CoinMarketCap.com - Market Cap Rankings of All Cryptocurrencies!

[salmion]

If you have evidence of HitBtc faking volume, please present it so I can see what they have to say about it.  Definitely do not want skewed numbers on the site.

Well looks like my post got derailed by some Dash idiot. Why isn't Dash listed as an instamine, Gliss? I know you need 'evidence' so I'll do your research for you.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=560138.0

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=999886.0

http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins#darkcoin

'That means in less than 8 hours, almost 5% of the Darkcoins that ever will be created spawned in that 1/3 of a day.'

Also

Was Darkcoin Instamined?
~2mn coins were issued in the first 48 hours due to problems with the difficulty readjustment. That represents approximately 10-15% of the total money supply that will ever be issued.

That is some sort of semi-official "FAQ" (which overstates the amount of time taken for the instamine, but that's another story)

Finally, from the actual official dash site:

When we relaunched we had a rush of miners join causing a huge spike of coin production without it being able to adjust the difficulty quick enough, we just ended up spilling out coins. Retargeting happened every 576 blocks and could only increase the difficulty by four times, so it took about six retargets to get to a difficulty that was near 2.5 minutes per block.

Later on, after the difficulty evened out we realized that there was a serious problem with the block reward calculation. You can see people discussing the problems here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.120

I soon fixed this issue at block 4500, but none of us realized the amount of coins that had been issued at the time. At that point we didn’t even have a block explorer yet.

There is no question that dash was instamined. Even supporters of the coin have given up denying it and instead claim it doesn't matter. We could argue that, but here is not the place to do so. Either way, it is 100% accurate to display it a such.

Displaying it as significant premine is hardly accurate. If you must - add another * option instamine or launch issues. An instamine is not a premine.

[smooth]

I agree that an instamine isn't exactly the same as a premine but when 35% of the outstanding coins were created in one day that is highly significant. I'm not sure that one day gap really makes that big a difference compared to just issuing 35% of the coins in the genesis block. It's certainly worth noting somehow anyway.

[MasterMined710]

DASH/Darkcoin was not premined. that is inaccurate.
is bitcoin not considered premined or instamined by satoshi?

[smooth]

DASH/Darkcoin was not premined. that is inaccurate.
is bitcoin not considered premined or instamined by satoshi?

Were 35% of the Bitcoins mined in one day? Was there a flaw in the Bitcoin software that produced more coins than the published schedule? Actually the answer to that is yes, but in Bitcoin's case the bug was fixed and the coins erased. In DASH's case, the extra coins were kept, and then, on top of that, the future rewards were lowered.

Bitcoin was not instamined -- it was and is mined at almost exactly the pace described in its design (50% of the remaining total every four years). Dash was intimated. (To be entirely accurate I think the tag should be changed to "significantly premined or instamined".)

[Taylor05]

I agree that an instamine isn't exactly the same as a premine but when 35% of the outstanding coins were created in one day that is highly significant. I'm not sure that one day gap really makes that big a difference compared to just issuing 35% of the coins in the genesis block. It's certainly worth noting somehow anyway.

By that definition, practically every PoS coin out there was "instamined". Most are 100% mined within a week. As long as they are pre-announced, that is fair. Dash was pre-announced and anyone could have benefited from the emission adjustment issue, not just the devs. And they did. I swear, if you spent half the time you spend trying to discredit Dash developing your own coin (Monero)...

Highlighting in red some proposed 2 million coin airdrop that Evan Duffield proposed to resolve the issue is deceptive (part of your "evidence"). That was a proposed 2m coin block that would be ADDED to the blockchain and distributed by Evan Duffield to the community and that proposal failed. The community hated the idea.

You guys need to move on. The coin was clearly not pre-mined. The first block was created after the announced release.

It's really rich coming from the guys from a coin with NO GUI complaining about how Dash launched without a windows wallet. The same guys warning the world about the "Dash scam" are the ones who are promoting their own coin that doesn't have a sustainable level of development and missed the promised GUI deadline by what, a YEAR now? Which coin requires a warning to investors? If it weren't so low class, I would be tempted to start a smear campaign against Moreno.

[smooth]

I agree that an instamine isn't exactly the same as a premine but when 35% of the outstanding coins were created in one day that is highly significant. I'm not sure that one day gap really makes that big a difference compared to just issuing 35% of the coins in the genesis block. It's certainly worth noting somehow anyway.

By that definition, practically every PoS coin out there was "instamined". Most are 100% mined within a week.

Not if that was the published distribution schedule. Fast, yes. Dumb, maybe, but not an instamine.

