[GPUC] GPU Coin | Mandatory Wallet Update

[illiki23]

I said this before but I want to do it again. Take the IPO money for shares on the GPU company and not for the premine coins, forget the GPU coin. People can purchase the graphics cards with other coins. And the DEVS have already a good amount of BTC to start the business. Stop making this dark business and be more transparent with all the people. If you continue to do things like this, the  people will lost confidence on crypto currencies.

Start the business and distribute profits with all of the IPO investors....

Ideally a nice business model could be made out of GPUCoin, not how they are doing it though.

In this model investors would buy into the company (including the CEO who would get a stake just like everyone else), which would be used to purchase wholesale equipment, which is then sold online for a set price of GPUCoin.

The proceeds, including a percentage of the profits would be used to purchase more GPUs, which in turn would be sold for more GPUCoin and so on.

There is a lot of competition for GPUs so customers would push the price up to around what other people are charging, customer competition would keep the price reasonable. If the price of GPUCoin per bitcoin fell then customers would push it back up.  We should see it end up near EBay levels or comparable to other online auctions.

It would also create one of the few coins where money is repeatedly injected into the coin.  In order to get good deals on GPUs customers would have to buy GPU coin.

Now, ideally the investors (including CEO) would get an initial lump sum of coins equal to the wholesale cost, which the can sell to people.  People can also mine.  Also a percentage of the profit (something small) would be split up and sent to investors whenever an order for more GPUs is made.  Investors would have special 'stake' function activated on their wallet and would receive GPU coins.

It would be huge.

[jest]

Surely you can't be serious!

P.S. And I will call you Shirley

[miningcrew]

Professional developers don't have to relaunch.

Exactly!

I am really astonished that the word RELAUNCH is such a legitimate term on bitcointalk,org - for me it is not.

Relaunch means, that somebody decides, that YOUR cryptocoins (mined until now) have no value!

IMHO it is completely against the original idea, that the community decides - in which I very much believe.
Once the mining/blockchain starts the (pseudo) DEV should have nothing to say...

[AcidSplash]

"Cryptowest" is a loser. I've worked with so called "developers" like this before. They are fat, lazy and have almost no actual programming skills.

Most people think that developers have no social skills but that's entirely not the case. I for one have to filter all the technical details out and put it in words that people with little or no technical skills can understand. This development team did nothing of the sort. In fact there was little to no communication on their end. They were just stringing along pool owners and miners and wasting their time. "Bugs" in the software that are overlooked can usually be forgiven by the community. However for this to take place there needs to be a strong open level of communication which was simply not present.

The only clear path that I see is to fire the entire development team. Start over from scratch and try to savage the reputation of the coin. Even though I am not an IPO holder, you could further restore confidence by returning all money that was invested in to the coin.

[mpmsvv]

I said this before but I want to do it again. Take the IPO money for shares on the GPU company and not for the premine coins, forget the GPU coin. People can purchase the graphics cards with other coins. And the DEVS have already a good amount of BTC to start the business. Stop making this dark business and be more transparent with all the people. If you continue to do things like this, the  people will lost confidence on crypto currencies.

Start the business and distribute profits with all of the IPO investors....

Ideally a nice business model could be made out of GPUCoin, not how they are doing it though.

In this model investors would buy into the company (including the CEO who would get a stake just like everyone else), which would be used to purchase wholesale equipment, which is then sold online for a set price of GPUCoin.

The proceeds, including a percentage of the profits would be used to purchase more GPUs, which in turn would be sold for more GPUCoin and so on.

There is a lot of competition for GPUs so customers would push the price up to around what other people are charging, customer competition would keep the price reasonable. If the price of GPUCoin per bitcoin fell then customers would push it back up.  We should see it end up near EBay levels or comparable to other online auctions.

It would also create one of the few coins where money is repeatedly injected into the coin.  In order to get good deals on GPUs customers would have to buy GPU coin.

