Bitcoin Forum
June 19, 2024, 05:42:00 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 [56] 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 ... 122 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Idena is the first Proof-of-Person Blockchain  (Read 44087 times)
lemonandfriesonetwo
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 655
Merit: 11


View Profile
June 02, 2020, 11:47:36 PM
 #1101

Well will you look at that, they revealed the rewards page on their "give out as many invitations as humanly possible (<500)" account after being called on it.

When I asked in a PM about a month ago why they were keeping the rewards, I was ignored and they proceeded to hide the rewards section in that account.

This is a good thing in the right direction towards better transparency. They might claim the project is free for users, but creating those flips = human work + time.

We should be rewarded accordingly and fairly. The people give IDENA 90% of its value, the devs just publish code hoping that someone will use it.
iHodler
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 141
Merit: 21

Trust No One!


View Profile
June 03, 2020, 08:18:43 AM
Merited by LGBX (1)
 #1102


Option B won cause people (you included) are greedy. Simple as that.

But it's easier to say devs are greedy. Grin

Here it doesn't matter who is greedy or not.

If a situation/proposition was the subject of a vote, and one side won, the devs/team/system should implement the decision, no matter if you/they/anyone like it or not. I don't know the story but if what LaaMos Seeth said is true, that the winning side proposition wasn't implemented, then why they started a vote session in the first place?

Not talking about governance power and stuff. Simply don't do it, because if you do this, is like you said: "Let's vote! But if you win you'll loose anyway" - in other words - let's vote if you wish, as we will piss on the result anyway, because we can.

Tytanowy Janusz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1622


View Profile
June 03, 2020, 08:54:26 AM
Last edit: June 03, 2020, 09:16:52 AM by Tytanowy Janusz
 #1103

Here it doesn't matter who is greedy or not.

If a situation/proposition was the subject of a vote, and one side won, the devs/team/system should implement the decision, no matter if you/they/anyone like it or not. I don't know the story but if what LaaMos Seeth said is true, that the winning side proposition wasn't implemented, then why they started a vote session in the first place?

Not talking about governance power and stuff. Simply don't do it, because if you do this, is like you said: "Let's vote! But if you win you'll loose anyway" - in other words - let's vote if you wish, as we will piss on the result anyway, because we can.

54% ... I would say "no consensus" rather than win because in statistics, we have something like a small sample error or statistical error, and this 4% is nothing more than that. I'm not surprised that it was not implemented. There are more important things now than satisfying 54% of network at the expense of going against 46%. There are things that will satisfy 100% of network (like sharding, mobile wallet, ledger support, option to encrypt wallet with password etc.)

Maybe it was 54:46 because both options are equally shitty and it is worth to repeat vote with additional option?

I personally prefer option A, because otherwise the network will be full of bad flips.

Let's say you are a human which has about 700 DNA as reward for the last validation. In the first scenario if you make 1 bad flip you will lose all your reward and next time will create better flips. In the second one you'll just lose 15 DNA, which is tiny 2% of your overall reward. You may even don't notice such a penalty and will continue to make bad flips.

If you want some trade off I would suggest the third option C:
C. 1 bad flip = 20% of overall reward unpaid instead of 1 flip reward unpaid like in option B. 20% means 1 flips out of 5 is bad. 40% means 2 out of 5 are bad, etc.
LaaMos Seeth
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 123
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 03, 2020, 08:58:19 AM
 #1104