Dash did not adhere to the published schedule. At all. First of all the difficulty didn't adjust properly due to a (alleged) bug. Second of all the number of coins created was too high due to a (alleged) bug (and the extra coins were not returned the way they were with Bitcoin). Third of all, the future rewards were arbitrarily lowered after the instamine.

That does not apply to "practically every" anything, other than "practically every" instamine scam.

[Taylor05]

I agree that an instamine isn't exactly the same as a premine but when 35% of the outstanding coins were created in one day that is highly significant. I'm not sure that one day gap really makes that big a difference compared to just issuing 35% of the coins in the genesis block. It's certainly worth noting somehow anyway.

By that definition, practically every PoS coin out there was "instamined". Most are 100% mined within a week.

Not if that was the published distribution schedule. Fast, yes. Dumb, maybe, but not an instamine.

Dash did not adhere to the published schedule. At all. First of all the difficulty didn't adjust properly due to a (alleged) bug. Second of all the number of coins created was too high due to a (alleged) bug (and the extra coins were not returned the way they were with Bitcoin). Third of all, the future rewards were arbitrarily lowered after the instamine.

That does not apply to "practically every" anything, other than "practically every" instamine scam.

There were two main issues at launch. A LOT of mining power was pointed at the coin (probably because it was the first coin to use x11 and therefore for which you could actually use your CPU to mine it) yet 1) the difficulty readjustment was infrequent and 2) limited to 4x the previous difficulty (both common protections against "stalling" new coins at impossible difficulty levels). These protections allowed a huge number of blocks of significant size to be emitted before adjustments could take place. So yes, lots of coins were emitted at a faster rate than planned. That's a long ways from a fraudulent instamine. Furthermore, there wasn't a block explorer yet to tell how many coins were emitted.

The coins from those early addresses were mostly transferred to exchanges and redistributed within weeks. Further evidence that they were mined by miners, not the dev. You also can't destroy those coins now, after they were sold to new owners. The developers don't even have control over them to do so (and I think pretty much everyone would agree that wouldn't be fair and would destroy the credibility of any developer that proposed it).

Finally, the reduction in rewards was not arbitary, and at that point what difference does it make anyway? Any emissions from any coin simply dilute existing holders. Emit half as much and you dilute existing holders half as much. LOWERING of emissions is a GOOD thing for existing holders of a coin (baring lowering them to the point that miners stop mining and making your coin secure). RAISING them "arbitrarily" would be bad and you would have a case, but that isn't the case here. So anyone buying the coin (the population you claim to want to protect) has had the emission rate LOWER than what they have been promised ever since DRK/DASH was available on an exchange to even purchase.

All you have is allegations... no proof at all that the lead dev has massive numbers of coin and until you do, shut the hell up. Launch issues? Fine yes. Instamine? Define it because lots of coins emitted a high share of existing coins their first day/week/month... and no you are entering a pretty slippery slope. Where do you draw the line? What percent over different time periods.

[smooth]

I agree that an instamine isn't exactly the same as a premine but when 35% of the outstanding coins were created in one day that is highly significant. I'm not sure that one day gap really makes that big a difference compared to just issuing 35% of the coins in the genesis block. It's certainly worth noting somehow anyway.

By that definition, practically every PoS coin out there was "instamined". Most are 100% mined within a week.

Not if that was the published distribution schedule. Fast, yes. Dumb, maybe, but not an instamine.

Dash did not adhere to the published schedule. At all. First of all the difficulty didn't adjust properly due to a (alleged) bug. Second of all the number of coins created was too high due to a (alleged) bug (and the extra coins were not returned the way they were with Bitcoin). Third of all, the future rewards were arbitrarily lowered after the instamine.

That does not apply to "practically every" anything, other than "practically every" instamine scam.

There were two main issues at launch. A LOT of mining power was pointed at the coin (probably because it was the first coin to use x11 and therefore for which you could actually use your CPU to mine it) yet 1) the difficulty readjustment was infrequent and 2) limited to 4x the previous difficulty (both common protections against "stalling" new coins at impossible difficulty levels). These protections allowed a huge number of blocks of significant size to be emitted before adjustments could take place. So yes, lots of coins were emitted at a faster rate than planned. That's a long ways from a fraudulent instamine.

Instamines or premines certainly aren't necessarily fraudulent (in the sense of deception) at all, so it doesn't matter. If coinmarketcap thinks it is important to let its users know when a huge portion of the coins were mined/created on the first day, then they should. (I disagree with your characterization as to their not being deception here, nor did you address the issue of extra coins, as explained elsewhere, but it irrelevant.)

