[ANN] [CVC] CIVIC Tokensale Successfully Completed

[gdrules]

CVC is booming

[masstahcoiner]

CVC is booming

CVC will get worldwide adoption

[freew5660]

I tried to register for 0xproject but app couldn't scan the qr code and I'm failed 

During registration, the code was scanned several times, always scanned without problems.

QR code working smoothly for me too without any problem I also confirm this. Don't understand what kind of problem your facing while try to register there I think restart your device than this problem will get resolved.

yes, same here. Everything should work fine. Maybe you could report more specifically what the problem looks like?

I confirmed my email, phone number.
It just didn't scan the qr code.

[_Ini_]

1) It seems like the value for the users (I mean the person who wants to register at an service, not the service who purchases attestation from a validator or the validator itself) of Civic is that they get notified when somebody does use their identidy (PII). But how does this notification work? Please keep in mind that "You get notified and you press a button" is not a valid answer to this question , I'm interested from a technical standpoint. Does this work via a centrlized service or in a decentralized manner and how exactly does it work?

2) When the users PII gets stolen and is already verfied on the blockchain how does it work to mark it as stolen on the blockchain, that it cannot be used anymore?

[_Ini_]

I was just reading on your Reddit that you are finalizing the full whitepaper right now, any estimated date for that? because I'm really curious to know more about the CIVIC Token and from where It value comes from? In other words, why would someone buy the token and how the investors will benefit from it beside funding the project.

Exactly. This is the most important question.
2. Why should a company switch to civic for identity verification?

Simple response to your question - it will be a lot cheaper than to use normal providers. More details in the summary whitepaper:
https://tokensale.civic.com/static/images/landing/CivicWhitepaperSummary.pdf

We will release full whitepaper soon and post the link here as well.

Why should the validators provide their service more cheap then they do now? And why should they use this platform, they just get less validation requests when this platform does get adopted.

[temple]

I tried to register for 0xproject but app couldn't scan the qr code and I'm failed 

During registration, the code was scanned several times, always scanned without problems.

QR code working smoothly for me too without any problem I also confirm this. Don't understand what kind of problem your facing while try to register there I think restart your device than this problem will get resolved.

yes, same here. Everything should work fine. Maybe you could report more specifically what the problem looks like?

I confirmed my email, phone number.
It just didn't scan the qr code.

that's weird. Did you resolve the problem by now or is it still existent? Anyone else here has the same problem?

[_Ini_]

vinnylingham re: BIP148 - we will make a decision closer to the time, but we are aware of the options.
It's a bigger issue for Bitcoin than for Civic, tbh.
Civic is not yet open source - eventually one day, it will be. Open sourcing security software in the early days is very risky

-- Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/ArkEcosystem/comments/6fw0un/log_of_ama_with_civic_by_vinny_lingham/?st=j3nih9dl&sh=5aacd533

Is Civic open source in the meantime? I think it's a huge barrier for people to enter an identidy security platform when it is no open source. I mean that is simply not acceptable from my point of view. I mean you don't know anyway what Mr. validator does with your PII, but that's why you only confirm validators that you trust. But like this I have to trust a startup that writes some software.

[huyhoang]

The idea of CIVIC is good, but how can you connect with the government (security check...) what is your roadmap to do so. I don't think any government accepted blockchain right?

[Dvd1989]

vinnylingham re: BIP148 - we will make a decision closer to the time, but we are aware of the options.
It's a bigger issue for Bitcoin than for Civic, tbh.
Civic is not yet open source - eventually one day, it will be. Open sourcing security software in the early days is very risky

-- Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/ArkEcosystem/comments/6fw0un/log_of_ama_with_civic_by_vinny_lingham/?st=j3nih9dl&sh=5aacd533

Is Civic open source in the meantime? I think it's a huge barrier for people to enter an identidy security platform when it is no open source. I mean that is simply not acceptable from my point of view. I mean you don't know anyway what Mr. validator does with your PII, but that's why you only confirm validators that you trust. But like this I have to trust a startup that writes some software.

It's not open source. Team doesn't want competitors to know the source. Maybe some day they will go open source!

