they can use cryptocurrencies for illegal stuff because at some time in the future, somebody figures out how to do the analysis to link your public spendings with your private spendings, then it is just a matter of motivation for them. And we don't know if FBI/NSA can already do that or not, they have enough money to throw unlimited people at this problem (it also makes them much easier to do that because open-source).

This is same reason why Monero is not 100% anonymous because they were not anonymous from the beginning https://medium.com/cryptics/monero-not-anonymous-at-all-113c3a14c816
All cryptocurrencies are as private as they used to be (which we can know) and will be in the future (which we can't know).

[bobq]

I'd like to resume the discussion on the theme of the default unit of Byteball, since Tony has finally made his point on this in the recent AMA session on Reddit, which people can fully read here:

https://np.reddit.com/r/ByteBall/comments/9yfbvt/i_am_tony_byteball_founder_and_lead_developer_ask/

I had expressed my opinion in June in this post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1608859.msg40547826#msg40547826

and this is Tony's opinion as expressed during the AMA:

It would be unthinkable for Bitcoin to change their SI base unit, so altcoin changing it would look even more scammy. Imagin Bitcoin changing from BTC to mBTC, priced under dollar and listing total supply as 21 000 000 000 mBTC. People should be educated to read total supply and display units instead.

So, without changing the supply size, everybody (exchange, bot, user) can still decide individually what display unit makes most sense for them. Exchanges have decided for GBYTE, most bots for MBYTE. New user wallets start with Byte, but users can pick anything they like.

Base unit is Byte because on code level, if you want to send amounts, you need to convert amounts into Byte. Same is for Bitcoin satoshi and Ethereum wei.

What are you quoting is my opinion, not Tony's. OP on Reddit is the one who has the microphone icon behind their user handle. User who asked a question about unit sizes never got a reply from Tony, so I answered to 1 of 3 questions that this user asked. Their other 2 questions were in form of "When?", which I guess why they didn't get answered.

Since you missed that and trimmed first part of my answer, I am guessing you didn't get what I wrote you, so here same answer told in different way (maybe makes more sense):

GBYTE and BTC are the units that exchanges have decided to you and that's what is on CMC and it's this unit because that's how total supply is defined. Bitcoin decided for 21 million BTC and Byteball decided 1 million GBYTE. If you would change that unit on CMC to MByte, you would need to change the unit for total supply, so 1 000 000 GBYTE to 1 000 000 000 MBYTE. That would make Byteball to have 1 billion supply, which automatically would look shitty for some users because Bitcoin only has 21 million supply. But those who argue that price looks expensive, doesn't understand that it is normal to have higher price if supply is small.

Another thing you do not understand, it is up to exchanges and app developers to choose which unit they want to use, that makes most sense for them and their users. Bitcoin has thought about that, Litecoin too, many good Bitcoin wallets even have an option to change the units in the wallet the same way like Byteball does.

Some cryptocurrencies like Nano have not even thought about it yet, so they are wondering if they should change it now because it is not user-friendly for users to pay in amounts that have decimal places. https://www.reddit.com/r/nanocurrency/comments/9zqr03/weekend_discussion_shifting_the_decimal_place/

Good Bitcoin wallets and Byteball wallet doesn't have to do that, this feature is already built-in. Changing a base SI unit would be step backwards into 90s, that is not how the units displaying should work.

If you would be developer then you would understand that Byteball works the same as Bitcoin and Ethereum, in code you use only bytes, like on Bitcoin you use satoshis and on Ethereum you use wei. This enables the dapp or bot developer to let users decided what is the unit displayed on UI.

It is not feasible to change the ticker on CMC every time price reaches some level and then drops to some other level. GBYTE is only default for CMC and existing exchanges, it is not default in any other way. And it's not about what is default, GBYTE, BTC is the unit in which the supply is defined, changing that will change how supply is displayed too.

Sorry to have mistunderstood you for Tony on Reddit, since the AMA was with him I thought it was him to answer the questions.

Thank you for having dedicated time to try to explain me your point, but from your answer I understand that you have totally missed mine.

It is not feasible to change the ticker on CMC every time price reaches some level

How do I have to say that the price is the least of my concerns? I'm repeating it in every post of mine but then people answer again and again as if the focus of my argument were just the price. It's a problem of semantics and of cognitive dissonance, but it seems that people here understand only about coding and pricing and are totally blind to any bigger picture. And IF the problem I'm raising is real, then to discharge the responsability of it on the exchanges is tragically childish. Problems must be addressed, not justified.

If you would be developer then you would understand...

