What are your thoughts on Numus' Features? Decentralized Exchange and more

[Duff___Man]

So?

[chinabreak123]

why your trust is -4?
if this a real project,i will join

[Duff___Man]

why your trust is -4?
if this a real project,i will join

Someone made a scam accusation of me regarding a Bitcoin service I was developing. Everyone who entered the thread drove my trsust level into the ground. It most definitely is a real project, this coin has got to be the most proffessional I've seen. They even have their own introductory video:  https://vimeo.com/89947268

[Ix]

1) Decentralized Lotto System.
I'm surprised no one else has come up with this feature actually, nor has anyone so much as thought about this feature. I won't post the extract from the whitepaper becuase it's quite long, but I'll post the diagram.

It's probably because it's the silliest thing imaginable to add to a cryptocurrency protocol. But RealSolid actually was going to use a similar gambling lottery as some kind of basis for new money creation, though I don't believe it ever went anywhere.

[Duff___Man]

.

[coin_coin]

why your trust is -4?
if this a real project,i will join

you still trust him ? please receive my respect , i am  out.

[DeltaQuebec]

why your trust is -4?
if this a real project,i will join

you still trust him ? please receive my respect , i am  out.

+2 You would think if it was a SERIOUS project, he would SERIOUSLY reconsider using that name.. yea..I'm serious..and..Im out too.

[Duff___Man]

why your trust is -4?
if this a real project,i will join

you still trust him ? please receive my respect , i am  out.

+2 You would think if it was a SERIOUS project, he would SERIOUSLY reconsider using that name.. yea..I'm serious..and..Im out too.

No, you've got it wrong. I am in no way linked to this project, I am merely someone following it and discussing its features. If you looked at the thread I linked in the OP you will realize who the real devs are.

[Ix]

I was skeptical at first,

If you were skeptical at first, what changed your mind to think that it is something other than a cheap trick to get people to use the currency? Because somebody's gotta win?

[Duff___Man]

I was skeptical at first,

If you were skeptical at first, what changed your mind to think that it is something other than a cheap trick to get people to use the currency? Because somebody's gotta win?

I was skeptical about the viability of such a system and wheter people would be tempted to use it.

[InsertUsernameHere]

Seems interesting, downloading the whitepaper now.

[InsertUsernameHere]

Okay I've read the whitepaper. The only thing that really concerns me about the Decentralized Exchange is that though I see no current flaws in it, there may be ways to sort of abuse it.

In the end I see one of three ways abuse would be attempted:

1) [John claims he did not receive $200 but actually did. John declines.]
John = +$200, -2.1 NMS
Jenny = -0.1 NMS

2) [Jenny claims to have sent $200, but actually did not. John declines.]
John = -2.1 NMS
Jenny = -0.1 NMS

3) [Jenny claims to have sent $200, but actually sent $100. John either accepts or declines.]
This is a mutual destruction scenario in which some interesting game theory may end up coming into play.

3a) John declines (mutual destruction)

John = +$100, -2.1 NMS
Jenny = -$100, -0.1 NMS

3b) John accepts (John realizes that either way he will lose 2 NMS but this will save him the collateral 0.1 NMS)
John = +$100, -2 NMS
Jenny = -$100, +2 NMS

[Duff___Man]

Okay I've read the whitepaper. The only thing that really concerns me about the Decentralized Exchange is that though I see no current flaws in it, there may be ways to sort of abuse it.

In the end I see one of three ways abuse would be attempted:

1) [John claims he did not receive $200 but actually did. John declines.]
John = +$200, -2.1 NMS
Jenny = -0.1 NMS

2) [Jenny claims to have sent $200, but actually did not. John declines.]
John = -2.1 NMS
Jenny = -0.1 NMS

3) [Jenny claims to have sent $200, but actually sent $100. John either accepts or declines.]
This is a mutual destruction scenario in which some interesting game theory may end up coming into play.

3a) John declines (mutual destruction)

John = +$100, -2.1 NMS
Jenny = -$100, -0.1 NMS

3b) John accepts (John realizes that either way he will lose 2 NMS but this will save him the collateral 0.1 NMS)
John = +$100, -2 NMS
Jenny = -$100, +2 NMS

The way I see it is that John and Jenny don't know each other since only their addresses would be shown. Therefore there would be no reason for them to stab each other in the back. Plus there's collateral which means if Jenny tries to stab John in the back she'll be losing out money or NMS.

[Willisius]

The way I see it is that John and Jenny don't know each other since only their addresses would be shown. Therefore there would be no reason for them to stab each other in the back.

[emphasis added]

This actually tends to have the opposite effect.

[nextgencoin]

What is the motivation to buy into the IPO?


