Are Etherum and Emunie scamcoins?

[Visin]

Oh, there is a lot more than 1200 lbs of trash being thrown out but then again I am not the average American though, am I?

[1714819160]

1714819160

[1714819160]

1714819160

[1714819160]

1714819160

[1714819160]

1714819160

[1714819160]

1714819160

[mrvegad]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAU0l7325w0

[cryptopaths]

Interesting the community has consistently been 50/50 on Emunie and 60% of the community consistently thinks Ethereum is a scam. 

[BTCWizard]

My trust called into question.......yet everyone trusts anonymous developers 

Those anonymous developers released the source code.
Those anonymous developers didn't sold their coins before the release. And surely not an 300BTC amount and than clearly state they would take a big cut from it for personal gains.
Those anonymous developers didn't had a track record of being involved in shady businesses.
...

[Fuserleer]

My trust called into question.......yet everyone trusts anonymous developers 

Those anonymous developers released the source code.
Those anonymous developers didn't sold their coins before the release. And surely not an 300BTC amount and than clearly state they would take a big cut from it for personal gains.
Those anonymous developers didn't had a track record of being involved in shady businesses.
...

1.  It was already open source, cut and paste changing a few variables doesn't count
2.  No, they insta/pre mined them instead
3.  I've proved & explained my expertise, past ventures and pretty much everything else.

As I said in the other thread you have been trolling...

[BTCWizard]

1. Bitcoin was a cut & paste? Peercoin and Primecoin too? I think you're the one who is drunk.
2. Many scamcoins did this indeed, just like you do with yours.
3. Yeah, only honest people at blackhatworld and many people got their account blocked by Paypal for the most stupid things. But a court order, that's a new one...

[Bartje]

1. Bitcoin was a cut & paste? Peercoin and Primecoin too? I think you're the one who is drunk.
2. Many scamcoins did this indeed, just like you do with yours.
3. Yeah, only honest people at blackhatworld and many people got their account blocked by Paypal for the most stupid things. But a court order, that's a new one...

Oh no, LeoC is back with another fake account. Too bad you don't know much about cryptos, otherwise I would be glad you're back.

[BTCWizard]

1. Bitcoin was a cut & paste? Peercoin and Primecoin too? I think you're the one who is drunk.
2. Many scamcoins did this indeed, just like you do with yours.
3. Yeah, only honest people at blackhatworld and many people got their account blocked by Paypal for the most stupid things. But a court order, that's a new one...

Oh no, LeoC is back with another fake account. Too bad you don't know much about cryptos, otherwise I would be glad you're back.

lol, I don't even know who LeoC is.
But I probably know more about Crypto than you. 

[rarebitproject]

Etherium: hype, maybe not a scam.  I personally don't see why they need $35m.

Emunie is interesting in some ways.

The emonie developer, however mercurial and paranoid he may be, has recognized that mining in bitcoin is mostly superfluous.  The most valuable work in the network is transaction clearing and validation, and it is this work that should be subsidized with new coins (no more need for transaction fees).  Mining in bitcoin is just a way to pick who gets to create the next block by running a race.  Picking who gets to create the next block can be done in some random way, which is more egalitarian.

Possible cons:

Proprietary, whitepaper and source code withheld.  Can't be properly vetted by the community.

Statement to the effect that emunie "will comply with the law" or attempt to disallow illegal activity.  What this means in practice is hidden back-doors for law enforcement/nsa/etc, blacklisted accounts, and a host of other nightmares (the source is withheld, ouch).

The coins can't appreciate in value (any increase in value causes new coins to to flood into the network).  Appreciation is incentive for early adopters, since early on the coins will have little use.  The fact that users will be granted a stream of coins for just connecting may be alluring at first, but disappointment and abandonment may follow (the first paycheck from that first minimum wage job is nice, then you realize just how long it will take for you to actually earn anything substantial).