The coins from those early addresses were mostly transferred to exchanges and redistributed within weeks

That is also entirely irrelevant to whether the coin was significantly premined/instamined.

Finally, the reduction in rewards was not arbitary, and at that point what difference does it make anyway? Any emissions from any coin simply dilute existing holders. Emit half as much and you dilute existing holders half as much. LOWERING of emissions is a GOOD thing for existing holders of a coin

Exactly. Lowering the emissions benefits those who participated in the initial instamine/premine and makes the magnitude of that instamine/premine far more significant. Hypothetically, if you premine an arguably-reasonable 5% and then cut future rewards by 90%, suddenly your premine is now 50%.

So yes it is highly relevant information with respect to the context of the existing supply number.

[MasterMined710]

this is gonna get ugly. no coins have had perfectly fair launches or have "fair" initial distribution including bitcoin.

DASH was not premined and i think everyone agrees with that so the "significantly premined" label must be changed.
instamine has no real definition and could refer to a lot of coins including monero which was launched with a deoptimized miner (nobody disputes this) where at least 2.5% to 5%+ of the coins were "instamined" and/or "unfair mined" by a few people.

you also have a lot of POS coins that have a very short pow phase from a few days (crave) up to 1-3 weeks that could also be considered a instamine. most of those coins don't clearly state this short pow phase in their ANN thread. they only say pow phase has completed and give a block number but few say they were instamined in 4 days or whatever it was.



"Yes i'm well aware of the (Monero deoptimized miner scam). They mined say 2.5% of the coins over several months... Good for them." Smooth

Looks like the monero fanboys got coinmarket cap to add ** against DASH: significantly premined

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=199685.msg11195469#msg11195469

I don't get this. A instamine is not a premine. The devs did not preemptively take a large number of coins out of circulation. I wonder if money changed hands here to get us listed as such. Shame on coinmarketcap, shame on the Monero shills/devs.

I have to say I did not tell them it was a premine. I told them it was an instamine
snip

You quoted threads posted by people that obviously had a beef with Darkcoin, your Darkcoin hate thread included.

Trying to say optimised miners were created is one thing. Monero miners were being overwhelmed by optimised miners at one end, and code baked in to rig the game at the other end.

Following a predefined trajectory yes, but with one or two people skimming most of the coins of that trajectory.

That's just another definition for instamined. If you had participated in the deoptimization I would have called you a scammer. You seem to have been the victim of the scam, along with everyone else, so I'll leave it as instamined for several months.

You need to submit that to coinmarketcap and to request Monero be flagged as instamined by a possible rouge dev.

-snip-

I don't know the full background history of Monero, but I did join early on. I will give you and tactotime props for stepping in to save a project.

However, on the basis of what you have said about Darkcoin, you should offer up to coinmarketcap a similar desire to have Monero listed as premined / instamined because it was forked from BCN and the code contained depotimisation to rig the mining game, apparently.

You may not have known that, but its a fact that Monero miners were being ripped off. You took over the project because you suspected the dev was a scammer but you didn't relaunch.

Then you just discovered an issue post fact.

The issue may have been resolved, but it still stands. Monero was instamined for the best part of two months, or more.

"Bitmonero was a fork of Bytecoin designed to not have the 80% premine.  But its initial developer either didn't know, didn't care, or wanted to profit from the de-optimized hashing.  That initial developer was pretty quickly given the boot by the community, and in came an unrelated group of developers who took it over---who were, as far as I can tell, completely unaware of the deoptimization.  So things sat there for a few weeks in the same state as Bytecoin."

http://da-data.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/minting-money-with-monero-and-cpu.html

You as one of the devs should have worked out there was a problem and not have been told about it but some kid who needed to get permission from his parents to keep spewing out hundreds of thousands of coins and dumping them for a profit.  Wait no, devs don't make mistakes.

Now you suspect a botnet attack, which could easily be more of the above.

You should offer this information up to coinmarketcap to demonstrate you are not just trying to attack the competition, but you genuinely want fair play.

Son if bitch... Really?    Holy fn smokes.  So these bastards have been here squaking for months about instamined BULLSHIT and their own coin was Instamined for 2 months.    
snip

TLDR: if DASH has an asterisk it should have to do with initial distribution issues and monero should have an asterisk too.

[smooth]

this is gonna get ugly. no coins have had perfectly fair launches or have "fair" initial distribution including bitcoin.

You're using the wrong standard. The standard is not "perfectly fair" it is "significantly premined."

CMC seems to think that an instamine of 35% in one day counts as that. I think they should clarify the tag and make it "significantly premined or instamined", but that's up to them.