Early investors that take a big risk only share 2.5% of total coins. (and even the total coins seems to be undefined)

So say even a mildly successful IPO of say 50 coins would mean you get 500,000 coins of a total 1 Billion, 250,000 if 100 etc.... Ok so if its as successful as say NXT then its an 'ok' investment, not amazing but ok. But coins come and go all the time these days, the coin is only an adaption of an another coin. So I would say there is nothing for the early investor here to get excited about. And indeed you could lose money even if the coin is decent.


IPO's must have a big mark up to early investors otherwise there is zero motivation to invest and not just buy once it hits exchanges. The developers need to rethink the IPO amounts..

[InsertUsernameHere]

The way I see it is that John and Jenny don't know each other since only their addresses would be shown. Therefore there would be no reason for them to stab each other in the back.

[emphasis added]

This actually tends to have the opposite effect.

How so? If anything it should decrease the effect.

[Duff___Man]

What is the motivation to buy into the IPO?


Early investors that take a big risk only share 2.5% of total coins. (and even the total coins seems to be undefined)

So say even a mildly successful IPO of say 50 coins would mean you get 500,000 coins of a total 1 Billion, 250,000 if 100 etc.... Ok so if its as successful as say NXT then its an 'ok' investment, not amazing but ok. But coins come and go all the time these days, the coin is only an adaption of an another coin. So I would say there is nothing for the early investor here to get excited about. And indeed you could lose money even if the coin is decent.


IPO's must have a big mark up to early investors otherwise there is zero motivation to invest and not just buy once it hits exchanges. The developers need to rethink the IPO amounts..

Are you seriosuly trying to compare NXT's IPO to this or any other IPO for that matter. NXT's initial disctribution comprised around 50 stakeholders who own ALL of NXT. NXT has a few mega-rich investors and the rest are dirt-poor in NXT. Let's think about that logically, if one stakeholder decided to throw in the towel one day and sells all his NXT that would bring the market crashing down to its knees.

The reason you don't see coins which offer full shares to the investors anymore is because those coins are time-bombs as soon as one investors sells  the market will come crashing down and soon other initial investors will also panic sell at lower prices bringing the market price down even further. You fail to realize that big returns can still be made through early investments in coins with IPO's less than 5% of the total supply. Investors could purchase low and sell very high and make massive returns.

[nextgencoin]

What is the motivation to buy into the IPO?


Early investors that take a big risk only share 2.5% of total coins. (and even the total coins seems to be undefined)

So say even a mildly successful IPO of say 50 coins would mean you get 500,000 coins of a total 1 Billion, 250,000 if 100 etc.... Ok so if its as successful as say NXT then its an 'ok' investment, not amazing but ok. But coins come and go all the time these days, the coin is only an adaption of an another coin. So I would say there is nothing for the early investor here to get excited about. And indeed you could lose money even if the coin is decent.


IPO's must have a big mark up to early investors otherwise there is zero motivation to invest and not just buy once it hits exchanges. The developers need to rethink the IPO amounts..

Are you seriosuly trying to compare NXT's IPO to this or any other IPO for that matter. NXT's initial disctribution comprised around 50 stakeholders who own ALL of NXT. NXT has a few mega-rich investors and the rest are dirt-poor in NXT. Let's think about that logically, if one stakeholder decided to throw in the towel one day and sells all his NXT that would bring the market crashing down to its knees.

The reason you don't see coins which offer full shares to the investors anymore is because those coins are time-bombs as soon as one investors sells  the market will come crashing down and soon other initial investors will also panic sell at lower prices bringing the market price down even further. You fail to realize that big returns can still be made through early investments in coins with IPO's less than 5% of the total supply. Investors could purchase low and sell very high and make massive returns.

I didn't fail to realize anything you noob. You spectacularly missed my point, I only used NXT as an example of a successful coin that increased in price many fold but still to share say 2.5% of NXT now wouldn't be worth it once divided by a sizable number of stakeholders. And your logic that large percentage IPO's are unfiar are nonsense if the offer is open to all and they can buy in as much as they want. NXT was lopsided cause no one was that interested at the time and thats also why people get so bitter about it cause we know for a fact the distribution is more balanced than Bitcoin at this time. Anyway my point was about IPO's need some kind of payback for people to risk capital. With this there seems very little...

[markm]

Wasn't NXT the one that lied about how long one had to buy into the IPO, suddenly closing the IPO before its announced closure date, thus screwing maybe the vast majority of people who were considering buying it by closing the buying unexpectedly?

-MarkM-

[InsertUsernameHere]

Wasn't NXT the one that lied about how long one had to buy into the IPO, suddenly closing the IPO before its announced closure date, thus screwing maybe the vast majority of people who were considering buying it by closing the buying unexpectedly?

-MarkM-

The same one.