If you would NOT be developer then you would PERHAPS understand that to create "A cryptocurrency platform ready for real world adoption" is a complex task that goes far beyond coding and if you stay in denial of that and don't get into the team people who can see beyond coding, then.. well, good luck, you're gonna need it.

If by any chance you are really interested to understand what I'm talking about, and which you didn't address in your answer, you may want to read my June's post:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1608859.msg40547826#msg40547826

[tarmo888]

Sorry to have mistunderstood you for Tony on Reddit, since the AMA was with him I thought it was him to answer the questions.

Thank you for having dedicated time to try to explain me your point, but from your answer I understand that you have totally missed mine.

It is not feasible to change the ticker on CMC every time price reaches some level

How do I have to say that the price is the least of my concerns? I'm repeating it in every post of mine but then people answer again and again as if the focus of my argument were just the price. It's a problem of semantics and of cognitive dissonance, but it seems that people here understand only about coding and pricing and are totally blind to any bigger picture. And IF the problem I'm raising is real, then to discharge the responsability of it on the exchanges is tragically childish. Problems must be addressed, not justified.

If you would be developer then you would understand...

If you would NOT be developer then you would PERHAPS understand that to create "A cryptocurrency platform ready for real world adoption" is a complex task that goes far beyond coding and if you stay in denial of that and don't get into the team people who can see beyond coding, then.. well, good luck, you're gonna need it.

If by any chance you are really interested to understand what I'm talking about, and which you didn't address in your answer, you may want to read my June's post:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1608859.msg40547826#msg40547826

I read it again, but I still don't understand what the hell are you suggesting to do. If you change it from GBYTE to MBYTE, then 1USD be shown as 33.422460 MByte, instead of 0.033422460 GBYTE (or 1GBYTE = 29.92USD to 1MBYTE = 0.02992USD). So, changing the unit directly affects how the price is displayed. Are you suggesting to replace understood storage units to made up unit names like babbage, lovelace, shannon, szabo, finney, satoshi? http://ethdocs.org/en/latest/ether.html

Also, saying that you don't care about the price, but then say that it should be changed from GBYTE to MBYTE because many people can't afford GBYTE is directly connected with price because once price of MBYTE raises to hundreds, you would do this process again, because many people would never afford MBYTE then (and somebody will think it is blocking the mass-adoption again). Many people will never afford 1 BTC and it is fine because once BTC prices goes into hundreds of thousands, it would start to make sense to display prices in mBTC instead. Byteball has already taken care of that, like many good Bitcoin wallets have done it too. Byteball also starts with smallest (Byte) unit as default, not like Bitcoin wallets start with the biggest (BTC) unit as default.

And as I've explained more in detail in my June post, to think in terms of Gigabytes means to think in terms of Million of Dollars - that's not how I would design a currency seeking mass adoption. As for the people who are programming bots in MBYTE, they are a little minority of tech guys. 99% of people will stay stuck with the GBYTE unit which was chosen for them. This could result lethal for Byteball adoption. As I've said in June, I don't care about the price, I care about perception and coherency and avoiding cognitive dissonance. To seek mass adoption with a currency which unit is expressed in "million of dollars" by 99% of adopters is sheer cognitive dissonance. Comparing to Bitcoin here it makes no sense because the two coins are not peers due to Bitcoin's huge first mover advantage.

Developers are not programming bots in MBYTE, developers do it in Bytes (smallest unit for Byteball), just like Bitcoin developers do it in Satoshi (smallest unit in Bitcoin mainnet) and Ethereum developers do it in Wei (smallest unit in Ethereum blockchain). It is up to bot or exchange developer to choose, which unit makes sense for their product/services prices. Best would be if they also let users pick the unit of display, but it doesn't matter because once they click buy link or scan a QR code, Byteball wallet will show the unit that user has chosen.

If you dowload the wallet, then default unit is Bytes, GBYTE is not chosen for them, it's just CMC and exchanges.

Not sure why would somebody associate gigabytes with Millions of Dollars, giga is billion, mega is million. Most people don't associate them billions or millions, but rather with storage space, what is the whole point of bytes in Byteball (1GBYTE is roughly 1GBYTE of data in DAG).

[tarmo888]

I see that again and again there are people here who claim that Byteball should be not be listed in Gigabytes in exchanges since this would be harming the price, because investors would perceive the high cost of one Gigabyte very expensive. I have always been against the "tactical" idea of scaling down the official unit of measurement just for the purpose to benefit the price. Tony has always stated that he is not interested in the price but in the distribution of the coin, and I have always agreed on that.

But then, I've also seen Byteball listed in Gigabytes on Coinmarketcap and something has suddenly clicked in my mind.
The fact that Byteball is measured in Gigabytes is not a problem because this is harming its price.

