|
IloveAnonCoin (OP)
|
 |
June 27, 2014, 03:56:03 AM |
|
Tired of the FUD ? Read the FAQ : http://wiki.darkcoin.eu/wiki/FAQWas Darkcoin Instamined?I read someone who wrote that 50% of the coins in circulation are owned by the devsNo. This is a classic case of spreading FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) by supporters of other cryptocurrencies who perceive Darkcoin as a threat to the coin they support. The coin has been well distributed through exchanges since early February 2014 – almost 15-20 days after the coin's launch. One could buy as many cheap DRKs as they wanted, with prices of 0.0000x per DRK or 0.0001x per DRK. This can be verified by historic charts of c-cex.com and poloniex.com of early Feb 2014. These two exchanges were the first that adopted DRK. Huge buy orders of 20-30-50k DRKs were being filled by early miners who were dumping their coins for pennies, not really appreciating the coin they had in their possession due to the “abundant” way in which they mined it as people do not really appreciate what they are given in ample quantity. Miners who “instamined” large quantities never foresaw the huge price increase and as such sold over a million coins at prices from 0.0000x up to 0.002 – with the first large batch being sold after DRK hit the exchanges and the next large batches being sold from February 2014 to April 2014 @ 0.0015 BTC price levels. In fact, many coin holders were complaining* of all the “dumping” by those who held cheap coins from the start that kept the price at artificially low levels for 2 months straight. The dumping ended, due to tremendous market demand, when a “pump” was initiated by “whale” buyers that swallowed millions of USD (in DRKs), raising the price from 0.0012 to 0.017 within a few weeks. - During this dumping period there were certain individuals who spread FUD about how the coin will never rise in price due to the instaminers dumping continuously. These are typically the same people who are claiming that the 50% instamine distribution affects the coin distribution today. However it is impossible to simultaneously claim that the coins were being dumped and that the 50% instamine holds true today. It's either one or the other. Since the coins were being dumped, the 50% instamine distribution was gradually reduced with each dumping wave. Blockchain analysis indicates a well distributed coin, reflecting the fact that the dumped coins were evenly distributed through the market. Early distribution is not currently an issue as huge buyers have been reshuffling the "rich-list" in their favor, buying millions of dollars in Darkcoins during May 2014. Late distribution through aggressive buying is currently more of a concern than early distribution.
(Mar 29, 2014 by Evan Duffield) This is the story of how Darkcoin came about. Recently the community has grown a lot and many people here aren’t aware at all of the early history of the coin. I’m sure you’ll see from the full story that I would have done things much differently, but hindsight is always 20/20. So who am I and what do I offer? My name is Evan Duffield and I’ve been developing software since I was 15. I also have a history in finance and an interest in economics and machine learning. I’ve worked all over the space for PR firms, creating search engines and machine learning algorithms for financial modeling. I’ve have a rewarding career and consider myself lucky to have been a part of many great projects. Also, it’s worth noting when I worked at Hawk Financial Group I got my series 65 (a financial advisor license) and I’ve used that knowledge extensively for Darkcoin. The birth of Darkcoin I discovered Bitcoin in mid 2010 and was obsessed ever since. After a couple of years in 2012 I started really thinking about how to add anonymity to Bitcoin. I came up with maybe 10 ways of doing this, but I soon realized that Bitcoin would never add my code. The developers really want the core protocol to stay the same for the most part and everything else to be implemented on the top of it. This was the birth of the concept of Darkcoin. I implemented X11 in a weekend and found it worked pretty well and it would give a completely fair start to the currency. What I really was aiming for with X11 is a similar development curve where miners would fight to create small advantages much like the early start of Bitcoin. I think this a requirement to create a healthy ecosystem. Next I was thinking about changing the reward system. I thought it would be an interesting experiment to add more incentives to join mining early on, driving up the hashrate and protecting the network, that’s when I came up with 1111.0 / ((x+1.0)^2.0), which was the first formula for controlling rewards. Launch It was January 18, 2014 and I had everything ready or so I thought. I announced the launch of Darkcoin (XCoin at the time) on BitcoinTalk. We launched later and immediately got stuck on block 42, I was new to the Bitcoin codebase and wasn’t sure what I missed so I announced we’d relaunch later. When we relaunched we had a rush of miners join causing a huge spike of coin production without it being able to adjust the difficulty quick enough, we just ended up spilling out coins. Retargeting happened every 576 blocks and could only increase the difficulty by four times, so it took about six retargets to get to a difficulty that was near 2.5 minutes per block. Later on, after the difficulty evened out we realized that there was a serious problem with the block reward calculation. You can see people discussing the problems here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.120 I soon fixed this issue at block 4500, but none of us realized the amount of coins that had been issued at the time. At that point we didn’t even have a block explorer yet. Growth Right after block 4500 is when I started working on DarkSend. I was trying to create a proof-of-concept and eventually I succeeded, I posted about it and our coin started to become more popular by the day. This is when the coin became a serious project of mine. Later on we switched to 11111.0 / ((Difficulty+51.0)/6.0)^2), these formulas proved to be much more powerful incentives to drive up the difficulty than I thought they would. Soon after we switched to (2222222.0 / ((Difficulty+2600.0)/9.0)^2.0), targeting a difficulty of about 3400. In the end? Darkcoin started from a few months of me