There is nothing funny in recent events and in general. The greed of the developers is amazing.
1. Absolutely unfair punishment for reported flips.
If someone doesn't know, then for reported flips, you completely lose the reward.
You will not be rewarded for successful validation, for invited users and for flips. Is it fair? No.
A poll was taken. Only the votes of identified users were counted.
Quote
Should Idena:
A. Leave the current system of penalties. One reported flip = loss of all rewards from validation.
B. Use a proportional system of fines for bad flips.  1 bad flip - 1 unpaid reward, 2 bad flips = 2 unpaid rewards, etc. And all rewards are not rejected for bad flips.
1) A.
0x0adc1dc970b0750e253ec97b4a9e3c85c04dedac (https://scan.idena.io/address?address=0x0adc1dc970b0750e253ec97b4a9e3c85c04dedac)
2) B.
0x818c464ea1bbf2d5212a2c8dead3971e5636405b (https://scan.idena.io/address?address=0x818c464ea1bbf2d5212a2c8dead3971e5636405b)
Send small amount of DNA to one of the addresses to vote for associated option.
ONLY VALIDATED IDENTITIES COUNT!
Variant B won - 54.94%.
Where is the reaction of the devs? Nowhere. They are not profitable to give users more coins.
Greed.
2. Because of a bug in the previous validation, due to the fault of the developers, all users lost their validation reward, flip reward, invitations reward, nining reward for next 10 days.
Can devs recover these losses? After all, the fault was theirs. Yes, they can, but they accused users of weak hardware. It is unprofitable for them to pay compensation.
Greed.
3. The increasing premine. What the f*ck is this? In what other coin did you see the increasing premine ?! This is f*cking scam. The larger the premine, the lower the value of the coin.
And in this coin, it is constantly increasing!
Greed.
4. When someone suggested increasing the reward for flips so that a person would try to make flips better and be afraid to lose rewards for a bad flip, all sorts of admins and other personalities immediately started laughing at him, calling him stupid and told that no one would give any more coins.
Greed.

Option B won cause people (you included) are greedy. Simple as that.

But it's easier to say devs are greedy. Grin

1. People spent time on a short session, a long session and verifying keywords. They spent time and effort and successfully passed validation. And they must receive a reward for this.
2. People invited other users to the Idena network and those successfully passed validation. Therefore, inviters should receive rewards for those invited.
3. People made good flips and should get rewards for them.
4. People made bad flips and do not receive rewards for bad flips.
It's easy.
Why for point 4, people lose their rewards for points 1 and 2 ??
The punishment is completely out of proportion.
There is no greed. What is done well must be rewarded. What is done poorly - not.


Here it doesn't matter who is greedy or not.

If a situation/proposition was the subject of a vote, and one side won, the devs/team/system should implement the decision, no matter if you/they/anyone like it or not. I don't know the story but if what LaaMos Seeth said is true, that the winning side proposition wasn't implemented, then why they started a vote session in the first place?

Not talking about governance power and stuff. Simply don't do it, because if you do this, is like you said: "Let's vote! But if you win you'll loose anyway" - in other words - let's vote if you wish, as we will piss on the result anyway, because we can.
Of course it's true, voting took place in a Telegram.
LaaMos Seeth
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 123
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 03, 2020, 09:31:47 AM
Last edit: June 03, 2020, 09:56:39 AM by LaaMos Seeth
 #1105

Why don't you care about the growing premine?
Do you think this is normal?
Was premine, 36 000 000, devs divided it into several parts.
And one part of the premine increases after each validation.
Initially, the size of this part of the premine was 521,526 DNA.
Now it’s 800,826.146 DNA.
This part of the premine grew by 279,300.146 DNA.
Which at the current rate is 2.79 BTC.
What is this all about?
Premine is bad in principle. The big premine is even worse. And in this coin it is huge - 36 mln and even increases. Doesn't this bother you ??
LaaMos Seeth
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 123
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 03, 2020, 11:28:00 PM
 #1106

Why don't you care about the growing premine?
.......
Lips sealed
I wonder why you deleted your original message? Where did you write that you are also concerned about this issue, that discord and telegram administrators and moderators look like schoolchildren, and that all this reminds you of the story of rats and a boat?
Do they put pressure on you?
Krucifer
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 85
Merit: 2

IdenaNetwork (idena.io)


View Profile WWW
June 04, 2020, 01:50:38 PM
 #1107


Option B won cause people (you included) are greedy. Simple as that.

But it's easier to say devs are greedy. Grin

Here it doesn't matter who is greedy or not.

