[ANN] IXCoin [IXC] The Original Bitcoin Sidechain

[Vlad2Vlad]

Hi

https://chainz.cryptoid.info/ixc/#!crypto

bitcointalk link there brings nowhere.

It’s expiring in 7 days so it’s a moot point.  Nothing new here, everyone has given up on donations.  Hard to keep believing after 9 years of failing.  Only the strong, true believers remain.  Sadly, we’re few and all broke.  :/

[Eddyc]

And coinomi must have at least a couple million frozen.  So medically me and a few other guys own the actually circulating supply.

Hi there, Coinomi is not a custodial service. The users themselves are the ones who control their coins and are always in full control of them regardless of what happens with the app. We cannot freeze any of our users' cons. Users can always use their private keys and access their funds using any wallet that supports it.

This outgoing discussion shows the real problem with Ixcoin's growth. The question is: How an investor is going to invest in a project knowing that there are thousands of frozen portfolios and as Vlad mentioned, it's not out of malice but because of the lack of knowledge of investors who at the time had no idea what they were doing. However there is another line of thought that is: How can we trust when investing in Ixcoin knowing that there is a possibility that some wallet will be active out of nowhere and dump into the market.

In other words, we are dealing with a promising and dangerous project to invest not out of malice but because of a lack of knowledge of the true circulation supply.


A time bomb 

[Vlad2Vlad]

And coinomi must have at least a couple million frozen.  So medically me and a few other guys own the actually circulating supply.

Hi there, Coinomi is not a custodial service. The users themselves are the ones who control their coins and are always in full control of them regardless of what happens with the app. We cannot freeze any of our users' cons. Users can always use their private keys and access their funds using any wallet that supports it.

This outgoing discussion shows the real problem with Ixcoin's growth. The question is: How an investor is going to invest in a project knowing that there are thousands of frozen portfolios and as Vlad mentioned, it's not out of malice but because of the lack of knowledge of investors who at the time had no idea what they were doing. However there is another line of thought that is: How can we trust when investing in Ixcoin knowing that there is a possibility that some wallet will be active out of nowhere and dump into the market.

In other words, we are dealing with a promising and dangerous project to invest not out of malice but because of a lack of knowledge of the true circulation supply.


A time bomb 

Definitely a timebomb To be honest cause there are a lot of whale wallets ThaT haven’t moved in years and who knows how many are lost for good or how many will just dump on any good run we might have.  That’s why I’ve got some ready on exchange and my finger on the dump button.   

Full disclosure and stuff.  lol

[markm]

It is still possible that oodles of IXCoin lost to fly-by-night or hacked exchanges are "out there" still yet to be dumped, yes.

But a lot of dumping has happened overall already, so maybe quite a bit of the stolen IXCoin has already long been dumped.

Then too, bear in mind that IXCoin is one of the "treasury based" currencies of the Galactic Milieu.

Because the game cannot rely upon always having enough actively-arbitraging players constantly active on all the markets, each currency paired against each other currency, the "treasuries" system is used so the game can compute the relative values of all the currencies.

It does this by adding up the values of everything in the currency's "treasury" and dividing that total by the number of that coin that has been minted.

Notice that is the number MINTED, not the number still actively in play / in circulation.

That means for purposes of the Milieu's calculation of a currency's relative value keeping a bunch of that currency out of circulation does NOT affect the calculation, despite the fact doing so might well put upward pressure on "spot market" prices by limiting the available "supply" able to get onto such "spot markets" to be sold and thus the "supply" available on spot markets to be bought.

This calculation of values based on "treasury" holdings is run over and over and over again, comparing its resulting "Latest Rates include-file" against the previous one until "diff latestrates.inc latestrates.old" finds the previous one and the current one are identical.

That means if any of the "reserve currencies" used in the "treasuries" change value, their changed value is applied to all the other "treasuries" and the calculation is run again; if any of those changed, their change is reflected in the next run around the loop, effecting all currencies having the changed one(s) in their own "treasuries"; and so on, round and round and round until they all come out unchanged from one run to the next.

That looping simulates an "efficient market", that is, a market in which everyone has full information and in which arbitrageurs efficiently balance out discrepancies.

The resulting "Latest Rates include file" thus shows values that work in all directions between all pairings of the currencies; for Open Transactions we had shell-scripts that included that file and automatically posted buy and sell offers of each currency against each other currency on three scales of how many coins in a bundle, so that like with porkbellies or cans of soup you could have different price-per-unit depending on whether you were buying individual items, packages of ten, packages of 100, packages of 1000 and so on. That way players could buy, say, 100000 at a time on the large scale market and resell at a profit in batches of 10000 at a time on the next-smaller market, or 1000 at a time on the next-next-smaller market and so on. The scripts used three scales for each pair and marked up their asking price or marked down their offering price from the values in the include-file by a smaller percentage the larger the market, like maybe 1% if you buy 100,000 at a time, 2% if you buy only 10,000, 3% if you buy 1000 at a time kind of thing.

Having these conversion-rates means all the major entities in the game can freely convert between currencies without having to somehow keep enough players active on each and every currency-pair's markets for organic "price-discovery" to take place. It means sellers of things and services in the game can accept any of the currencies they choose to, and, perhaps unfortunately, debtors can pay off their loans using any of the currencies without having to go through "spot markets" to try to convert their payment into the currency their loan is denominated in.