Might be overrun by botnets or farms, which could sweep up most of the new coins generated.  Worse, a botnet could send transactions between its nodes to stimulate what appears to be demand.  Most cryptocoins can be abused by botnets, but emunie's network might be stimulated to respond with a coin flood (I'm a bit unsure on this point, maybe not possible/feasible?).

Conclusion:

Some of Emunie's ideas are good ones, but emunie itself is not a candidate for adoption.  It would be nice to see a group of open source developers adapt those ideas into a new altcoin.



 

[Fuserleer]

Etherium: hype, maybe not a scam.  I personally don't see why they need $35m.

Emunie is interesting in some ways.

The emonie developer, however mercurial and paranoid he may be, has recognized that mining in bitcoin is mostly superfluous.  The most valuable work in the network is transaction clearing and validation, and it is this work that should be subsidized with new coins (no more need for transaction fees).  Mining in bitcoin is just a way to pick who gets to create the next block by running a race.  Picking who gets to create the next block can be done in some random way, which is more egalitarian.

Possible cons:

Proprietary, whitepaper and source code withheld.  Can't be properly vetted by the community.

Statement to the effect that emunie "will comply with the law" or attempt to disallow illegal activity.  What this means in practice is hidden back-doors for law enforcement/nsa/etc, blacklisted accounts, and a host of other nightmares (the source is withheld, ouch).

The coins can't appreciate in value (any increase in value causes new coins to to flood into the network).  Appreciation is incentive for early adopters, since early on the coins will have little use.  The fact that users will be granted a stream of coins for just connecting may be alluring at first, but disappointment and abandonment may follow (the first paycheck from that first minimum wage job is nice, then you realize just how long it will take for you to actually earn anything substantial).

Might be overrun by botnets or farms, which could sweep up most of the new coins generated.  Worse, a botnet could send transactions between its nodes to stimulate what appears to be demand.  Most cryptocoins can be abused by botnets, but emunie's network might be stimulated to respond with a coin flood (I'm a bit unsure on this point, maybe not possible/feasible?).

Conclusion:

Some of Emunie's ideas are good ones, but emunie itself is not a candidate for adoption.  It would be nice to see a group of open source developers adapt those ideas into a new altcoin.

Finally a constructive post!  I thank you!

My statement of trying to stamp out gross illegal activity has been somewhat taken out of context in general.  There will be no backdoor for TPTB, or myself, as it's impossible to do.  What I meant was that if we were to become aware of it (we as in the eMunie community as a whole), we should do everything we can to stop it....this would typically involve good old infiltration of a manual nature, and not "opening up" supposed encrypted data and having a look who it is.   That is impossible by design and we've gone to great efforts to ensure that all parts of the system are secure and anon.

Of course as you rightly state, eMunie will be closed source to general public for some time for reasons I've covered many many times, so other than give you assurances, there isn't much else I can offer in terms of convincing proof.

Another common mistake is assuming that a stable price means no ROI...there are 2 major components in any market, be it currency or commodity, and they are value and supply.  eMunie attempts to steady the value, and moves the supply depending on the demand, this supply is then distributed proportionally to stake holders and hatcher that have performed work.

Assume you have 100 eMu at a value of $100, the market value isn't moving at all, the system isn't even attempted to stabilize it, its naturally stable at this point.  Assume it stays this way for a year....your 100 eMu are still worth $100...0% ROI.   However demand for eMu is high, so the system is creating lots of new eMu to absord the incoming value from fiat, gold or whatever else you decide to use.  Assume that inflation over the year is 100%....you will receive 50 more eMu over that time (its a 50/50 split between hatchers and balance holders).  You now have 150 eMu worth $1 each, 50% ROI.

Finally, demand isn't calculated by transaction volume, as this is both inaccurate and prone to the exact attack you point out.  The P2P exchange drives the demand, though the various buy and sell orders that occur on there, as these are a better indicator of if demand is up, or down at any given moment.