Now, ideally the investors (including CEO) would get an initial lump sum of coins equal to the wholesale cost, which the can sell to people.  People can also mine.  Also a percentage of the profit (something small) would be split up and sent to investors whenever an order for more GPUs is made.  Investors would have special 'stake' function activated on their wallet and would receive GPU coins.

It would be huge.

Hi totally agree with you.
But this guys are not able to do the things well. Because they only want to get rich with our money.
We need to look to the IPO like corporate/companies where each people get a share on the company. They can pay the shares with GPUcoins. Doesn't matter. In this way like you said they have to inject money on the market to buy and sell GPU coins and this is good for liquidit of the market.

[ocminer]

Hey folks,

I've switched https://gpu.suprnova.cc to Vertcoin for now, I've purged all the Panda's before to the saved address, msg me if you still miss something with your username, mailaddress and the amount, i've got a backup and will look if there is anything left for you.

I'll be watching this thread and if there comes a relaunch, I'll decide whether Suprnova will be part of it or not .. in the meanwhile I think we/you're really better of with Vertcoin as the price is rising and diff is quite stable.

[Snard]

What was the original BTC address for the IPO?

[phaddie]

I have given up on my .2 BTC.  Going to call it a learning experience.  IN reality even if they do get this coin going, all the IPO will dump to get their investment back and then hightale it outta here.  No coin today succeeds without strong community support, and there is none here.

my 2 cents

[SP4RK7]

What was the original BTC address for the IPO?

Everyone who invested in the IPO was given a different address to send too

[tjc]

That was painful. So f'ing tired at work today and nothing to show for it.

[vesperwillow]

I said this before but I want to do it again. Take the IPO money for shares on the GPU company and not for the premine coins, forget the GPU coin. People can purchase the graphics cards with other coins. And the DEVS have already a good amount of BTC to start the business. Stop making this dark business and be more transparent with all the people. If you continue to do things like this, the  people will lost confidence on crypto currencies.

Start the business and distribute profits with all of the IPO investors....

LLC's in Virginia can't have shareholders or issue shares.

Why don't people read at least a few comments above. You would see that a relaunch is happening on Sunday 9th March 2014

Thanks for your time..

I've been here since the first page of the thread. I'm very well aware of what's going on. I was also the first one to warn people not to waste their time because I called the launch a failure prior to launch, due to what I knew the developer and owner were doing behind the scenes.

What was the original BTC address for the IPO?

As stated, everyone received different addresses. If you trace the addresses given, you'll find all the money gets tumbled into larger wallets, and it got moved again after the failed launch lastnight. A question would be, why is it being moved?

[pastet89]

Why were you "pulled off" of the project?

The cryptowest team was first to claim that they had already finished the code for GPUcoin (I had to take care of some family stuff yesterday, so i couldn't start on the code till after dinner).  The CEO of the project spoke to them and was more comfortable with that team, since they had a full team of multiple people behind the project.. whereas I'm just one guy, and a hobbyist at best.  So I bowed out since it seemed they had things under control (but i still finished my reference code and uploaded to github just for kicks).

Thought it may not seem it, it was probably the right decision at the time.. I can't fault the CEO for choosing to go that way.  There are people who want to do this stuff seriously, consider themselves consultants for the business.. and they will achieve that manifest destiny eventually (if you believe what you will become, you will become it).  I on the other hand, am just doing this for fun... like with realstackcoin; just giving back to the community.

I really want both GPUCoin, and Cryptowest's teams to be successful.  The more adept people there are in this industry, the more powerful all this will become.  So I'll make myself available to provide what they need.. whether it be to write/deploy the whole thing.. or just help out in any way, over this week.  I do think they have the ability to do this.  Perhaps just rushed under the gun.  This kinda stuff happens a lot with at any number tech companis.. especially when engineers are under pressure.  Some time to regroup to test code.. 20/80 rule and all.. it'll get done.  

I'm super confident that the devs in cryptowest's team are competent people that can do this.