thinking about ways to create a better coin and a couple weekends of coding. It wasn’t till later that we got established and I really started taking this seriously. Anyone can compare our recent efforts to the sorted past and see things are going much smoother. No one really knew how much this would blow up (in a good way) and how popular it would be, otherwise I would have took my time in the beginning. Goals and the future of Darkcoin I don’t believe the origins of Darkcoin are too much to overcome, but investors and users are going to have to decide for themselves if they want to support the project. Recently I’ve shifted away from other projects to going full time on Darkcoin. I think with a full time developer and our solid community we’ll be able to make something great. It’s only been a couple months and we have a lot to show for it (X11, DGW and DarkSend Beta) and there is more in the works. This obviously didn’t go perfect but I think we have a really fantastic community and I see a really bright future for Darkcoin. Of course mudslinging is easier than innovation. So keep creating new accounts while the Darkcoin team is innovating. Have a good day ! /end thread - nice try fudsters haha  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
Coolstoryteller
|
|
June 27, 2014, 03:59:33 AM |
|
THE FACTS ABOUT DARK COIN
1. released without windows QT so that only dev and pals could mine it.
2. Instamined harder than any other coin out there 12.5% of the current minting was mined in the first day
3. Later they decided to cut the minting by 75% to turn their 12.5% instamine with no windows QT into 50% instamine in 24hours - nice hey
yes that is correct they mined 50% of all the coins available at this time by themselves in the first 24 hours whilst windows users could not mine.
That is the facts.... doesn't matter what else they say... nothing can change what they have done.
Once zero coin, or bytecoin with a decent wallet it released or another darkcoin clone is released.... dark coin will sink like a stone.
Every time they try to spam their coin just post this to remind them of the facts about their coin.
This whole pre-mine instamine is starting to get old now. I don't care if 100% of the coin is owned by 1 developer. If the product is great, is innovative and has useful features its worth what i'm willing to pay for it. Its like saying I should share my wealth of my own business with random people, because its the right thing to do. IF, which it was NOT 50% instamined, as I was one of the first initial core to discover DarkCoin, I knew right off the bat that this coin was going somewhere...I spent 10's of thousands of dollars on mining servers from microsoft and amazon to mine DRK coin...I took a huge gamble and it paid off...then there should be reward for that. At the writing of your message there was barely 4 million coins minted, of a possible 20+ million. Thats NOT 50% instamined...what about the other 16+million coins yet to be mined? Sometime, it's hard to tell people the truth. I started mining DRK the moment after it was released. I rented a shitload of VPSs and amazon instances as well. I was at the top of all the mining charts on the pools I was using. I've since got out of the DRK scene but yeah when the coin launched I was getting a bunch per day. I offloaded my DRK into the market in small increments around the end of April. I don't know Evan personally I just saw his post and was looking for something new to mine after the Stablecoin developer went MIA. Anyways I have been invested into anon focused coins since the release of anoncoin. I don't really think that its a conspiracy tbh its just how this market works. Something looks appealing and then you mine the shit out of it. I did the same thing with Anoncoin. There is truth for ya. If you want a conspiracy try to connect the disappearance of Artos (Lead Stablecoin Dev) with the appearance of Evan Dufffield (Lead Darkcoin Dev). The two coins share the same design principals (Closed Source Mixer) and were abandoned/launched around the same timeframe. If you can get proof of that then you will have something on your hands BTW - Satoshi owns 1.5 million Bitcoins. So, what's you said is instamine 2 million coins by devs is the right thing to do because Satoshi also did ? No. I'm saying I had more hashing power pointed at the pools than they did and I'm not on their team. Look, pre-mine is a sensitive subject when it comes to the coins development but tbh Satoshi set the precedent in that regard. I personally look at it like this. If a developer is working on a coin instead of working a job then his only source of income is the project he is working on. It's not 100% that the coin is going to make him any money. The general opinion is that a developer needs to work for free on the coin he is developing, mine the coin like everyone else and then rely on donations from the community to support himself. If he doesn't get enough donations he stops working on the coin and the coin dies. Now unless he is earning an income outside of the project this is a recipe for bankruptcy and homelessness. Mining pools take 1-3% of the total coins mined then dump them into the market to support other coins - ultimately turning into a large multi-pool. These pools dont give a shit about the coin just turning them into bitcoins when they could instead be donating to help the coin's original developers out. Why is it OK for mining pools to take 1-3% of the coins mined and not OK for the original developer to take a pre-mine to support the actual progression of the coin? It doesn't really make much sense. If anyone is going to want a coin to succeed it would be the original developer. Yes, there are cases of scams where developers pump and dump but I'm saying in a scenario where its a legitimate project. I think the correct solution is developer vesting similar to founder's vesting. A developer take a % of the coins mined over time. This gives him an incentive to keep working on the project otherwise it dies and he doesn't get his full share; Moreover, it prevents him from dumping his coins onto the market. Its a guaranteed source of coins for him and he doesn't need to rely on donations to keep the project going. |
|
|
|
|
IloveAnonCoin (OP)
|
|
June 27, 2014, 04:02:37 AM |
|
THE FACTS ABOUT DARK COIN
1. released without windows QT so that only dev and pals could mine it.