If a situation/proposition was the subject of a vote, and one side won, the devs/team/system should implement the decision, no matter if you/they/anyone like it or not. I don't know the story but if what LaaMos Seeth said is true, that the winning side proposition wasn't implemented, then why they started a vote session in the first place?

Not talking about governance power and stuff. Simply don't do it, because if you do this, is like you said: "Let's vote! But if you win you'll loose anyway" - in other words - let's vote if you wish, as we will piss on the result anyway, because we can.



I guess it was put to vote by admins in TG cause you were annoying about it so they went with it.

As for results, you cannot expect something to be implemented when only a fraction of total identities voted.

So winning option got minimal % of total votes. Not representative at all. If it was 54% of all identities, then devs would possibly need to consider it.

I  D  E  N  A   ►   Proof-of-Person Blockchain
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ https://idena.io/ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Saisher
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 2310
Merit: 175


View Profile
June 04, 2020, 02:42:56 PM
 #1108

Just look at IDENA's price right now it's crashing $0.075467 -13.0% 0.00000738 BTC -18.7%, things is not the same anymore after that last verification where so many people are affected, I don't know if this is manipulated, but I guess it's because we are in a testnet, I'm worried something like this could happen again.
realRioda
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 173
Merit: 79

https://idena.site


View Profile WWW
June 04, 2020, 02:47:14 PM
 #1109

Just look at IDENA's price right now it's crashing $0.075467 -13.0% 0.00000738 BTC -18.7%, things is not the same anymore after that last verification where so many people are affected, I don't know if this is manipulated, but I guess it's because we are in a testnet, I'm worried something like this could happen again.

I'm looking and the last price was 940sats... Where did you see that price?

Saisher
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 2310
Merit: 175


View Profile
June 04, 2020, 04:26:50 PM
 #1110

Just look at IDENA's price right now it's crashing $0.075467 -13.0% 0.00000738 BTC -18.7%, things is not the same anymore after that last verification where so many people are affected, I don't know if this is manipulated, but I guess it's because we are in a testnet, I'm worried something like this could happen again.

I'm looking and the last price was 940sats... Where did you see that price?

Here I did not screenshot you can check the data https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/idena so far it's improving I'm hoping and very optimistic that the price will go back to what it was after the next validation and things will go back to normal.
Krucifer
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 85
Merit: 2

IdenaNetwork (idena.io)


View Profile WWW
June 04, 2020, 04:40:32 PM
 #1111

Just look at IDENA's price right now it's crashing $0.075467 -13.0% 0.00000738 BTC -18.7%, things is not the same anymore after that last verification where so many people are affected, I don't know if this is manipulated, but I guess it's because we are in a testnet, I'm worried something like this could happen again.

I'm looking and the last price was 940sats... Where did you see that price?

Here I did not screenshot you can check the data https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/idena so far it's improving I'm hoping and very optimistic that the price will go back to what it was after the next validation and things will go back to normal.

Coingecko is prolly using some average of passed week.

These 940 sats is the lowest that has been in the last 3 days, since the rebound after the validation bug crashed the price.

I  D  E  N  A   ►   Proof-of-Person Blockchain
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ https://idena.io/ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
realRioda
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 173
Merit: 79

https://idena.site


View Profile WWW
June 04, 2020, 05:56:23 PM
Last edit: June 04, 2020, 07:33:31 PM by realRioda
Merited by Rath_ (10), Tytanowy Janusz (3), Krucifer (1)
 #1112

Here is some explanation about that bug that happened and how I understood what was the problem...

Q: Why was I killed, I had great PC / VPS, 16GB of ram and 6 core CPU?

A: The whole network stopped, no one killed anyone, the whole network "killed itself" in a way. I understand that, that kind of powerful node is one of those who participated in committee that made those big blocks, but your results were not in the first but in the second block that was made late.

If you participate in the committee for making blocks, approximately, I'm not sure how big that committee is, that is, how many nodes it consists of. All participating nodes in committee must process all transactions within 20sec of the block's duration. What happened was, too many transactions from too many participants.