[_Ini_]

vinnylingham re: BIP148 - we will make a decision closer to the time, but we are aware of the options.
It's a bigger issue for Bitcoin than for Civic, tbh.
Civic is not yet open source - eventually one day, it will be. Open sourcing security software in the early days is very risky

-- Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/ArkEcosystem/comments/6fw0un/log_of_ama_with_civic_by_vinny_lingham/?st=j3nih9dl&sh=5aacd533

Is Civic open source in the meantime? I think it's a huge barrier for people to enter an identidy security platform when it is no open source. I mean that is simply not acceptable from my point of view. I mean you don't know anyway what Mr. validator does with your PII, but that's why you only confirm validators that you trust. But like this I have to trust a startup that writes some software.

It's not open source. Team doesn't want competitors to know the source. Maybe some day they will go open source!

Store data encrypted in a non open source programm does make not much sense to me. Furthermore non open source identity security is also a big issue.

[jacafbiz]

vinnylingham re: BIP148 - we will make a decision closer to the time, but we are aware of the options.
It's a bigger issue for Bitcoin than for Civic, tbh.
Civic is not yet open source - eventually one day, it will be. Open sourcing security software in the early days is very risky

-- Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/ArkEcosystem/comments/6fw0un/log_of_ama_with_civic_by_vinny_lingham/?st=j3nih9dl&sh=5aacd533

Is Civic open source in the meantime? I think it's a huge barrier for people to enter an identidy security platform when it is no open source. I mean that is simply not acceptable from my point of view. I mean you don't know anyway what Mr. validator does with your PII, but that's why you only confirm validators that you trust. But like this I have to trust a startup that writes some software.

It's not open source. Team doesn't want competitors to know the source. Maybe some day they will go open source!

Store data encrypted in a non open source programm does make not much sense to me. Furthermore non open source identity security is also a big issue.

I don't rely thing most people understand what Civic project is all about, it all stands against what Crypto stands for and Governement can and come in and ask Civic team to supply them their users information like COinbase and won't have any other option but to comply

[Middleway]

solid project and a legit team, in my opinion this one is going somewhere

[vuvanle120]

vinnylingham re: BIP148 - we will make a decision closer to the time, but we are aware of the options.
It's a bigger issue for Bitcoin than for Civic, tbh.
Civic is not yet open source - eventually one day, it will be. Open sourcing security software in the early days is very risky

-- Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/ArkEcosystem/comments/6fw0un/log_of_ama_with_civic_by_vinny_lingham/?st=j3nih9dl&sh=5aacd533

Is Civic open source in the meantime? I think it's a huge barrier for people to enter an identidy security platform when it is no open source. I mean that is simply not acceptable from my point of view. I mean you don't know anyway what Mr. validator does with your PII, but that's why you only confirm validators that you trust. But like this I have to trust a startup that writes some software.

It's not open source. Team doesn't want competitors to know the source. Maybe some day they will go open source!

Store data encrypted in a non open source programm does make not much sense to me. Furthermore non open source identity security is also a big issue.

I don't rely thing most people understand what Civic project is all about, it all stands against what Crypto stands for and Governement can and come in and ask Civic team to supply them their users information like COinbase and won't have any other option but to comply

However if crypto is to be adopted to the mainstream it will need to be regulated. This is why Civic is crucial is getting mass adoption. Plus civic provide better security for future launch. Like it or not Civic will be huge no doubt!!!!

[mv1986]

vinnylingham re: BIP148 - we will make a decision closer to the time, but we are aware of the options.
It's a bigger issue for Bitcoin than for Civic, tbh.
Civic is not yet open source - eventually one day, it will be. Open sourcing security software in the early days is very risky

-- Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/ArkEcosystem/comments/6fw0un/log_of_ama_with_civic_by_vinny_lingham/?st=j3nih9dl&sh=5aacd533

Is Civic open source in the meantime? I think it's a huge barrier for people to enter an identidy security platform when it is no open source. I mean that is simply not acceptable from my point of view. I mean you don't know anyway what Mr. validator does with your PII, but that's why you only confirm validators that you trust. But like this I have to trust a startup that writes some software.

It's not open source. Team doesn't want competitors to know the source. Maybe some day they will go open source!

Store data encrypted in a non open source programm does make not much sense to me. Furthermore non open source identity security is also a big issue.