2. Instamined harder than any other coin out there 12.5% of the current minting was mined in the first day
3. Later they decided to cut the minting by 75% to turn their 12.5% instamine with no windows QT into 50% instamine in 24hours - nice hey
yes that is correct they mined 50% of all the coins available at this time by themselves in the first 24 hours whilst windows users could not mine.
That is the facts.... doesn't matter what else they say... nothing can change what they have done.
Once zero coin, or bytecoin with a decent wallet it released or another darkcoin clone is released.... dark coin will sink like a stone.
Every time they try to spam their coin just post this to remind them of the facts about their coin.
This whole pre-mine instamine is starting to get old now. I don't care if 100% of the coin is owned by 1 developer. If the product is great, is innovative and has useful features its worth what i'm willing to pay for it. Its like saying I should share my wealth of my own business with random people, because its the right thing to do. IF, which it was NOT 50% instamined, as I was one of the first initial core to discover DarkCoin, I knew right off the bat that this coin was going somewhere...I spent 10's of thousands of dollars on mining servers from microsoft and amazon to mine DRK coin...I took a huge gamble and it paid off...then there should be reward for that. At the writing of your message there was barely 4 million coins minted, of a possible 20+ million. Thats NOT 50% instamined...what about the other 16+million coins yet to be mined? Sometime, it's hard to tell people the truth. I started mining DRK the moment after it was released. I rented a shitload of VPSs and amazon instances as well. I was at the top of all the mining charts on the pools I was using. I've since got out of the DRK scene but yeah when the coin launched I was getting a bunch per day. I offloaded my DRK into the market in small increments around the end of April. I don't know Evan personally I just saw his post and was looking for something new to mine after the Stablecoin developer went MIA. Anyways I have been invested into anon focused coins since the release of anoncoin. I don't really think that its a conspiracy tbh its just how this market works. Something looks appealing and then you mine the shit out of it. I did the same thing with Anoncoin. There is truth for ya. If you want a conspiracy try to connect the disappearance of Artos (Lead Stablecoin Dev) with the appearance of Evan Dufffield (Lead Darkcoin Dev). The two coins share the same design principals (Closed Source Mixer) and were abandoned/launched around the same timeframe. If you can get proof of that then you will have something on your hands BTW - Satoshi owns 1.5 million Bitcoins. So, what's you said is instamine 2 million coins by devs is the right thing to do because Satoshi also did ? No. I'm saying I had more hashing power pointed at the pools than they did and I'm not on their team. Look, pre-mine is a sensitive subject when it comes to the coins development but tbh Satoshi set the precedent in that regard. I personally look at it like this. If a developer is working on a coin instead of working a job then his only source of income is the project he is working on. It's not 100% that the coin is going to make him any money. The general opinion is that a developer needs to work for free on the coin he is developing, mine the coin like everyone else and then rely on donations from the community to support himself. If he doesn't get enough donations he stops working on the coin and the coin dies. Now unless he is earning an income outside of the project this is a recipe for bankruptcy and homelessness. Mining pools take 1-3% of the total coins mined then dump them into the market to support other coins - ultimately turning into a large multi-pool. These pools dont give a shit about the coin just turning them into bitcoins when they could instead be donating to help the coin's original developers out. Why is it OK for mining pool to take 1-3% of the coins mined and not OK for the original developer to take a pre-mine to support the actual progression of the coin? It doesn't really make much sense. If anyone is going to want a coin to succeed it would be the original developer. Yes, there are cases of scams where developers pump and dump but I'm saying in a scenario where its a legitimate project. I think the correct solution is developer vesting similar to founder's vesting. A developer take a % of the coins mined over time. This gives him an incentive to keep working on the project otherwise it dies and he doesn't get his full share; Moreover, prevents him from dumping his coins onto the market. Its a guaranteed source of coins for him and he doesn't need to rely on donations to keep the project going. I never have problem with premined coins if devs said they want to do premine for what they do. BUT, in this case, he said NO PREMINED. "Release date: 11PM EST, 18th January 2014 / No premine " |
|
|
|
|
|
Coolstoryteller
|
|
June 27, 2014, 04:07:42 AM |
|
THE FACTS ABOUT DARK COIN
1. released without windows QT so that only dev and pals could mine it.