The fact that Byteball is measured in Gigabytes is a problem because it is crucially violating Byteball's mission number one: to achieve mass adoption.

Even though Byteball's monetary base is consisting in billions of bytes, only 650.000 Gigabytes or so are existing now, and max supply will be 1 Million.
Therefore, if you are thinking in terms of Gigabytes, mass adoption is virtually impossible. People will always feel the frustration of not being able to own even one single Gigabyte and they will likely not even take into consideration the currency. Since there are whales who own a lot of Gigabytes, people who will be able to afford one entire Gigabyte will be in the thousands - best case scenario. This is NOT mass adoption.
People will argue that something similar is happening with Bitcoin - most of the people today can afford to own only fractions of a Bitcoin. But this, in fact, is one of the main problems of Bitcoin, people have always to carefully count how many zeroes there are before the quantity of satoshis of their transactions. This is totally absurd and in fact Bitcoin today is used only as a speculative store of value, and NOT as a real currency.
Byteball aimed to be better, but if the total monetary base is consisting in just 1 Million coins the fact is that it has just AMPLIFIED 21 times this problem of Bitcoin, it has not at all solved it. There will be max 21 Million Bitcoins, and Byteball won't ever have more than one Million Gigabytes. If you are thinking in term of Gigabytes, you have just made the problem 21 times worse. And now we are thinking in terms of Gigabytes. When I'm speaking with my friend we are talking about how many Gigabytes we have, not Megabytes or Bytes. This is a mistake.

We have to think at Gigabytes as we are thinking at the Million of dollars.

The few who can afford owning the Gigabytes are the rich elite, just like those who are owning the Million of dollars. Most of the people don't own Million of dollars (or euros), they just own dollars (or euros). Perhaps thousands of Euros/Dollars ("grands"), but not Millions.
And if Byteball will achieve mass adoption most of the people won't own Gigabytes, they will just own Bytes. Or Kilobytes. If you consider bytes to be cents, then you should consider the ideal unity of Byteball being Kilobytes. Not even Megabytes. Megabytes would somehow semantically sound like the "grands" - one thousand dollars or pounds according to the urban dictionary of FIAT money.
Just as you don't buy a packet of cigarettes with 0.00001 Million of Dollars, you shouldn't have to buy it with 0.001 Gigabytes.
This all could seem a trivial problem to many, but it is not. Reality is a state of mind and perception is playing a fundamental role in the shaping of reality.
To use Gigabytes to measure Byteball generates a cognitive dissonance with the mission of achieving mass adoption. It makes feel Byteball to be an elitarian coin/platform, not a popular one. The exchanges, and more than that Coinmarketcap, are the places where the measurment unit of Byteball is officialized. If exchanges and Coinmarketcap will tell Gigabytes, people will think in Gigabytes, and this makes no sense, since in ordinary life you don't think in terms of Million of Dollars/Euros. That would be crazy. And to insist to speak about Byteball in terms of Gigabytes is crazy too. It basically makes bo sense.

As I've said, I'm not interested in the price of Byteball. In a healthy environment the price is just a natural consequence. But I am interested in seeing one little problem corrected, which alone is able to jeopardize Byteball's entire mission, since it's in complete dissonance with the "philosophy" of Byteball.

Just my two cents (or Bytes)

Byteball units vs beer units - or why it doesn't matter if GBYTE looks too expensive

In food store, you would buy a 1-3 bottles of beer (Bytes) or 6 pack (KBytes) or 12 pack (MByte).
Now, when that store buys it from wholesale, it is not buying them by 1 bottle, it might buy them in 24 packs (GByte) and open it up for people who want to buy just one beer (you don't need to buy the biggest pack of beer, you buy as much you need).
So, bots are like food store (selling smaller amounts to many individuals) and exchanges are like wholesale (selling in bulk to food stores). Difference is, every next unit on Bytebal is 1000 times bigger (like metric units for storage), not just 2 times like the beer example.

You would never go to wholesale shop and look at the 24 pack and think: "I will never afford beer". You would go to foods store and you would buy 12 beers (Byte) or two 6-pack (KByte) or one 12-pack (MByte) and you will be happy that you got beer, you will not be sad because you didn't get the biggest pack of beer (GByte).

[jwinterm]

tarmo888 do you get paid to post here? It's just kind of weird the frequency of your responses and the alignment of your opinion on all issues with that of the powers that be. Just noticed your account is only a month old or so, and I remember there was another guy that came out of the blue who would post here defending the party line, meterse, though he seems to have gone away around the time you showed up. Just curious if it's an official like "community manager" position or if you will say that you're not being compensated or what...