I said "perhaps unfortunately" there because for years now we in the DeVCoin project (DVC, another coin merged-mined right alongside BTC, IXC, I0C, CLC, GRP  XGG etc) have speculated that if the vast amount of DeVCoin-denominated debt insisted on being paid IN ACTUAL DeVCoins, the amount of debt-paying constantly going on would likely cause massive pressure on any "spot markets" where folks can buy DeVCoins using other coins or currencies.

On the other hand, even if all the DeVCoins being constantly minted were all made available in the game for debtors whose loans are denominated in DeVCoins to buy up and use to make loan payments, there might not be enough!

So basically the Latest Rates include-file came about partly because waiting for players to actively trade each and every currency against, for example. DeVCoin so that debtors owing DeVCoins could use whatever coins they were earning to buy DeVCoins to make loan payments was simply not practical.

Now another thing to consider is that the calculation of value based on "treasury" does not count a currency's own coins if any of its own coins did happen to be in its treasury. Nowadays probably all the treasuries don't actually contain any of their own coin, but even if they did the calculation treats the value of their own coin as zero when adding up the value of their own treasury.

That means each currency has at least one "Slush Fund" account: a place where it can store any of its own coin that it owns.

Then, once they had at least one "Slush Fund" account anyway, many started to use their "Slush Fund" as a kind of catch-all petty (or not-so-petty) cash account.

So many of the currencies have pretty darn large amounts of stuff in their "Slush Funds", kind of like the way that when I tokenise coins I only tokenise half of them so I can keep the other half available to buy the tokens back without without needing to actually use the coins that "back" the tokens to "redeem" the tokens. I suppose ideally we should start trying to get everyone to keep at least as much value in their "Slush Fund" as they have in their "treasury", so that we/they do not need to dip into their actual "treasury" in order to "redeem" their coins at the values calculated from their "treasury".

(Afterall we do not wish to have to constantly change the contents of the treasuries just to do day to day things like buying back our coins from who-ever has somehow managed to get hold of some of them; it is nice to only put into our treasury things we hopefully never need to take back out of the treasury, or at least never to take anything out of the treasury without replacing it with something of greater or equal value. So if there is any chance that a currency might need to buy back every one of its coins at the value computed from its treasury it would be able to do that using its "Slush Fund", no need to actually "liquidate" anything that is actually in the treasury. Currently however that ideal is not yet enforced, so it is currently possible that some of the currencies might have to liquidate stuff from their treasury if enough of a "bank run" on their coin were to somehow happen.)

The germ of the idea behind this "treasuries" system began back when I was using eggdrop IRC-bots to allow access to the coin-daemons of the "big seven" Galactic currencies, many years ago.

Basically each daemon (coin) had a named account in its built-in simplistic accounts system (that maybe bitcoin still might have? Not sure. Older coins certainly still have it) named for each other coin.

So for example in IXCoin's daemon there were accounts for I0Coin and for DeVCoin and each other coin, so that each other coin could own some IXCoin.

Then the IRC bot could use the Latest Rates Include-file, adding a small fee to cover any blockchain fees and maybe a small stipend for itself, let folks buy back any of the coins using any of the other coins subject only to how many of each other coin each coin had.

That is, IF anyone had bought any IXC using, say, DVC, resulting in IXC's DVC-account having some DVC in it, THEN IXC was able to sell that DVC. Basically each coin thus could own some of each other coin, and users could only buy from each coin as many of each other coin as that particular coin actually had on hand.

Thus IF anyone bought any IXC using BTC, THEN that amount of BTC (minus any blockchain-fees) would be available to be bought FOR IXC.

In other words each coin would be redeemable in each other coin only up to however much of that other coin had been used to buy the coin in the first place.

In other other words, you could not expect to be able to buy BTC with IXC unless someone, even if only you yourself, had at some previous time already bought IXC with BTC.

Does that make sense to you?

Unfortunately over the years some BTC did get sent to third-party "exchanges" which ended up "flying by night", claiming to be hacked, and so on and so on.

Thus over the years such activities have periodically crippled our ability to buy back every single one of each coin USING the exact same coin as was originally used to buy it from us.

That is sad, but what can we do about it? We are still waiting for various coins from various "bankruptcy proceedings" of exchanges and suchlike things.

But meanwhile, each and every IXCoin, including ones in long-lost wallets that are totally and forever lost, can be redeemed at the rates shown in the Latest Rates include-file, albeit how many of which of the currencies shown it would take to do it necessarily varies according to how many of which currency who-ever you go to to redeem them happens to have on hand.

For a currency such as IXC, which only has 21 million coins yet each is currently shown as being worth so little, likely there are some other currencies that would be able to buy the entire lot of them from you, maybe without even needing to dip into their own actual "treasury" to do so...

-MarkM-

[Vlad2Vlad]

It is still possible that oodles of IXCoin lost to fly-by-night or hacked exchanges are "out there" still yet to be dumped, yes.

But a lot of dumping has happened overall already, so maybe quite a bit of the stolen IXCoin has already long been dumped.

Then too, bear in mind that IXCoin is one of the "treasury based" currencies of the Galactic Milieu.