2. Instamined harder than any other coin out there 12.5% of the current minting was mined in the first day
3. Later they decided to cut the minting by 75% to turn their 12.5% instamine with no windows QT into 50% instamine in 24hours - nice hey
yes that is correct they mined 50% of all the coins available at this time by themselves in the first 24 hours whilst windows users could not mine.
That is the facts.... doesn't matter what else they say... nothing can change what they have done.
Once zero coin, or bytecoin with a decent wallet it released or another darkcoin clone is released.... dark coin will sink like a stone.
Every time they try to spam their coin just post this to remind them of the facts about their coin.
This whole pre-mine instamine is starting to get old now. I don't care if 100% of the coin is owned by 1 developer. If the product is great, is innovative and has useful features its worth what i'm willing to pay for it. Its like saying I should share my wealth of my own business with random people, because its the right thing to do. IF, which it was NOT 50% instamined, as I was one of the first initial core to discover DarkCoin, I knew right off the bat that this coin was going somewhere...I spent 10's of thousands of dollars on mining servers from microsoft and amazon to mine DRK coin...I took a huge gamble and it paid off...then there should be reward for that. At the writing of your message there was barely 4 million coins minted, of a possible 20+ million. Thats NOT 50% instamined...what about the other 16+million coins yet to be mined? Sometime, it's hard to tell people the truth. I started mining DRK the moment after it was released. I rented a shitload of VPSs and amazon instances as well. I was at the top of all the mining charts on the pools I was using. I've since got out of the DRK scene but yeah when the coin launched I was getting a bunch per day. I offloaded my DRK into the market in small increments around the end of April. I don't know Evan personally I just saw his post and was looking for something new to mine after the Stablecoin developer went MIA. Anyways I have been invested into anon focused coins since the release of anoncoin. I don't really think that its a conspiracy tbh its just how this market works. Something looks appealing and then you mine the shit out of it. I did the same thing with Anoncoin. There is truth for ya. If you want a conspiracy try to connect the disappearance of Artos (Lead Stablecoin Dev) with the appearance of Evan Dufffield (Lead Darkcoin Dev). The two coins share the same design principals (Closed Source Mixer) and were abandoned/launched around the same timeframe. If you can get proof of that then you will have something on your hands BTW - Satoshi owns 1.5 million Bitcoins. So, what's you said is instamine 2 million coins by devs is the right thing to do because Satoshi also did ? No. I'm saying I had more hashing power pointed at the pools than they did and I'm not on their team. Look, pre-mine is a sensitive subject when it comes to the coins development but tbh Satoshi set the precedent in that regard. I personally look at it like this. If a developer is working on a coin instead of working a job then his only source of income is the project he is working on. It's not 100% that the coin is going to make him any money. The general opinion is that a developer needs to work for free on the coin he is developing, mine the coin like everyone else and then rely on donations from the community to support himself. If he doesn't get enough donations he stops working on the coin and the coin dies. Now unless he is earning an income outside of the project this is a recipe for bankruptcy and homelessness. Mining pools take 1-3% of the total coins mined then dump them into the market to support other coins - ultimately turning into a large multi-pool. These pools dont give a shit about the coin just turning them into bitcoins when they could instead be donating to help the coin's original developers out. Why is it OK for mining pool to take 1-3% of the coins mined and not OK for the original developer to take a pre-mine to support the actual progression of the coin? It doesn't really make much sense. If anyone is going to want a coin to succeed it would be the original developer. Yes, there are cases of scams where developers pump and dump but I'm saying in a scenario where its a legitimate project. I think the correct solution is developer vesting similar to founder's vesting. A developer take a % of the coins mined over time. This gives him an incentive to keep working on the project otherwise it dies and he doesn't get his full share; Moreover, prevents him from dumping his coins onto the market. Its a guaranteed source of coins for him and he doesn't need to rely on donations to keep the project going. I never have problem with premined coins if devs said they want to do premine for what they do. BUT, in this case, he said NO PREMINED. Ah ok. I never got the feeling that I was being scammed by the coin though. You gotta remember something they took a risk renting those instances and VPSs just like everyone else. It's not 100% that the coin is going to be worth anything. I think you should focus your energy on the relationship between Artos and Evan if there is any - then you'll have a real conspiracy on your hands |
|
|
|
|
IloveAnonCoin (OP)
|
|
June 27, 2014, 04:12:49 AM |
|
THE FACTS ABOUT DARK COIN
1. released without windows QT so that only dev and pals could mine it.
2. Instamined harder than any other coin out there 12.5% of the current minting was mined in the first day
3. Later they decided to cut the minting by 75% to turn their 12.5% instamine with no windows QT into 50% instamine in 24hours - nice hey
yes that is correct they mined 50% of all the coins available at this time by themselves in the first 24 hours whilst windows users could not mine.
That is the facts.... doesn't matter what else they say... nothing can change what they have done.
Once zero coin, or bytecoin with a decent wallet it released or another darkcoin clone is released.... dark coin will sink like a stone.