I disagree with your statement that instamined doesn't have a clear definition. It has a reasonable common sense definition and plain English definition that means "mined extremely fast" just as "significantly" has such a definition. I don't know what criteria CMC uses for "significantly" though.

[smooth]

"Yes i'm well aware of the (Monero deoptimized miner scam). They mined say 2.5% of the coins over several months... Good for them." Smooth

If you're going to quote, you should actually quote. That is not a quote. You're making yourself look like a scammer when you rewrite a quote and don't link it for context. Not good for your argument at all.

[busterzzz]

Thank you for giving me the confidence in knowing I made the right decision in taking coinmarketcap off my favorite websites list. Your recent actions are very unprofessional and prove to myself and the cryptocommunity at large that coinmarketcap.com can not be taken seriously as a provider of information.

[smooth]

Thank you for giving me the confidence in knowing I made the right decision in taking coinmarketcap off my favorite websites list. Your recent actions are very unprofessional and prove to myself and the cryptocommunity at large that coinmarketcap.com can not be taken seriously as a provider of information.

I would say exactly the opposite in this instance. The enormous 35% instamine of dash is something that is highly relevant to providing useful and objective supply statistics, and coinmarketcap is to be commended for disclosing it, even though dash is a "popular" coin and they are bound to be aggressively criticized by dash supporters for doing so.

Although I do question the quality of their information given that they don't list Bytecoin as premined and haven't removed the hitbtc exchange data despite being provided with ample evidence of hitbtc volume being fake.

[FreedomCoin]

Coinmarketcap...

So you leave coins like Ripple on your page, but then take down Dash?

Some good logic there...

[smooth]

Coinmarketcap...

So you leave coins like Ripple on your page, but then take down Dash?

Some good logic there...

Ripple is marked as non-mineable. If you filter non-mineable and significantly premined it disappears too.

[busterzzz]

Coinmarketcap...

So you leave coins like Ripple on your page, but then take down Dash?

Some good logic there...

Ripple is marked as non-mineable. If you filter non-mineable and significantly premined it disappears too.

I would honestly rather not have DASH listed anywhere on coinmarketcap, the website is a joke.

[FreedomCoin]

Coinmarketcap...

So you leave coins like Ripple on your page, but then take down Dash?

Some good logic there...

Ripple is marked as non-mineable. If you filter non-mineable and significantly premined it disappears too.

Its a Fedcoin with centralized control and a an apparently very corrupt organization.

[BagHolder010]

This site just lost it's credibility because of a cry baby Monero dev who is a copy cat with no coding skills what so ever. Instead of working to make Monero better he attacks EVAN because he is to much for him to compete with in CODING or getting something new to CRYPTO.

[ddink7]

This site just lost it's credibility.

Agreed. Anybody who looks at the Dash block explorer can clearly see that no coins were premined. If you want to mark the coin as instamined, that's great, but it's clearly and provably not premined.

[smooth]

This site just lost it's credibility.

Agreed. Anybody who looks at the Dash block explorer can clearly see that no coins were premined. If you want to mark the coin as instamined, that's great, but it's clearly and provably not premined.

It's actually not provable from that because you can fake a blockchain easily enough (Bytecoin did it). But enough people were around for the launch for us to know that the blockchain is actually real and I agree it wasn't premined. It was instamined, which was all I ever said in my post on this thread.

Why isn't Dash listed as an instamine, Gliss? I know you need 'evidence' so I'll do your research for you.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=560138.0

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=999886.0

http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins#darkcoin

'That means in less than 8 hours, almost 5% of the Darkcoins that ever will be created spawned in that 1/3 of a day.'

Also

Was Darkcoin Instamined?
~2mn coins were issued in the first 48 hours due to problems with the difficulty readjustment. That represents approximately 10-15% of the total money supply that will ever be issued.

That is some sort of semi-official "FAQ" (which overstates the amount of time taken for the instamine, but that's another story)

Finally, from the actual official dash site:

When we relaunched we had a rush of miners join causing a huge spike of coin production without it being able to adjust the difficulty quick enough, we just ended up spilling out coins. Retargeting happened every 576 blocks and could only increase the difficulty by four times, so it took about six retargets to get to a difficulty that was near 2.5 minutes per block.

Later on, after the difficulty evened out we realized that there was a serious problem with the block reward calculation. You can see people discussing the problems here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.120

I soon fixed this issue at block 4500, but none of us realized the amount of coins that had been issued at the time. At that point we didn’t even have a block explorer yet.

There is no question that dash was instamined. Even supporters of the coin have given up denying it and instead claim it doesn't matter. We could argue that, but here is not the place to do so. Either way, it is 100% accurate to display it a such.