I don't rely thing most people understand what Civic project is all about, it all stands against what Crypto stands for and Governement can and come in and ask Civic team to supply them their users information like COinbase and won't have any other option but to comply

However if crypto is to be adopted to the mainstream it will need to be regulated. This is why Civic is crucial is getting mass adoption. Plus civic provide better security for future launch. Like it or not Civic will be huge no doubt!!!!

I am curious how all these regulations will work out. The interesting thing I see is while regulators are now dealing with potential regulation for BTC, new protocols like Zcash are on the way to make it even impossible to track anything. I can hardly imagine what the world will be looking like in 10-15 years from now should all these crazy innovations become pervasive reality.

[Jayjay04]

Curious about how the 660 000 000 millions coins left out off the circulation for now will be integrated into the system ?!?!
That is a lot of coins... no ?!??!

[DrGil]

Curious about how the 660 000 000 millions coins left out off the circulation for now will be integrated into the system ?!?!
That is a lot of coins... no ?!??!

I have also been concerned about the disbursement of the giant pile of "digital tokens" you're probably tripping over at the office.  Do they get in your way.....or is there a nice cleaning lady to stack them neatly for you?  Either way.....it'd really be bangin' if you could try to not crash the market....ya know?  Thanks yo.




 

[Dr Charles]

Its crazy how many people invest in a project without doing some good research

[_Ini_]

Q:

The attestation is nothing but a hash of the PII + signature of the validator. So if a service provider needs to verify somebody he could just ask another service provider give me the public key of the validator and then just look at the blockchain and verify it himself without paying something in a smart contract.

Example: Service providers could just share all public keys that they have (lets say on a website where all service providers register their known information, public key = validator). And when they then receive a PII from user they could just try to decrypt every attestation on the blockchain and check if the plain text of that decrypted text includes a hash that matches the hash of the PII that he has received from user. Like that service providers would lower their costs massivly and validators provit would decrease massivly.

Isn't that a HUGE problem? Normally in order to get this adopted goverments should join the party as validators. And the whitepaper states on page 13 paragraph 2 "Civic's ecosystem will be designed to incentivice participation of trustworthy IDV providers known as validators, wo may be include financial instiutations, goverments....". How do they want incentive them? The will earn not much if the service providers share there keys and everything is visible on the blockchain.

[Dr Charles]

Q:

The attestation is nothing but a hash of the PII + signature of the validator. So if a service provider needs to verify somebody he could just ask another service provider give me the public key of the validator and then just look at the blockchain and verify it himself without paying something in a smart contract.

Example: Service providers could just share all public keys that they have (lets say on a website where all service providers register their known information, public key = validator). And when they then receive a PII from user they could just try to decrypt every attestation on the blockchain and check if the plain text of that decrypted text includes a hash that matches the hash of the PII that he has received from user. Like that service providers would lower their costs massivly and validators provit would decrease massivly.

Isn't that a HUGE problem? Normally in order to get this adopted goverments should join the party as validators. And the whitepaper states on page 13 paragraph 2 "Civic's ecosystem will be designed to incentivice participation of trustworthy IDV providers known as validators, wo may be include financial instiutations, goverments....". How do they want incentive them? The will earn not much if the service providers share there keys and everything is visible on the blockchain.

Why would anyone share their keys for free if they could get paid to share them?

[_Ini_]

Q:

The attestation is nothing but a hash of the PII + signature of the validator. So if a service provider needs to verify somebody he could just ask another service provider give me the public key of the validator and then just look at the blockchain and verify it himself without paying something in a smart contract.

Example: Service providers could just share all public keys that they have (lets say on a website where all service providers register their known information, public key = validator). And when they then receive a PII from user they could just try to decrypt every attestation on the blockchain and check if the plain text of that decrypted text includes a hash that matches the hash of the PII that he has received from user. Like that service providers would lower their costs massivly and validators provit would decrease massivly.

Isn't that a HUGE problem? Normally in order to get this adopted goverments should join the party as validators. And the whitepaper states on page 13 paragraph 2 "Civic's ecosystem will be designed to incentivice participation of trustworthy IDV providers known as validators, wo may be include financial instiutations, goverments....". How do they want incentive them? The will earn not much if the service providers share there keys and everything is visible on the blockchain.

Why would anyone share their keys for free if they could get paid to share them?

If one service provider has the key he could just share them with other paid or not paid. This is not avoidable that your key as a validator will get public someday, maybe somebody posts it on the internet or tells it somebody else.