Every time they try to spam their coin just post this to remind them of the facts about their coin.
This whole pre-mine instamine is starting to get old now. I don't care if 100% of the coin is owned by 1 developer. If the product is great, is innovative and has useful features its worth what i'm willing to pay for it. Its like saying I should share my wealth of my own business with random people, because its the right thing to do. IF, which it was NOT 50% instamined, as I was one of the first initial core to discover DarkCoin, I knew right off the bat that this coin was going somewhere...I spent 10's of thousands of dollars on mining servers from microsoft and amazon to mine DRK coin...I took a huge gamble and it paid off...then there should be reward for that. At the writing of your message there was barely 4 million coins minted, of a possible 20+ million. Thats NOT 50% instamined...what about the other 16+million coins yet to be mined? Sometime, it's hard to tell people the truth. I started mining DRK the moment after it was released. I rented a shitload of VPSs and amazon instances as well. I was at the top of all the mining charts on the pools I was using. I've since got out of the DRK scene but yeah when the coin launched I was getting a bunch per day. I offloaded my DRK into the market in small increments around the end of April. I don't know Evan personally I just saw his post and was looking for something new to mine after the Stablecoin developer went MIA. Anyways I have been invested into anon focused coins since the release of anoncoin. I don't really think that its a conspiracy tbh its just how this market works. Something looks appealing and then you mine the shit out of it. I did the same thing with Anoncoin. There is truth for ya. If you want a conspiracy try to connect the disappearance of Artos (Lead Stablecoin Dev) with the appearance of Evan Dufffield (Lead Darkcoin Dev). The two coins share the same design principals (Closed Source Mixer) and were abandoned/launched around the same timeframe. If you can get proof of that then you will have something on your hands BTW - Satoshi owns 1.5 million Bitcoins. So, what's you said is instamine 2 million coins by devs is the right thing to do because Satoshi also did ? No. I'm saying I had more hashing power pointed at the pools than they did and I'm not on their team. Look, pre-mine is a sensitive subject when it comes to the coins development but tbh Satoshi set the precedent in that regard. I personally look at it like this. If a developer is working on a coin instead of working a job then his only source of income is the project he is working on. It's not 100% that the coin is going to make him any money. The general opinion is that a developer needs to work for free on the coin he is developing, mine the coin like everyone else and then rely on donations from the community to support himself. If he doesn't get enough donations he stops working on the coin and the coin dies. Now unless he is earning an income outside of the project this is a recipe for bankruptcy and homelessness. Mining pools take 1-3% of the total coins mined then dump them into the market to support other coins - ultimately turning into a large multi-pool. These pools dont give a shit about the coin just turning them into bitcoins when they could instead be donating to help the coin's original developers out. Why is it OK for mining pool to take 1-3% of the coins mined and not OK for the original developer to take a pre-mine to support the actual progression of the coin? It doesn't really make much sense. If anyone is going to want a coin to succeed it would be the original developer. Yes, there are cases of scams where developers pump and dump but I'm saying in a scenario where its a legitimate project. I think the correct solution is developer vesting similar to founder's vesting. A developer take a % of the coins mined over time. This gives him an incentive to keep working on the project otherwise it dies and he doesn't get his full share; Moreover, prevents him from dumping his coins onto the market. Its a guaranteed source of coins for him and he doesn't need to rely on donations to keep the project going. I never have problem with premined coins if devs said they want to do premine for what they do. BUT, in this case, he said NO PREMINED. Ah ok. I never got the feeling that I was being scammed by the coin though. You gotta remember something they took a risk renting those instances and VPSs just like everyone else. It's not 100% that the coin is going to be worth anything. I think you should focus your energy on the relationship between Artos and Evan if there is any - then you'll have a real conspiracy on your hands Thank you for your input, but I don't want to find out more than this, if you have information, please provide to me, I can create another topic. For me, only keeping telling the truth about Darkcoin instamine is enough to do. BTW, I know you may be Darkcoin supporter, but you are the good Darkcoin supporter who discuss base on truth rather than try to cover things. |
|
|
|
|
|
TsuyokuNaritai
|
|
June 27, 2014, 04:19:33 AM |
|
Your FAQ can write Dark is not instamined coin. BUT you know yourself.
As you can clearly see in the text you quoted, the FAQ doesn't say that. In fact, it states more than once that an instamine happened, and goes on to explain the details. Either you can't read for toffee or you're deliberately misrepresenting what the FAQ says and hoping the readers of the thread won't bother to read the facts for themselves. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman |
|
|
|
|
Coolstoryteller
|
|
June 27, 2014, 04:20:34 AM |
|
THE FACTS ABOUT DARK COIN
1. released without windows QT so that only dev and pals could mine it.
2. Instamined harder than any other coin out there 12.5% of the current minting was mined in the first day
3. Later they decided to cut the minting by 75% to turn their 12.5% instamine with no windows QT into 50% instamine in 24hours - nice hey
yes that is correct they mined 50% of all the coins available at this time by themselves in the first 24 hours whilst windows users could not mine.