Because the game cannot rely upon always having enough actively-arbitraging players constantly active on all the markets, each currency paired against each other currency, the "treasuries" system is used so the game can compute the relative values of all the currencies.

It does this by adding up the values of everything in the currency's "treasury" and dividing that total by the number of that coin that has been minted.

Notice that is the number MINTED, not the number still actively in play / in circulation.

That means for purposes of the Milieu's calculation of a currency's relative value keeping a bunch of that currency out of circulation does NOT affect the calculation, despite the fact doing so might well put upward pressure on "spot market" prices by limiting the available "supply" able to get onto such "spot markets" to be sold and thus the "supply" available on spot markets to be bought.

This calculation of values based on "treasury" holdings is run over and over and over again, comparing its resulting "Latest Rates include-file" against the previous one until "diff latestrates.inc latestrates.old" finds the previous one and the current one are identical.

That means if any of the "reserve currencies" used in the "treasuries" change value, their changed value is applied to all the other "treasuries" and the calculation is run again; if any of those changed, their change is reflected in the next run around the loop, effecting all currencies having the changed one(s) in their own "treasuries"; and so on, round and round and round until they all come out unchanged from one run to the next.

That looping simulates an "efficient market", that is, a market in which everyone has full information and in which arbitrageurs efficiently balance out discrepancies.

The resulting "Latest Rates include file" thus shows values that work in all directions between all pairings of the currencies; for Open Transactions we had shell-scripts that included that file and automatically posted buy and sell offers of each currency against each other currency on three scales of how many coins in a bundle, so that like with porkbellies or cans of soup you could have different price-per-unit depending on whether you were buying individual items, packages of ten, packages of 100, packages of 1000 and so on. That way players could buy, say, 100000 at a time on the large scale market and resell at a profit in batches of 10000 at a time on the next-smaller market, or 1000 at a time on the next-next-smaller market and so on. The scripts used three scales for each pair and marked up their asking price or marked down their offering price from the values in the include-file by a smaller percentage the larger the market, like maybe 1% if you buy 100,000 at a time, 2% if you buy only 10,000, 3% if you buy 1000 at a time kind of thing.

Having these conversion-rates means all the major entities in the game can freely convert between currencies without having to somehow keep enough players active on each and every currency-pair's markets for organic "price-discovery" to take place. It means sellers of things and services in the game can accept any of the currencies they choose to, and, perhaps unfortunately, debtors can pay off their loans using any of the currencies without having to go through "spot markets" to try to convert their payment into the currency their loan is denominated in.

I said "perhaps unfortunately" there because for years now we in the DeVCoin project (DVC, another coin merged-mined right alongside BTC, IXC, I0C, CLC, GRP  XGG etc) have speculated that if the vast amount of DeVCoin-denominated debt insisted on being paid IN ACTUAL DeVCoins, the amount of debt-paying constantly going on would likely cause massive pressure on any "spot markets" where folks can buy DeVCoins using other coins or currencies.

On the other hand, even if all the DeVCoins being constantly minted were all made available in the game for debtors whose loans are denominated in DeVCoins to buy up and use to make loan payments, there might not be enough!

So basically the Latest Rates include-file came about partly because waiting for players to actively trade each and every currency against, for example. DeVCoin so that debtors owing DeVCoins could use whatever coins they were earning to buy DeVCoins to make loan payments was simply not practical.

Now another thing to consider is that the calculation of value based on "treasury" does not count a currency's own coins if any of its own coins did happen to be in its treasury. Nowadays probably all the treasuries don't actually contain any of their own coin, but even if they did the calculation treats the value of their own coin as zero when adding up the value of their own treasury.

That means each currency has at least one "Slush Fund" account: a place where it can store any of its own coin that it owns.

Then, once they had at least one "Slush Fund" account anyway, many started to use their "Slush Fund" as a kind of catch-all petty (or not-so-petty) cash account.

So many of the currencies have pretty darn large amounts of stuff in their "Slush Funds", kind of like the way that when I tokenise coins I only tokenise half of them so I can keep the other half available to buy the tokens back without without needing to actually use the coins that "back" the tokens to "redeem" the tokens. I suppose ideally we should start trying to get everyone to keep at least as much value in their "Slush Fund" as they have in their "treasury", so that we/they do not need to dip into their actual "treasury" in order to "redeem" their coins at the values calculated from their "treasury".

(Afterall we do not wish to have to constantly change the contents of the treasuries just to do day to day things like buying back our coins from who-ever has somehow managed to get hold of some of them; it is nice to only put into our treasury things we hopefully never need to take back out of the treasury, or at least never to take anything out of the treasury without replacing it with something of greater or equal value. So if there is any chance that a currency might need to buy back every one of its coins at the value computed from its treasury it would be able to do that using its "Slush Fund", no need to actually "liquidate" anything that is actually in the treasury. Currently however that ideal is not yet enforced, so it is currently possible that some of the currencies might have to liquidate stuff from their treasury if enough of a "bank run" on their coin were to somehow happen.)

The germ of the idea behind this "treasuries" system began back when I was using eggdrop IRC-bots to allow access to the coin-daemons of the "big seven" Galactic currencies, many years ago.

Basically each daemon (coin) had a named account in its built-in simplistic accounts system (that maybe bitcoin still might have? Not sure. Older coins certainly still have it) named for each other coin.