"Cryptowest" is a loser. I've worked with so called "developers" like this before. They are fat, lazy and have almost no actual programming skills.

Most people think that developers have no social skills but that's entirely not the case. I for one have to filter all the technical details out and put it in words that people with little or no technical skills can understand. This development team did nothing of the sort. In fact there was little to no communication on their end. They were just stringing along pool owners and miners and wasting their time. "Bugs" in the software that are overlooked can usually be forgiven by the community. However for this to take place there needs to be a strong open level of communication which was simply not present.

The only clear path that I see is to fire the entire development team. Start over from scratch and try to savage the reputation of the coin. Even though I am not an IPO holder, you could further restore confidence by returning all money that was invested in to the coin.

I originally voted for scrypt N. If it takes going back to scrypt to make the next launch successful. I am down with it.  This coin HAD a lot of support last night. The difficulty jumped up quick.  I think this could still work but launch date should be on Saturday since Sunday here in the USA is Monday in other countries and people need to work. 

P.S. Who thinks IPOs should get a little more for all the troubles in the last 2 launches?  I say, it wouldn't hurt to premine an extra 100M and spread it out evenly to all the IPOs.  Still a lot less than 50% premine that Auroracoin had. Just a thought.

ATTENTION PLEASE!

After all of us are tired and sick of this day or night (depending on his timezone), I think we need to sit down, calm, try not to be mad and as a community vote for the future or death of this project.
I am going to share with you my opinion and suggestions, would like to hear community opinions as well and I am not forcing anyone to be tied to my statements or back them.

1. First, while the reputation of this coin is already harmed to a severe level, my opnion still is, that behind that project we still have an innovative and promising business model, maybe the first one to keep one alt coins price alive, due to the simple fact that the coins purpose will not be only they to be mined and dumped (soon or later), but USED for something! Secondly, from what I hear from other folks as a behavior pattern from the CEO and my own impression with him, I can conclude that he is NOT a scammer. What we faced here was just not a polite, nervous, and incompetent way of trying to get launching the coin, mainly due to technical incompetence of the devs, nervousness spread all around and lack of solid planning, organisation and communication. While at least for me these problematic points seem easier to get fixed, I still believe we can start from the begning, IF the community have not lost confidence in the project entirely. Me myself also went mad at some point and maybe tought and said wrong things, however, after being away for a few hours, on a fresh mind I can see things more positive now.

What is your opinon - should this project go further or not?

2. Secondly, cryptowest, as some guy already mentioned, is in my opinion nothing but a teenager smoking pot, or even worse, adult, behaving like teenager, and believeing he is some "professional developer", which is even worse scenario! And yes, cryptowest, I am ready to tell you directly this if I meet you once! You made the highest anti-advertisment this night/day as proofing you are an unique hybrid of incompetent programmer and rude guy with terrible communication skills as well.

What is your opinon - should cryptowest continue working on the project or not?

3. Third, my opinion is, that micryon is an extremely nice and humble guy. My experience in life, however, also points that in most cases people who are not claiming to know everything in most cases turn out to be more competitive than the haughty ones like cryptowest, advertising to everyone their "professional coin development service", and finally showing that they can not do anything but a total mess. Do you guys realise that they have even not changed the block reward when forking panda ?? Well, I was also silent till now as I do not accept myself a specialist in the specific area of programming altcoins. However, while being an IT professional for years and runnning my own IT company, after what I saw, I really think that I can hardly get it worse than cryptowest. So I am going to suggest to prepare the next launch of the coin but *ONLY* if I do it together with micryon. I believe both of us can do the job well. I am not trying to promote myself as a developer and I do not care if the CEO and community will approve us to take this project. I am just amazed and desparate from what I saw so far and I really want to give it a try myself because, as I said, I hardly believe I can do it that bad. However, if I do it, I would require from the CEO a systematic, NON-RUSHING, planned and calmed down timeline, say, if needed, one week, but with lots of testing, providing finally a smooth launch.