That is the facts.... doesn't matter what else they say... nothing can change what they have done.
Once zero coin, or bytecoin with a decent wallet it released or another darkcoin clone is released.... dark coin will sink like a stone.
Every time they try to spam their coin just post this to remind them of the facts about their coin.
This whole pre-mine instamine is starting to get old now. I don't care if 100% of the coin is owned by 1 developer. If the product is great, is innovative and has useful features its worth what i'm willing to pay for it. Its like saying I should share my wealth of my own business with random people, because its the right thing to do. IF, which it was NOT 50% instamined, as I was one of the first initial core to discover DarkCoin, I knew right off the bat that this coin was going somewhere...I spent 10's of thousands of dollars on mining servers from microsoft and amazon to mine DRK coin...I took a huge gamble and it paid off...then there should be reward for that. At the writing of your message there was barely 4 million coins minted, of a possible 20+ million. Thats NOT 50% instamined...what about the other 16+million coins yet to be mined? Sometime, it's hard to tell people the truth. I started mining DRK the moment after it was released. I rented a shitload of VPSs and amazon instances as well. I was at the top of all the mining charts on the pools I was using. I've since got out of the DRK scene but yeah when the coin launched I was getting a bunch per day. I offloaded my DRK into the market in small increments around the end of April. I don't know Evan personally I just saw his post and was looking for something new to mine after the Stablecoin developer went MIA. Anyways I have been invested into anon focused coins since the release of anoncoin. I don't really think that its a conspiracy tbh its just how this market works. Something looks appealing and then you mine the shit out of it. I did the same thing with Anoncoin. There is truth for ya. If you want a conspiracy try to connect the disappearance of Artos (Lead Stablecoin Dev) with the appearance of Evan Dufffield (Lead Darkcoin Dev). The two coins share the same design principals (Closed Source Mixer) and were abandoned/launched around the same timeframe. If you can get proof of that then you will have something on your hands BTW - Satoshi owns 1.5 million Bitcoins. So, what's you said is instamine 2 million coins by devs is the right thing to do because Satoshi also did ? No. I'm saying I had more hashing power pointed at the pools than they did and I'm not on their team. Look, pre-mine is a sensitive subject when it comes to the coins development but tbh Satoshi set the precedent in that regard. I personally look at it like this. If a developer is working on a coin instead of working a job then his only source of income is the project he is working on. It's not 100% that the coin is going to make him any money. The general opinion is that a developer needs to work for free on the coin he is developing, mine the coin like everyone else and then rely on donations from the community to support himself. If he doesn't get enough donations he stops working on the coin and the coin dies. Now unless he is earning an income outside of the project this is a recipe for bankruptcy and homelessness. Mining pools take 1-3% of the total coins mined then dump them into the market to support other coins - ultimately turning into a large multi-pool. These pools dont give a shit about the coin just turning them into bitcoins when they could instead be donating to help the coin's original developers out. Why is it OK for mining pool to take 1-3% of the coins mined and not OK for the original developer to take a pre-mine to support the actual progression of the coin? It doesn't really make much sense. If anyone is going to want a coin to succeed it would be the original developer. Yes, there are cases of scams where developers pump and dump but I'm saying in a scenario where its a legitimate project. I think the correct solution is developer vesting similar to founder's vesting. A developer take a % of the coins mined over time. This gives him an incentive to keep working on the project otherwise it dies and he doesn't get his full share; Moreover, prevents him from dumping his coins onto the market. Its a guaranteed source of coins for him and he doesn't need to rely on donations to keep the project going. I never have problem with premined coins if devs said they want to do premine for what they do. BUT, in this case, he said NO PREMINED. Ah ok. I never got the feeling that I was being scammed by the coin though. You gotta remember something they took a risk renting those instances and VPSs just like everyone else. It's not 100% that the coin is going to be worth anything. I think you should focus your energy on the relationship between Artos and Evan if there is any - then you'll have a real conspiracy on your hands Thank you for your input, but I don't want to find out more than this, if you have information, please provide to me, I can create another topic. For me, only keeping telling the truth about Darkcoin instamine is enough to do. BTW, I know you may be Darkcoin supporter, but you are the good Darkcoin supporter who discuss base on truth rather than try to cover things. Thanks I actually don't own any anymore DRK though, I offloaded them over the last month. In my experience speaking with Evan he seemed like a nice guy so I can't really say anything bad about him. But yeah if there was a scam it went over my head lol. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
TsuyokuNaritai
|
|
June 27, 2014, 04:36:45 AM |
|
What? That text doesn't say Dark wasn't instamined, it just says the devs don't own those coins. Yes, I have read it the FAQ. It says in several places that there was an instamine, and explains the details. Trolls have been singing your tune and saying DRK was doomed to crash since it was under 10% of it's current price. Any argument against the rise of DRK that was being said at that time has now been proved wrong. Come up with new arguments or go home. |
|
|
|
Hippie Tech
aka Amenstop
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1624
Merit: 1001
All cryptos are FIAT digital currency. Do not use.