3420 nodes performed validation. In the previous successful validation, 2300 nodes passed, which means that the network worked with 47.8% more nodes than last time, which means that the load is so much higher, that is. number of transactions. The block reached a maximum size, 1MB, other transactions were waiting in the mempool to be put in next block. Then the network tried to process that block in order for those transactions to become valid (ie. our answers on validation).
Then, a committee of random nodes is made.
And every node in that committee must process that, so far the largest block we have ever had.
The nodes in the committee were changing all the time trying to process that huge block. But were not able and network made empty blocks.
Until the network came up with stronger nodes (like VPS's and home PC's that had multicores and higher RAM), and they managed to process that block, f**in near the end of validation. Those transactions(validation answers) processed in that block have passed validation, because those transactions are on the processed block and are written to the blockchain.
The next committee is again a failure and an empty block.
After that, when it was already late, the second block was processed (also almost full 1MB block), which contained the other half of our answers/transactions.

Now... The developers will make sure that validation cannot be completed while there are still unprocessed validation transactions in mempool. The worst that can now happen is to wait for the validation result for few blocks longer. Additionally, since it will reduce the maximum block size to 300KB from 1MB, that means it will be 3x easier for all nodes to process blocks.

Q: So what now? Will they kick us out who have 1cpu/1gb or?

A: No, these nodes will work now as well, because they will be 3x less demanding blocks.

Q: And what will happen for the next validation when we have 3000 nodes again?

A: Since there will be less demanding blocks, all nodes should be able to process them and that's only... 10 blocks.
If we calculate that in the last validation we needed 2 blocks of 1MB for all answers. This means we need 2MB of data for all responses to be written. Let's think that in the next validation we will have not 2MB as we had now, let's consider 3MB. Since the block will be 300KB, this means that we will need to process 10 blocks in order for all transactions (all validation responses) to be successfully written on blockchain.
Since the block lasts 20 seconds and we need 10 blocks, that is, we need 3.5 minutes.
And we know that a long session lasts 30 minutes, which means we have 8x more time than we need.
With this principle, we can roughly calculate the following theoretical maximum of the network before validation sharding must be implemented.

Q: And now the question, why didn't they remember that before? But when did it break?

A: It broke because we reached the maximum with testing. If no one had tested, no one would have ever found out about this what we found out. They themselves said they did not expect this.
I guess the problem was also VPSs that have 1Core/1GB. When the 1GB of memory is full, then it switches to SWAP which is actually a slow hard drive. Then for that, the processor needs much more time to allocate memory to RAM and SWAP. And that leads to the impossibility to do everything properly, that is, does not have enough CPU power to process that large block of 1MB transactions.

I also figured out what our maximum transactions were. There yeah were 3966 transactions in that first big block, let's say 4000.
4000tx / 20sec block time, so 200 transactions per second, what is the speed tx/s in ETH?
On ETH the max is 15tx/s.
And do you know what ETH is working on? What are those nodes? They are certainly not a $5 VPS. They run on powerful Amazon instances.
And ETH has 7800 nodes.
Not even Idena can work on Tetris hardware.
After reducing the block size 3x, we will again be at 4x faster transaction speed than ETH.
At about 66 tx/s, even with tetris computers.

My recommendation is to temporarily upgrade each VPS for validation to 2GB.
Digital Ocean is great for that, they support temporary component changes. One can even make a script that Digital Ocean itself does upscale 2GB for validation and downscale 1GB afterwards, automatically via API. I remember that Anthrophobia and Crackowich told me that they were doing it. Validation means testing the theoretical maximum of the network each time.
Node operation during mining, while there are barely a couple of transactions in each block, is nothing compared with node operation during validation.

And this is what we deal in the network, this member is complaining that syncing is slow, and has 5/0.2 internet speed...

LaaMos Seeth
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 123
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 04, 2020, 09:49:01 PM
 #1113

And how do all these explanations cancel the compensation? Made a mistake - pay users compensation.