What is your opinon - should micryon and me replace cryptowest and try to get this coin finally working or no? Please, opinion of both community and CEO needed here!

4. Forth, if you agree on going further with this coin and still want a relaunch, regardless if you trust and choose me as a developer or not, what is your opinion on the algo of the coin? I can see a lot of folks complaining about the scrypt-n, and some reporting burnt GPUs. We still have alternatives, as pure scrypt, scrypt-jane, Keccak, quark (note, the last two are actually not fully asic resistant!). I would personally go with pure scrypt or scrypt-jane. At the end, if so much guys are having troubles setting their rigs to mine that (please, read few pages back, one guy even corrupted his PC when he started the rigs with scrypt-n!!!), I think it would be a nice idea the CEO to submit a new poll regarding the algo.

Please, all of you guys, read carefuly, think, vote and write in the thread, and let the CEO decide what course he should take. And once again, think fresh, not tillted! You know what they say - the morning is wiser than the evening. Forcing the N-th failed launch with a total lack of communication during night time for devs (and american folks) was extremely wrong decision at least IMO and it logicaly didn't ended with anything good.

[Anthropolis]

Anyone like to explain to a coin noob in plain terms exactly why the (re?)launch failed? It looked okay to me, we were mining coins right? I know it's kinda dumb, but I am missing something...

[SP4RK7]

Anyone like to explain to a coin noob in plain terms exactly why the (re?)launch failed? It looked okay to me, we were mining coins right? I know it's kinda dumb, but I am missing something...

The block rewards (the coins per block) were all wrong.

[rizardus]

cryptowest said that ceo offer him a 0.2 btc for his job : D

[flasheart]

Anyone like to explain to a coin noob in plain terms exactly why the (re?)launch failed? It looked okay to me, we were mining coins right? I know it's kinda dumb, but I am missing something...

First Launch...
Everything set up proper, launch on time... then Fork... Dev was MIA... CEO couldn't right the ship.  Called the coin, promised relaunch in 24  hours.

2nd Launch...
New dev team copied panda and renamed it GPUC... it launched semi successfully, but the block reward values were never changed to 20k / block (which is what the coin and IPO were based off of).  CEO called the coin, promised relaunch in hours.

3rd Launch (attempt)...
Long time mining genesis block, addnodes were compromised had to be reset up.  In doing so they sent the wallet to a few people who were "trusted" and they started mining... had to scrap it to relaunch.

4th Launch (attempt)...
New genesis block and addnodes now working, mining for IPO / premine 1st block of 400M GPUC was orphaned and they couldn't tell who got the block... (someone with a working wallet stole it)... had to scrap this launch attempt.

5th Launch coming Sunday March 9th.

Did I miss anything?

[MoneyMorpheus]

Anyone like to explain to a coin noob in plain terms exactly why the (re?)launch failed? It looked okay to me, we were mining coins right? I know it's kinda dumb, but I am missing something...

First Launch...
Everything set up proper, launch on time... then Fork... Dev was MIA... CEO couldn't right the ship.  Called the coin, promised relaunch in 24  hours.

2nd Launch...
New dev team copied panda and renamed it GPUC... it launched semi successfully, but the block reward values were never changed to 20k / block (which is what the coin and IPO were based off of).  CEO called the coin, promised relaunch in hours.

3rd Launch (attempt)...
Long time mining genesis block, addnodes were compromised had to be reset up.  In doing so they sent the wallet to a few people who were "trusted" and they started mining... had to scrap it to relaunch.

4th Launch (attempt)...
New genesis block and addnodes now working, mining for IPO / premine 1st block of 400M GPUC was orphaned and they couldn't tell who got the block... (someone with a working wallet stole it)... had to scrap this launch attempt.

5th Launch coming Sunday March 9th.

Did I miss anything?