So for example in IXCoin's daemon there were accounts for I0Coin and for DeVCoin and each other coin, so that each other coin could own some IXCoin.

Then the IRC bot could use the Latest Rates Include-file, adding a small fee to cover any blockchain fees and maybe a small stipend for itself, let folks buy back any of the coins using any of the other coins subject only to how many of each other coin each coin had.

That is, IF anyone had bought any IXC using, say, DVC, resulting in IXC's DVC-account having some DVC in it, THEN IXC was able to sell that DVC. Basically each coin thus could own some of each other coin, and users could only buy from each coin as many of each other coin as that particular coin actually had on hand.

Thus IF anyone bought any IXC using BTC, THEN that amount of BTC (minus any blockchain-fees) would be available to be bought FOR IXC.

In other words each coin would be redeemable in each other coin only up to however much of that other coin had been used to buy the coin in the first place.

In other other words, you could not expect to be able to buy BTC with IXC unless someone, even if only you yourself, had at some previous time already bought IXC with BTC.

Does that make sense to you?

Unfortunately over the years some BTC did get sent to third-party "exchanges" which ended up "flying by night", claiming to be hacked, and so on and so on.

Thus over the years such activities have periodically crippled our ability to buy back every single one of each coin USING the exact same coin as was originally used to buy it from us.

That is sad, but what can we do about it? We are still waiting for various coins from various "bankruptcy proceedings" of exchanges and suchlike things.

But meanwhile, each and every IXCoin, including ones in long-lost wallets that are totally and forever lost, can be redeemed at the rates shown in the Latest Rates include-file, albeit how many of which of the currencies shown it would take to do it necessarily varies according to how many of which currency who-ever you go to to redeem them happens to have on hand.

For a currency such as IXC, which only has 21 million coins yet each is currently shown as being worth so little, likely there are some other currencies that would be able to buy the entire lot of them from you, maybe without even needing to dip into their own actual "treasury" to do so...

-MarkM-

I wonder how much they would pay for each IXC...

[markm]

I wonder how much they would pay for each IXC...

Divide the value shown for each other item into the value shown for IXCrate to find the value of IXC in terms of that other thing.

Note though of course that things that do not have a "treasury" to calculate their value from, but instead find their value by volume-averaging the prices on a bunch of "exchanges", cannot be relied upon to still be worth the same amount as they were back when the Latest Rates were last uploaded, and also of course that different nations / currencies / Corps / players / etc have different things in their purses or Slush Funds or whatever with which to buy stuff; and quite likely many will prefer to use their own currency such as if you want to sell to the Brits they are likely to want to pay you with United Kingdom Britcoin (UKB), General Mining Corp would probably assume they'd be buying with GMC, the Canucks would likely tend to use Canadian Digital Notes (CDN) and so on; also of course those that have their currency on a normal web-based "exchange" such as you are likely used to, will probably already have committed all that they have of whatever it is paired against into building a buy-side there for their coin, assuming they even bother about such "exchanges" instead of simply placing their offers on the HORIZON or even the Stellar platform...

Currently on Stellar hardly any of these coins have sold much against XLM yet, so hardly any of them have managed to build up their XLM buy-sides.

Very few of the coins are on versus-BTC exchanges currently, you presumably already know about DVC, IXC and I0C on FreiExchange, you can see there that so far the amount of bitcoin that has so far been spent there to  buy them has not so far been enough to build up theier buy-sides to the Latest Rates values yet.

As has been demonstrated repeatedly in the past though it is just a matter of time to get them built up more, and unfortunately historically it seems likely it is also just a matter of time before the exchange runs off with both sides of the pair, possibly claiming it was hacked... So who knows how might we will manage to build them this time around before the coins all go "poof"...

The nice thing about Stellar is we can build our buy-sides there wih XLM and there is no "third party" that can fly by night with our XLM. So at least one side of those pairs is secure as long as the Stellar platform itself, and whatever client we use to acces it, is secure. For me, both sides are secure in the cases where I am the issuer of the token side of such a pair.

-MarkM-

[Vlad2Vlad]

I wonder how much they would pay for each IXC...

Divide the value shown for each other item into the value shown for IXCrate to find the value of IXC in terms of that other thing.

Note though of course that things that do not have a "treasury" to calculate their value from, but instead find their value by volume-averaging the prices on a bunch of "exchanges", cannot be relied upon to still be worth the same amount as they were back when the Latest Rates were last uploaded, and also of course that different nations / currencies / Corps / players / etc have different things in their purses or Slush Funds or whatever with which to buy stuff; and quite likely many will prefer to use their own currency such as if you want to sell to the Brits they are likely to want to pay you with United Kingdom Britcoin (UKB), General Mining Corp would probably assume they'd be buying with GMC, the Canucks would likely tend to use Canadian Digital Notes (CDN) and so on; also of course those that have their currency on a normal web-based "exchange" such as you are likely used to, will probably already have committed all that they have of whatever it is paired against into building a buy-side there for their coin, assuming they even bother about such "exchanges" instead of simply placing their offers on the HORIZON or even the Stellar platform...

Currently on Stellar hardly any of these coins have sold much against XLM yet, so hardly any of them have managed to build up their XLM buy-sides.