And you forgot to explain on what basis the premine grows. It should not be. Premine is a FIXED amount.
Why not take these 279,300.146 DNA coins and pay them for those losses? After all, developers should not have these coins, only 521,526 DNA in Foundation part, because premine can't grow!
notblox1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1283


Logo Designer ⛨ BSFL Division1


View Profile WWW
June 04, 2020, 10:23:41 PM
 #1114

Here is some explanation about that bug that happened and how I understood what was the problem...

Q: Why was I killed, I had great PC / VPS, 16GB of ram and 6 core CPU?

A: The whole network stopped, no one killed anyone, the whole network "killed itself" in a way. I understand that, that kind of powerful node is one of those who participated in committee that made those big blocks, but your results were not in the first but in the second block that was made late.

If you participate in the committee for making blocks, approximately, I'm not sure how big that committee is, that is, how many nodes it consists of. All participating nodes in committee must process all transactions within 20sec of the block's duration. What happened was, too many transactions from too many participants.



3420 nodes performed validation. In the previous successful validation, 2300 nodes passed, which means that the network worked with 47.8% more nodes than last time, which means that the load is so much higher, that is. number of transactions. The block reached a maximum size, 1MB, other transactions were waiting in the mempool to be put in next block. Then the network tried to process that block in order for those transactions to become valid (ie. our answers on validation).
Then, a committee of random nodes is made.
And every node in that committee must process that, so far the largest block we have ever had.
The nodes in the committee were changing all the time trying to process that huge block. But were not able and network made empty blocks.
Until the network came up with stronger nodes (like VPS's and home PC's that had multicores and higher RAM), and they managed to process that block, f**in near the end of validation. Those transactions(validation answers) processed in that block have passed validation, because those transactions are on the processed block and are written to the blockchain.
The next committee is again a failure and an empty block.
After that, when it was already late, the second block was processed (also almost full 1MB block), which contained the other half of our answers/transactions.

Now... The developers will make sure that validation cannot be completed while there are still unprocessed validation transactions in mempool. The worst that can now happen is to wait for the validation result for few blocks longer. Additionally, since it will reduce the maximum block size to 300KB from 1MB, that means it will be 3x easier for all nodes to process blocks.

Q: So what now? Will they kick us out who have 1cpu/1gb or?

A: No, these nodes will work now as well, because they will be 3x less demanding blocks.

Q: And what will happen for the next validation when we have 3000 nodes again?

A: Since there will be less demanding blocks, all nodes should be able to process them and that's only... 10 blocks.
If we calculate that in the last validation we needed 2 blocks of 1MB for all answers. This means we need 2MB of data for all responses to be written. Let's think that in the next validation we will have not 2MB as we had now, let's consider 3MB. Since the block will be 300KB, this means that we will need to process 10 blocks in order for all transactions (all validation responses) to be successfully written on blockchain.
Since the block lasts 20 seconds and we need 10 blocks, that is, we need 3.5 minutes.
And we know that a long session lasts 30 minutes, which means we have 8x more time than we need.
With this principle, we can roughly calculate the following theoretical maximum of the network before validation sharding must be implemented.

Q: And now the question, why didn't they remember that before? But when did it break?

A: It broke because we reached the maximum with testing. If no one had tested, no one would have ever found out about this what we found out. They themselves said they did not expect this.
I guess the problem was also VPSs that have 1Core/1GB. When the 1GB of memory is full, then it switches to SWAP which is actually a slow hard drive. Then for that, the processor needs much more time to allocate memory to RAM and SWAP. And that leads to the impossibility to do everything properly, that is, does not have enough CPU power to process that large block of 1MB transactions.

I also figured out what our maximum transactions were. There yeah were 3966 transactions in that first big block, let's say 4000.
4000tx / 20sec block time, so 200 transactions per second, what is the speed tx/s in ETH?
On ETH the max is 15tx/s.
And do you know what ETH is working on? What are those nodes? They are certainly not a $5 VPS. They run on powerful Amazon instances.
And ETH has 7800 nodes.
Not even Idena can work on Tetris hardware.
After reducing the block size 3x, we will again be at 4x faster transaction speed than ETH.
At about 66 tx/s, even with tetris computers.