[rarebitproject]

Etherium: hype, maybe not a scam.  I personally don't see why they need $35m.

Emunie is interesting in some ways.

The emonie developer, however mercurial and paranoid he may be, has recognized that mining in bitcoin is mostly superfluous.  The most valuable work in the network is transaction clearing and validation, and it is this work that should be subsidized with new coins (no more need for transaction fees).  Mining in bitcoin is just a way to pick who gets to create the next block by running a race.  Picking who gets to create the next block can be done in some random way, which is more egalitarian.

Possible cons:

Proprietary, whitepaper and source code withheld.  Can't be properly vetted by the community.

Statement to the effect that emunie "will comply with the law" or attempt to disallow illegal activity.  What this means in practice is hidden back-doors for law enforcement/nsa/etc, blacklisted accounts, and a host of other nightmares (the source is withheld, ouch).

The coins can't appreciate in value (any increase in value causes new coins to to flood into the network).  Appreciation is incentive for early adopters, since early on the coins will have little use.  The fact that users will be granted a stream of coins for just connecting may be alluring at first, but disappointment and abandonment may follow (the first paycheck from that first minimum wage job is nice, then you realize just how long it will take for you to actually earn anything substantial).

Might be overrun by botnets or farms, which could sweep up most of the new coins generated.  Worse, a botnet could send transactions between its nodes to stimulate what appears to be demand.  Most cryptocoins can be abused by botnets, but emunie's network might be stimulated to respond with a coin flood (I'm a bit unsure on this point, maybe not possible/feasible?).

Conclusion:

Some of Emunie's ideas are good ones, but emunie itself is not a candidate for adoption.  It would be nice to see a group of open source developers adapt those ideas into a new altcoin.

Finally a constructive post!  I thank you!

My statement of trying to stamp out gross illegal activity has been somewhat taken out of context in general.  There will be no backdoor for TPTB, or myself, as it's impossible to do.  What I meant was that if we were to become aware of it (we as in the eMunie community as a whole), we should do everything we can to stop it....this would typically involve good old infiltration of a manual nature, and not "opening up" supposed encrypted data and having a look who it is.   That is impossible by design and we've gone to great efforts to ensure that all parts of the system are secure and anon.

Of course as you rightly state, eMunie will be closed source to general public for some time for reasons I've covered many many times, so other than give you assurances, there isn't much else I can offer in terms of convincing proof.

Another common mistake is assuming that a stable price means no ROI...there are 2 major components in any market, be it currency or commodity, and they are value and supply.  eMunie attempts to steady the value, and moves the supply depending on the demand, this supply is then distributed proportionally to stake holders and hatcher that have performed work.

Assume you have 100 eMu at a value of $100, the market value isn't moving at all, the system isn't even attempted to stabilize it, its naturally stable at this point.  Assume it stays this way for a year....your 100 eMu are still worth $100...0% ROI.   However demand for eMu is high, so the system is creating lots of new eMu to absord the incoming value from fiat, gold or whatever else you decide to use.  Assume that inflation over the year is 100%....you will receive 50 more eMu over that time (its a 50/50 split between hatchers and balance holders).  You now have 150 eMu worth $1 each, 50% ROI.

Finally, demand isn't calculated by transaction volume, as this is both inaccurate and prone to the exact attack you point out.  The P2P exchange drives the demand, though the various buy and sell orders that occur on there, as these are a better indicator of if demand is up, or down at any given moment.

Well, I guess this is the problem many are frustrated about, information that is too vague.  I have stumbled onto emunie only recently, and am astonished by the vitriol surrounding it.

I can understand that in the current cryptocoin climate, a source code release would result in a flurry of pointless clones with minor tweaks.

However, the community at large needs to properly vet the claims being made.  If a whitepaper is released, there are many smart people in the bitcoin community who can help to identify potential vulnerabilities in the system before it may be too late.

If the perception is that your system is proprietary, it may have a negative impact on its adoption.  I suppose a mainstream audience may not care, so perhaps that is the gamble.