Very few of the coins are on versus-BTC exchanges currently, you presumably already know about DVC, IXC and I0C on FreiExchange, you can see there that so far the amount of bitcoin that has so far been spent there to  buy them has not so far been enough to build up theier buy-sides to the Latest Rates values yet.

As has been demonstrated repeatedly in the past though it is just a matter of time to get them built up more, and unfortunately historically it seems likely it is also just a matter of time before the exchange runs off with both sides of the pair, possibly claiming it was hacked... So who knows how might we will manage to build them this time around before the coins all go "poof"...

The nice thing about Stellar is we can build our buy-sides there wih XLM and there is no "third party" that can fly by night with our XLM. So at least one side of those pairs is secure as long as the Stellar platform itself, and whatever client we use to acces it, is secure. For me, both sides are secure in the cases where I am the issuer of the token side of such a pair.

-MarkM-

But that would mean exchanging my ixc coins for ixc tokens.  Not a good deal for me.  And until stellar and horizon become user friendly I doubt many people will go for it.  I got my corn buried deep and wide so not too worried unless the feds want them, but then again, they print and steal trillions with no questions asked so buying what they want is trivial. 




Mark, is that you still market making on exchanges?  Man you’re a patient resilient guy.  Much appreciated.  So I hope it was you who caught most of that 50k I dumped at market down to 1 penny last month and not some pump and dumper. 



[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

[hornetsnest]

Mark, is that you still market making on exchanges?  Man you’re a patient resilient guy.  Much appreciated.  So I hope it was you who caught most of that 50k I dumped at market down to 1 penny last month and not some pump and dumper. 

I caught your 50k stack quicker than a wombat catches covid and am just waiting for my moment to poop it all over your moon parade 

[Vlad2Vlad]

Mark, is that you still market making on exchanges?  Man you’re a patient resilient guy.  Much appreciated.  So I hope it was you who caught most of that 50k I dumped at market down to 1 penny last month and not some pump and dumper. 

I caught your 50k stack quicker than a wombat catches covid and am just waiting for my moment to poop it all over your moon parade 

Hahaha.  So glad to hear it was somebody here.  Better than merits as long as you have time to dump before me.   

[markm]

But that would mean exchanging my ixc coins for ixc tokens.  Not a good deal for me.  And until stellar and horizon become user friendly I doubt many people will go for it.  I got my corn buried deep and wide so not too worried unless the feds want them, but then again, they print and steal trillions with no questions asked so buying what they want is trivial. 

You do realise that unless there is some kind of "atomic swap between blockchains" app that supports the IXCoin blockchain and some other blockchain you want to trade against, you always ARE exchanging your IXC coins for at best IXC tokens and at normal mere database entries in an undistributed database at the exchange's site or server?

That is to say, on normal exchanges when you deposit IXCoins they usually do not even give you IXC tokens to play with, all you usually get is a "balance" recorded in a MySQL or PostGres or whatever kind of database they use to record customer info and balances.

So if tokens are not a good deal for you presumably mere database entries are a far worse deal?

-MarkM-

[Vlad2Vlad]

But that would mean exchanging my ixc coins for ixc tokens.  Not a good deal for me.  And until stellar and horizon become user friendly I doubt many people will go for it.  I got my corn buried deep and wide so not too worried unless the feds want them, but then again, they print and steal trillions with no questions asked so buying what they want is trivial. 

You do realise that unless there is some kind of "atomic swap between blockchains" app that supports the IXCoin blockchain and some other blockchain you want to trade against, you always ARE exchanging your IXC coins for at best IXC tokens and at normal mere database entries in an undistributed database at the exchange's site or server?

That is to say, on normal exchanges when you deposit IXCoins they usually do not even give you IXC tokens to play with, all you usually get is a "balance" recorded in a MySQL or PostGres or whatever kind of database they use to record customer info and balances.

So if tokens are not a good deal for you presumably mere database entries are a far worse deal?

-MarkM-

Yikes!!!  Well, i try to remove my corn and do underground super cold storage. 

That said, when do you think there’s gonna Be an easy app for regular Joe to use stellar and horizon? 

[markm]

Yikes!!!  Well, i try to remove my corn and do underground super cold storage.  

That said, when do you think there’s gonna Be an easy app for regular Joe to use stellar and horizon?  

If you do not leave at least the buy-side coin on the exchange though, then all the reporting sites and such are going to say your coin is worthless, because they do not see a strong buy-side; most of them seem to show the highest buy offer, not the last actual trade that happened maybe weeks or months ago, as the current price/value I think?

I suspect that for an easy app, the app has to basically point users at specific assets.

For example there are very likely Stellar apps that are extremely easy to use to send and receive XLM, Stellar Lumens, Stellar's native currency.

Desktop and web-based apps I have seen also tend to list some trusted token-issuers and/or some trusted tokens, based on what the app creators trust; though probably if they are not themselves those issuers likely they have fine-print of some kind warning that they do not legally actually recommend those things, certainly not as "investments", and their lists should not be mistaken for "investment advice" and so on.

So maybe you just need to get an app-developer to make an app that does not confuse users by admitting any tokens other than yours exist, and maybe doesn't even bother providing them with the option of trusting any others but yours, even maybe requiring an update of the app to make any more tokens you later want to add become accessible to them.