My recommendation is to temporarily upgrade each VPS for validation to 2GB.
Digital Ocean is great for that, they support temporary component changes. One can even make a script that Digital Ocean itself does upscale 2GB for validation and downscale 1GB afterwards, automatically via API. I remember that Anthrophobia and Crackowich told me that they were doing it. Validation means testing the theoretical maximum of the network each time.
Node operation during mining, while there are barely a couple of transactions in each block, is nothing compared with node operation during validation.

And this is what we deal in the network, this member is complaining that syncing is slow, and has 5/0.2 internet speed...


Very good explanation for everyone to read.
It is obvious you spend time to think before you wrote anything.
Not many people do this sadly.

██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
... LIVECASINO.io    Play Live Games with up to 20% cashback!...██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
necromastery
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 254



View Profile WWW
June 04, 2020, 11:04:32 PM
 #1115

Just look at IDENA's price right now it's crashing $0.075467 -13.0% 0.00000738 BTC -18.7%, things is not the same anymore after that last verification where so many people are affected, I don't know if this is manipulated, but I guess it's because we are in a testnet, I'm worried something like this could happen again.
but the I see the volume is still good even though it fell to $ 162K, it went up again, that mean it will rise again. What I see is that crash -10% or +10% is something usual, it's not a stable coin, so there is no need to exaggerate.
Saisher
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 2310
Merit: 175


View Profile
June 05, 2020, 01:20:10 AM
Last edit: June 05, 2020, 01:41:48 AM by Saisher
 #1116

Just look at IDENA's price right now it's crashing $0.075467 -13.0% 0.00000738 BTC -18.7%, things is not the same anymore after that last verification where so many people are affected, I don't know if this is manipulated, but I guess it's because we are in a testnet, I'm worried something like this could happen again.
but the I see the volume is still good even though it fell to $ 162K, it went up again, that mean it will rise again. What I see is that crash -10% or +10% is something usual, it's not a stable coin, so there is no need to exaggerate.

Not really exaggerating just trying to point out  the lost momentum because of the recent event, I don't believe it will going to go down to 100 sats back when it was still traded first in QTRADE,investors are now and on a what see if the bug is fix ed and I see it moving up again after the next validation is successful.
realRioda
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 173
Merit: 79

https://idena.site


View Profile WWW
June 05, 2020, 02:44:56 AM
 #1117

Oh, this is why price on coingeko is 0.07... stupid qbtc...


Krucifer
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 85
Merit: 2

IdenaNetwork (idena.io)


View Profile WWW
June 05, 2020, 06:44:49 AM
 #1118

Oh, this is why price on coingeko is 0.07... stupid qbtc...



Yeah, the fake volume exchange that DNA has been only withdrawn from for the last 2 months.

And CoinGecko doesn't want to remove it, LOL. I guess they like big numbers, even if they're fake.

I  D  E  N  A   ►   Proof-of-Person Blockchain
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ https://idena.io/ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Saisher
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 2310
Merit: 175


View Profile
June 05, 2020, 02:10:02 PM
 #1119

Oh, this is why price on coingeko is 0.07... stupid qbtc...



Yeah, the fake volume exchange that DNA has been only withdrawn from for the last 2 months.

And CoinGecko doesn't want to remove it, LOL. I guess they like big numbers, even if they're fake.

Honestly I don't like both exchanges but between the two I prefer trading on Qtrade than QBTC,I have traded several times on QTRADE but never on QBTC I've been reading a lot of bad things about QBTC in the IDENA price telegram, I hope after we move on the mainnet we can get in a  much better exchange.
realRioda
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 173
Merit: 79

https://idena.site


View Profile WWW
June 05, 2020, 02:13:08 PM
 #1120

Honestly I don't like both exchanges but between the two I prefer trading on Qtrade than QBTC,I have traded several times on QTRADE but never on QBTC I've been reading a lot of bad things about QBTC in the IDENA price telegram, I hope after we move on the mainnet we can get in a  much better exchange.

What is it about qtrade that you don't like?

Pages: « 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 [56] 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 ... 122 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!