[Emule]

My trust called into question.......yet everyone trusts anonymous developers 

Those anonymous developers released the source code.
Those anonymous developers didn't sold their coins before the release. And surely not an 300BTC amount and than clearly state they would take a big cut from it for personal gains.
Those anonymous developers didn't had a track record of being involved in shady businesses.
...

1.  It was already open source, cut and paste changing a few variables doesn't count
2.  No, they insta/pre mined them instead
3.  I've proved & explained my expertise, past ventures and pretty much everything else.

As I said in the other thread you have been trolling...

Hughes, the main reason why people should NOT invest in your pyramide sceme is that you are a retard.

You already pre-sold 600 BTC on discount price to your "friends"

So get back to your emu corner and go pis there, you don't need BTC trolls.

[rarebitproject]

Assume you have 100 eMu at a value of $100, the market value isn't moving at all, the system isn't even attempted to stabilize it, its naturally stable at this point.  Assume it stays this way for a year....your 100 eMu are still worth $100...0% ROI.   However demand for eMu is high, so the system is creating lots of new eMu to absord the incoming value from fiat, gold or whatever else you decide to use.  Assume that inflation over the year is 100%....you will receive 50 more eMu over that time (its a 50/50 split between hatchers and balance holders).  You now have 150 eMu worth $1 each, 50% ROI.

I think these would be considered wages (income), not ROI.  It is payment for work, not investment.  The interest paid might be considered ROI.  I suppose if the distribution is based on *all* previous work performed, then early adopters could get progressively higher wages (a larger cut of the distributions), but this might be disturbed by a flood of new workers entering the system (assuming they each are paid something for the smaller amount of work they've performed).

Anyway, this is a bit off the cuff.  I'll look into it more.


[edit]
If the coin takes off, the early adopters could potentially get huge payouts as massive minting is stimulated.  Yes, they are wage slaves, but gilded ones like wall street workers with their lavish bonuses.

But new workers would rush in, perhaps diluting subsequent payouts.  Depends on the exact algo used.

Also, bitcoin has long periods of stable price.  emunie won't need to increase supply during these periods, so I'm presuming it will pay nothing, a potential problem.

A very interesting experiment to watch when it goes live.

BTW, if I work for the system for some time, then sell my coins and quit, will my prior work still qualify me for payouts, i.e., can I retire to the south of France with my emunie pension?

[cryptopaths]

Interesting to see after this time most people still think Etherum is a scam and Emunie is still 50/50

[lemfuture]

dont think so for ethereum. and havent read anything about emunie

[freigeist]

dont think so for ethereum. and havent read anything about emunie

Hello.

If you are interested in eMunie check the offical forum at:
http://forum.emunie.com/

Also there is software beta version available for testing at:
http://beta.emunie.com/

[cryptopaths]

Etherum IPO is now live what are your thoughts?

[cryptopaths]

9 months after the poll was started and neither of the coins have launched yet. Has anyone's opinions changed?

[CoinHoarder]

9 months after the poll was started and neither of the coins have launched yet. Has anyone's opinions changed?

I think it's too early to tell, but I am leaning towards no on both. I'm not saying they are a good investment, just that I don't think they are a scam.

Unfortunately, they both are taking forever to launch and pretty much lost the first mover advantage. There are a few coins that have implemented or are planning on implementing Turing complete scripting, and there are a few coins that have a lot of features and a new code base a la eMunie.

They could still be successful but the competition is much harder now than when they announced their projects.

[jd1959]

What I don't get is all these IPO's need millions of $ to start up, I mean it's not like there building spaceships or something. If they had real faith in there projects they only need enough to get them going, after that the

wonderful  new tech (that's always almost finished) should guarantee there financial futures. However filling your pockets first seems to be the aim, Then who cares if it takes an unknown time to complete projects. It

seems to be a case of "Take the Kash"

Jon