Any off the shelf app that does allow the user to decide what account to trust for what label/ticker/token/asset/coin though is just as simple to use for our tokens as for any other tokens that the app it not basically "pushing", although the more volume of trade a token has, and the less the gap ("spread") between its lowest sell offer and its highest buy offer, the more likely it is that users will be able to "discover" the token by searching, since some only show in searches "reasonably high-use low-spread" tokens, requiring the user to already know of a token+issuer pair to specify if that particular token from that particular issuer does not meet the criteria for discovering it by searching for it.

Given that you know the issuing account and label of the asset you want to work with though, which in my case you can discover by browsing http://makemoney.knotwork.com/ , there are several clients that work just fine.

So I think more important than ease of use of clients is ease of discovery that our tokens even exist and what account issues them. Given that, I do not think which client someone uses is much of a problem, other than clients that do not allow users to specify the label and issuer to use and/or do not give access to markets. (The Stellar wallet built into Keybase does not seem to do either; if you have set up trust lines for an account it can receive and send the assets the account does trust, but you cannot add arbitrary trust-lines as far as I can tell and does not seem to provide access to trading, just to sending and receiving.)

Bear in mind that the original concept behind Ripple and thus Stellar, before Ripple Corp bought the name Ripple and the concept from its original developer, was that a bunch of average Joes sitting around drinking beer or having lunch can say "who brought cash or card to pay the bill?" and one of them can say "oh thats me today, here, I'll tell my app to trust each of you for, uh, what do we want to measure this in? Should I trust each of you for some number of meals? Or some number of beers? Or shall we track it in dollars? Oh heck lets just call it loonies being as how we are in Canada, eh? Each of you tell me your account and I'll trust it for oh lets say one hundred loonies. OK, done, now when you go to send me something it should tell you that one of the possibly many things I accept is called loonies. See it there in your apps? OK, now what your app is probably not telling you is that you are an issuer of those loonies! You can each send me up to 100 of them even though your balances do not show you have any of them, and very likely your app is not even telling you that you are able to issue them and maybe also not how many of them my account is willing to accept from you. So anyway, divvy up the bill and send me your share in these so-called loonies that you have magically gained the ability to issue due to my having chosen to trust each of you for some of them..."

-MarkM-

[Vlad2Vlad]

Yikes!!!  Well, i try to remove my corn and do underground super cold storage.  

That said, when do you think there’s gonna Be an easy app for regular Joe to use stellar and horizon?  

If you do not leave at least the buy-side coin on the exchange though, then all the reporting sites and such are going to say your coin is worthless, because they do not see a strong buy-side; most of them seem to show the highest buy offer, not the last actual trade that happened maybe weeks or months ago, as the current price/value I think?

I suspect that for an easy app, the app has to basically point users at specific assets.

For example there are very likely Stellar apps that are extremely easy to use to send and receive XLM, Stellar Lumens, Stellar's native currency.

Desktop and web-based apps I have seen also tend to list some trusted token-issuers and/or some trusted tokens, based on what the app creators trust; though probably if they are not themselves those issuers likely they have fine-print of some kind warning that they do not legally actually recommend those things, certainly not as "investments", and their lists should not be mistaken for "investment advice" and so on.

So maybe you just need to get an app-developer to make an app that does not confuse users by admitting any tokens other than yours exist, and maybe doesn't even bother providing them with the option of trusting any others but yours, even maybe requiring an update of the app to make any more tokens you later want to add become accessible to them.

Any off the shelf app that does allow the user to decide what account to trust for what label/ticker/token/asset/coin though is just as simple to use for our tokens as for any other tokens that the app it not basically "pushing", although the more volume of trade a token has, and the less the gap ("spread") between its lowest sell offer and its highest buy offer, the more likely it is that users will be able to "discover" the token by searching, since some only show in searches "reasonably high-use low-spread" tokens, rquiring the user to already know of a token+issuer pair to specify if that particular token from that particular issuer does not meet the criteria for discovering it by searching for it.

Given that you know the issuing account and label of the asset you want to work with though, which in my case you can discover by browsing http://makemoney.knotwork.com/ , there are several clients that work just fine.

So I think more important than ease of use of clients is ease of discovery that our tokens even exist and what account issues them. Given that, I do not think which client someone uses is much of a problem, other than clients that do not allow users to specify the label and issuer to use and/or do not give access to markets. (The Stellar wallet built into Keybase does not seem to do either; if you have set up trust lines for an account it can receive and send the assets the account does trust, but you cannot add arbitrary trust-lines as far as I can tell and does not seem to provide access to trading, just to sending and receiving.)

Bear in mind that the original concept behind Ripple and thus Stellar, before Ripple Corp bought the name Ripple and the concept from its original developer, was that a bunch of average Joes sitting around drinking beer or having lunch can say "who brought cash or card to pay the bill?" and one of them can say "oh thats me today, here, I'll tell my app to trust each of you for, uh, what do we want to measure this in? Should I trust each of you for some number of meals? Or some number of beers? Or shall we track it in dollars? Oh heck lets just call it loonies being as how we are in Canada, eh? Each of you tell me your account and I'll trust it for oh lets say one hundred loonies. OK, done, now when you go to send me something it should tell you that one of the possibly many things I accept is called loonies. See it there in your apps? OK, now what your app is probably not telling you is that you are an issuer of those loonies! You can each send me up to 100 of them even though your balances do not show you have any of them, and very likely your app is not even telling you that you are able to issue them and maybe also not how many of them my account is willing to accept from you. So anyway, divvy up the bill and send me your share in these so-called loonies that you have magically gained the ability to issue due to my having chosen to trust each of you for some of them..."