You did, at some point it was claimed that the genesis block was just 20k instead of 400m, I'm not sure if this was the 5th launch actually. And somewhere in between the 3rd and the 5th launch potatocoin was born  

[smartalxx]

3rd launch was promised in 1 hour.  Then pushed back another 30 minutes, then, if I remember correctly, another 30 minutes.   Then they gave up giving us an ETA at all.  Other than the 10 minutes guys, 5 minutes, just a little while longer, hold your nuggets, and just a minute.

[djm34]

Anyone like to explain to a coin noob in plain terms exactly why the (re?)launch failed? It looked okay to me, we were mining coins right? I know it's kinda dumb, but I am missing something...

First Launch...
Everything set up proper, launch on time... then Fork... Dev was MIA... CEO couldn't right the ship.  Called the coin, promised relaunch in 24  hours.

2nd Launch...
New dev team copied panda and renamed it GPUC... it launched semi successfully, but the block reward values were never changed to 20k / block (which is what the coin and IPO were based off of).  CEO called the coin, promised relaunch in hours.

3rd Launch (attempt)...
Long time mining genesis block, addnodes were compromised had to be reset up.  In doing so they sent the wallet to a few people who were "trusted" and they started mining... had to scrap it to relaunch.

4th Launch (attempt)...
New genesis block and addnodes now working, mining for IPO / premine 1st block of 400M GPUC was orphaned and they couldn't tell who got the block... (someone with a working wallet stole it)... had to scrap this launch attempt.

5th Launch coming Sunday March 9th.

Did I miss anything?

Seriously what kind of trust can we get in this coin (and those behind it), if someone in the team steels 400M even before launch ?!

[vesperwillow]

What is your opinon - should this project go further or not?

No, and if it were to go forward, not with the people presently involved. This includes their business frontend. Their demonstrated lack of business acumen and competency provides 0% of trust in their capability to be self sustaining.

What is your opinon - should cryptowest continue working on the project or not?

That's "Hell no" for $500 Alex.

What is your opinon - should micryon and me replace cryptowest and try to get this coin finally working or no? Please, opinion of both community and CEO needed here!

Not knowing your backgrounds I can't give a solid yes or no, except to say that you both demonstrate greater technical capability and have more depth of understanding in how to handle situations like this. I would voice support for you if folks voted for you.

4. Forth, if you agree on going further with this coin and still want a relaunch, regardless if you trust and choose me as a developer or not, what is your opinion on the algo of the coin?

TLDR; Algo can be whatever, people will complain because they want easy money, they want the playing field to be fair (despite life not being fair, and despite the fact some people have farms and some people have 1 GPU). I personally believe Scrypt would be excellent because it's easy to stand up, well known, and it was the first major alt-coin gpu algo. No need to worry about ASICs, that's such an immature fear. They are coming for ScryptN as well people.

Long version: People went batshit about the algo for no reason. A lot of the folks I've seen complaining about Scrypt have fairly new accounts on the forum, and/or demonstrate very little understanding of mining or the technical aspects of coins in general. I would wager 8/10 folks complaining about it, have absolutely no idea what they're talking about. Some do understand it, but not most. ScryptN is not ASIC proof, it is resistant, just like Scrypt was resistant.

The most profitable and long-term altcoins, which have been around for ages, are using Scrypt. Despite newer algos, there's no immediate shift for them to switch. Why? Because they are established, their value isn't based on how fast it can be mined and dumped. ASIC coming to them are a good thing, because it build up the community, it secures the chain, and it gets more value due to the companies standing up around it.

ScryptN is coming to ASICs, they're already being designed. You can come up with a great puzzle, and someone will always find a way around it.

Lots of people complained because they were upset their 1 GPU would get tramped by farms. You realize that's how it works right? You won't lose out, you still get paid for your work. If you want to be in the big boy games, you play hard. You reinvest your coins and get more equipment. I started out with a GPU which mined at 40kh/s, and now I have a small growing farm.

Those are my thoughts, however, I will likely not support this coin/venture any further, aside from getting my refund. I have tried to help people, and led them to the water. The masses have decided their own fate.