|
|
June 27, 2014, 04:40:22 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
IloveAnonCoin (OP)
|
|
June 27, 2014, 04:43:13 AM |
|
What? That text doesn't say Dark wasn't instamined, it just says the devs don't own those coins. Yes, I have read it the FAQ. It says in several places that there was an instamine, and explains the details. Trolls have been singing your tune and saying DRK was doomed to crash since it was under 10% of it's current price. Any argument against the rise of DRK that was being said at that time has now been proved wrong. Come up with new arguments or go home. Please stay with the topic "Dark instamine", do I need to argue with your about the price ? If so, I can create another topic to elaborate how Dark scam coin make the price up by changing total supply and block reward. |
|
|
|
|
|
illodin
|
|
June 27, 2014, 05:01:32 AM |
|
Tired of the FUD ? Read the FAQ : http://wiki.darkcoin.eu/wiki/FAQWas Darkcoin Instamined?I read someone who wrote that 50% of the coins in circulation are owned by the devsNo. This is a classic case of spreading FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) by supporters of other cryptocurrencies who perceive Darkcoin as a threat to the coin they support. The coin has been well distributed through exchanges since early February 2014 – almost 15-20 days after the coin's launch. One could buy as many cheap DRKs as they wanted, with prices of 0.0000x per DRK or 0.0001x per DRK. This can be verified by historic charts of c-cex.com and poloniex.com of early Feb 2014. These two exchanges were the first that adopted DRK. Huge buy orders of 20-30-50k DRKs were being filled by early miners who were dumping their coins for pennies, not really appreciating the coin they had in their possession due to the “abundant” way in which they mined it as people do not really appreciate what they are given in ample quantity. Miners who “instamined” large quantities never foresaw the huge price increase and as such sold over a million coins at prices from 0.0000x up to 0.002 – with the first large batch being sold after DRK hit the exchanges and the next large batches being sold from February 2014 to April 2014 @ 0.0015 BTC price levels. In fact, many coin holders were complaining* of all the “dumping” by those who held cheap coins from the start that kept the price at artificially low levels for 2 months straight. The dumping ended, due to tremendous market demand, when a “pump” was initiated by “whale” buyers that swallowed millions of USD (in DRKs), raising the price from 0.0012 to 0.017 within a few weeks. - During this dumping period there were certain individuals who spread FUD about how the coin will never rise in price due to the instaminers dumping continuously. These are typically the same people who are claiming that the 50% instamine distribution affects the coin distribution today. However it is impossible to simultaneously claim that the coins were being dumped and that the 50% instamine holds true today. It's either one or the other. Since the coins were being dumped, the 50% instamine distribution was gradually reduced with each dumping wave. Blockchain analysis indicates a well distributed coin, reflecting the fact that the dumped coins were evenly distributed through the market. Early distribution is not currently an issue as huge buyers have been reshuffling the "rich-list" in their favor, buying millions of dollars in Darkcoins during May 2014. Late distribution through aggressive buying is currently more of a concern than early distribution.
(Mar 29, 2014 by Evan Duffield) This is the story of how Darkcoin came about. Recently the community has grown a lot and many people here aren’t aware at all of the early history of the coin. I’m sure you’ll see from the full story that I would have done things much differently, but hindsight is always 20/20. So who am I and what do I offer? My name is Evan Duffield and I’ve been developing software since I was 15. I also have a history in finance and an interest in economics and machine learning. I’ve worked all over the space for PR firms, creating search engines and machine learning algorithms for financial modeling. I’ve have a rewarding career and consider myself lucky to have been a part of many great projects. Also, it’s worth noting when I worked at Hawk Financial Group I got my series 65 (a financial advisor license) and I’ve used that knowledge extensively for Darkcoin. The birth of Darkcoin I discovered Bitcoin in mid 2010 and was obsessed ever since. After a couple of years in 2012 I started really thinking about how to add anonymity to Bitcoin. I came up with maybe 10 ways of doing this, but I soon realized that Bitcoin would never add my code. The developers really want the core protocol to stay the same for the most part and everything else to be implemented on the top of it. This was the birth of the concept of Darkcoin. I implemented X11 in a weekend and found it worked pretty well and it would give a completely fair start to the currency. What I really was aiming for with X11 is a similar development curve where miners would fight to create small advantages much like the early start of Bitcoin. I think this a requirement to create a healthy ecosystem. Next I was thinking about changing the reward system. I thought it would be an interesting experiment to add more incentives to join mining early on, driving up the hashrate and protecting the network, that’s