-MarkM-

Thanks for all that.  You’re one guy I’ve always liked from day one.  Glad we have someone like you who sees the potential of old merge mined coins. 

[markm]

OK so lets continue that story.

Tom, Dick and Harry now each owe Joe some so-called loonies, because they "issued" them to him. Which is to say, he has a bunch of IOUs, or as some call them, tokens, called loonies, a bunch of different loonies in that each of those loonie-IOUs is from a particular "issuer" of loonie-IOUs.

Now Joe, as far as we know so far, is not yet an "issuer" of so called "loonies" himself yet.

So, thinking about inviting Vlad to the group's next get-together and knowing that Vlad likes to use so called IXC, Joe tells his account to trust Vlad for some number of IXC then sets up buy offers pairing Vlad-IXC against Tom-loonies, Dick-loonies and Harry-loonies, since those are what he currently has on hand.

Along comes Vlad. He is going to go to lunch with those guys at their local watering-hole. He has heard the story so he knows those guys use so-called loonies, and he also knows that Joe trusts Tom's loonies and also Dick's loonies and also Harry's loonies.

Vlad decides he might as well introduce those guys to IXCoin.

So Vlad, knowing that Joe is a "hub" for loonies in that crowd, finds out Joe's account and tells his to trust it for "loonies".

Heh heh see what he did there? He made Joe, too, into an "issuer" of loonies!

Now that he trusts Joe-loonies, he can set up trade offers involving Joe-loonies.

Hopefully since Joe is a hub for all those other issuers of loonies Vlad can get away with only having to set up one trust-line for loonies, trusting Joe for them; Joe can be his gateway in and out of loonieville hopefully so that he does not need to separately trust each and every one of all those other guys who issue "loonies". Afterall he knows Joe trusts them, so he can let Joe field all the loonies business for him.

So they all go to lunch. This time it turns out to be Tom's turn to cover the bill.

So everyone else needs to send Tom some kind of IOU that he'll accept.

Joe, of course, can send back to Tom Tom's own loonies, if he has enough to cover his share of today's bill.

Tom decides to trust Dick and Harry for "loonies", just like Joe did last time. They are thus able to issue loonies to him.

Ah but Vlad, Vlad. This is when he makes his IXC pitch...

...

"Sorry but I am not really into the idea of issuing loonies," he says, "so how about either you trust me for IXC, or maybe Joe will trust me for IXC and I'll trade him some IXC IOUs for some loonies IOUs he issues himself?

I should point out though Joe that it can be a very useful practice to use a second account when you issue things, so you can issue them to yourself.

If you create a second account, and have that new account trust your current account for loonies, you will then be able to have that new account make buy and sell offers, offering to sell Dick-loonies for Joe-loonies and to sell Harry-loonies for Joe-loonies. Heck, set up an offer to sell Tom-loonies for Joe-loonies too while you're at it.

Now if you actually issue yourself - your new account - some Joe-loonies, you will have a Joe-loonies balance so that you can offer to buy Tom-loonies, Dick-loonies and Harry-loonies using Joe-loonies.

Presto, you are now a conversion hub!

Anyone whose client supports "pathfinding" conversion between IOUs (or maybe they call them currencies, or tokens, whatever) should hopefully be able to ask to convert any of those kinds of loonies into any other of those kinds of loonies and the "pathfinder" will find the cheapest path to go from one to the other.

Unfortunately some clients might only do pathfinding through things that have "reasonable" volume and spread, but oh well what can I say, some clients are broken compared to the original vision of how this stuff was meant to work.

Now if Joe will set up an offer to buy IXC for Joe-loonies, any time any of you guys wants me to send you any of your various types of loonies I should be able to tell my client I want to send one of your various kinds of loonies and a path should be found whereby my IXC goes through however many people in-between as it takes to end up with the loonies you trust getting to you. That is how it is supposed to work, anyway.

If these puny little phone-apps can't handle that, then at least hopefully I can sell Joe enough IXC to have him send Tom my share of the bill in some flavour of loonies that Tom trusts?

Oh and by the way, Tom, if I can convince Joe to sell me some Joe-loonies for my Vlad-IXC, I'll be able to buy Vlad-IXC using Joe-loonies in the future so if anyone sends you any Vlad-IXC you can sell them to me for Joe-loonies, so I suggest you set up to trust Joe-loonies even though today he had enough other kinds of loonies to pay his share of the bill thus you didn't have to set up to trust his own-issued loonies..."

...

Complicated? Nahhh...

-MarkM-

[Vlad2Vlad]

OK so lets continue that story.

Tom, Dick and Harry now each owe Joe some so-called loonies, because they "issued" them to him. Which is to say, he has a bunch of IOUs, or as some call them, tokens, called loonies, a bunch of different loonies in that each of those loonie-IOUs is from a particular "issuer" of loonie-IOUs.

Now Joe, as far as we know so far, is not yet an "issuer" of so called "loonies" himself yet.

So, thinking about inviting Vlad to the group's next get-together and knowing that Vlad likes to use so called IXC, Joe tells his account to trust Vlad for some number of IXC then sets up buy offers pairing Vlad-IXC against Tom-loonies, Dick-loonies and Harry-loonies, since those are what he currently has on hand.

Along comes Vlad. He is going to go to lunch with those guys at their local watering-hole. He has heard the story so he knows those guys use so-called loonies, and he also knows that Joe trusts Tom's loonies and also Dick's loonies and also Harry's loonies.

Vlad decides he might as well introduce those guys to IXCoin.

So Vlad, knowing that Joe is a "hub" for loonies in that crowd, finds out Joe's account and tells his to trust it for "loonies".

Heh heh see what he did there? He made Joe, too, into an "issuer" of loonies!

Now that he trusts Joe-loonies, he can set up trade offers involving Joe-loonies.

Hopefully since Joe is a hub for all those other issuers of loonies he can get away with only having to set up one trust-line for loonies, trusting Joe for them; Joe can be his gateway in and out of loonieville hopefully so that he does not need to separately trust each and every one of all those other guys who issue "loonies". Afterall he knows Joe trusts them, so he can let Joe field all the loonies business for him.

So they all go to lunch. This time it turns out to be Tom's turn to cover the bill.

So everyone else needs to send Tom some kind of IOU that he'll accept.

Joe, of course, can send back to Tom Tom's own loonies, if he has enough to cover his share of today's bill.

Tom decides to trust Dick and Harry for "loonies", just like Joe did last time. They are thus able to issue loonies to him.

Ah but Vlad, Vlad. This is when he makes his IXC pitch...

...

"Sorry but I am not really into the idea of issuing loonies," he says, "so how about either you trust me for IXC, or maybe Joe will trust me for IXC and I'll trade him some IXC IOUs for some loonies IOUs he issues himself?

I should point out though Joe that it can be a very useful practice to use a second account when you issue things, so you can issue them to yourself.

If you create a second account, and have that new account trust your current account for loonies, you will then be able to have that new account make buy and sell offers, offering to sell Dick-loonies for Joe-loonies and to sell Harry-loonies for Joe-loonies. Heck, set up an offer to sell Tom-loonies for Joe-loonies too while you're at it.

Now if you actually issue yourself - your new account - some Joe-loonies, you will have a Joe-loonies balance so that you can offer to buy Tom-loonies, Dick-loonies and Harry-loonies using Joe-loonies.

Presto, you are now a conversion hub!

Anyone whose client supports "pathfinding" conversion between IOUs (or maybe they call them currencies, or tokens, whatever) should hopefully be able to ask to convert any of those kinds of loonies into any other of those kinds of loonies and the "pathfinder" will find the cheapest path to go from one to the other.

Unfortunately some clients might only do pathfinding through things that have "reasonable" volume and spread, but oh well what can I say, some clients are broken compared to the original vision of how this stuff was meant to work.

Now if Joe will set up an offer to buy IXC for Joe-loonies, any time any of you guys wants me to send you any of your various types of loonies I should be able to tell my client I want to send one of your various kinds of loonies and a path should be found whereby my IXC goes through however many people in-between as it takes to end up with the loonies you trust getting to you. That is how it is supposed to work, anyway.

If these puny little phone-apps can't handle that, then at least hopefully I can sell Joe enough IXC to have him send Tom my share of the bill in some flavour of loonies that he trusts?

Oh and by the way, Tom, if I can convince Joe to sell me some Joe-loonies for my Vlad-IXC, I'll be able to buy Vlad-IXC using Joe-loonies in the future so if anyone sends you any Vlad-IXC you can sell them to me for Joe-loonies, so I suggest you set up to trust Joe-loonies even though today he had enough other kinds of loonies to pay his share of the bill thus you didn't have to set up to trust his own-issued loonies..."

...

Complicated? Nahhh...

-MarkM-

Complicated?  Nah, just next level Sophisticated financial instruments that can spread like wildfire if ease of use is
there.  Someone with enough coins/tokens can literally function like a bank.  And no need to move go NY. 

[dudeminer@]

Please help starting my wallet its stuck - its 2 years behind , any help would be appreciated

[ViqRa]

Please help starting my wallet its stuck - its 2 years behind , any help would be appreciated

What does the wallet say? What version are you running?

Are you getting connections?

[catacata]

Please help starting my wallet its stuck - its 2 years behind , any help would be appreciated

hard fork

https://github.com/IXCore/IXCoin/releases/tag/v0.14.1

[Vlad2Vlad]

Please help starting my wallet its stuck - its 2 years behind , any help would be appreciated

Mine is 5 years behind.  Probably Rusted, wet and moldy.  What can I do?  :/

Like Cata said, we had a hard fork so update to new wallet. 

Catacata, it’s giving me anxiety cause I feel it means something but I haven’t been able to figure it out.  It used to all be simple Latin stuff now I gotta put in effort.  lol

[dudeminer@]

stops at 2 years 27 weeks `` no  connections ``` no block source available ````iXcoin Core version v0.14.1.0-2f7da53 (64-bit)