when I came up with 1111.0 / ((x+1.0)^2.0), which was the first formula for controlling rewards. Launch It was January 18, 2014 and I had everything ready or so I thought. I announced the launch of Darkcoin (XCoin at the time) on BitcoinTalk. We launched later and immediately got stuck on block 42, I was new to the Bitcoin codebase and wasn’t sure what I missed so I announced we’d relaunch later. When we relaunched we had a rush of miners join causing a huge spike of coin production without it being able to adjust the difficulty quick enough, we just ended up spilling out coins. Retargeting happened every 576 blocks and could only increase the difficulty by four times, so it took about six retargets to get to a difficulty that was near 2.5 minutes per block. Later on, after the difficulty evened out we realized that there was a serious problem with the block reward calculation. You can see people discussing the problems here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.120 I soon fixed this issue at block 4500, but none of us realized the amount of coins that had been issued at the time. At that point we didn’t even have a block explorer yet. Growth Right after block 4500 is when I started working on DarkSend. I was trying to create a proof-of-concept and eventually I succeeded, I posted about it and our coin started to become more popular by the day. This is when the coin became a serious project of mine. Later on we switched to 11111.0 / ((Difficulty+51.0)/6.0)^2), these formulas proved to be much more powerful incentives to drive up the difficulty than I thought they would. Soon after we switched to (2222222.0 / ((Difficulty+2600.0)/9.0)^2.0), targeting a difficulty of about 3400. In the end? Darkcoin started from a few months of me thinking about ways to create a better coin and a couple weekends of coding. It wasn’t till later that we got established and I really started taking this seriously. Anyone can compare our recent efforts to the sorted past and see things are going much smoother. No one really knew how much this would blow up (in a good way) and how popular it would be, otherwise I would have took my time in the beginning. Goals and the future of Darkcoin I don’t believe the origins of Darkcoin are too much to overcome, but investors and users are going to have to decide for themselves if they want to support the project. Recently I’ve shifted away from other projects to going full time on Darkcoin. I think with a full time developer and our solid community we’ll be able to make something great. It’s only been a couple months and we have a lot to show for it (X11, DGW and DarkSend Beta) and there is more in the works. This obviously didn’t go perfect but I think we have a really fantastic community and I see a really bright future for Darkcoin. Of course mudslinging is easier than innovation. So keep creating new accounts while the Darkcoin team is innovating. Have a good day ! /end thread - nice try fudsters haha Thanks for your input. |
|
|
|
|
|
illodin
|
|
June 27, 2014, 05:02:04 AM |
|
Masternode payments started yesterday, and I set up a few nodes and got $50 worth of coins a day. Not bad huh? How's this a scam if I get $50 a day??
|
|
|
|
|
|
IloveAnonCoin (OP)
|
|
June 27, 2014, 05:13:50 AM |
|
Masternode payments started yesterday, and I set up a few nodes and got $50 worth of coins a day. Not bad huh? How's this a scam if I get $50 a day??
  Not bad for instamine coin huh ? |
|
|
|
|
Hippie Tech
aka Amenstop
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1624
Merit: 1001
All cryptos are FIAT digital currency. Do not use.
|
|
June 27, 2014, 05:23:56 AM |
|
Masternode payments started yesterday, and I set up a few nodes and got $50 worth of coins a day. Not bad huh? How's this a scam if I get $50 a day??
Its your cut of the slaves' tax. They could easily afford to pay you double .. triple if the easymine was used. Or how about we vote for a hard fork that will eliminate the 500 coin blocks !   |
|
|
|
|
illodin
|
|
June 27, 2014, 05:25:25 AM |
|
Masternode payments started yesterday, and I set up a few nodes and got $50 worth of coins a day. Not bad huh? How's this a scam if I get $50 a day??
They could easily afford to pay you double .. triple if the easymine was used. It's currently at 20%, 30% or even 40% has been considered I've heard.  |
|
|
|
|
|
illodin
|
|
June 27, 2014, 05:26:24 AM |
|
Masternode payments started yesterday, and I set up a few nodes and got $50 worth of coins a day. Not bad huh? How's this a scam if I get $50 a day??
Not bad huh ? Not bad imo. I like it. |
|
|
|
|
|
IloveAnonCoin (OP)
|
|
June 27, 2014, 05:28:06 AM |
|
Masternode payments started yesterday, and I set up a few nodes and got $50 worth of coins a day. Not bad huh? How's this a scam if I get $50 a day??
Not bad huh ? Not bad imo. I like it. pathetic, for someone who knows there are instamine, but does nothing. |
|
|
|
|
|
illodin
|
|
June 27, 2014, 06:04:10 AM |
|
Does nothing? I mined in the beginning (and a bit later too), bought coins cheap, and now I'm running masternodes to support the network. I'm doing something, and getting paid nicely. |
|
|
|
|
|
IloveAnonCoin (OP)
|
|
June 27, 2014, 06:27:29 AM |
|
Does nothing? I mined in the beginning (and a bit later too), bought coins cheap, and now I'm running masternodes to support the network. I'm doing something, and getting paid nicely. Are you sure you mine at beginning ? |
|
|
|
|
|
