The Cryptocurrency Challenge to the brightest crypto minds * Updated

[digitalindustry]

The Great Cryptocurrency challenge.

Updates Summary Here- :

* Well amazingly,  so far no one has contested the fact that Quark is exceptional, or in the fact that it is the only major crypto not subject to the whims of mining monopoly.

* Decentralized consensus suggests i'm "trolling" the truth, i'm fine with that, best to start a discussion with the truth on your side.

*It has been suggested that I'm trying to "Pump" Quark, lets just address that , if i didn't sell when it was at its recent peak why would i be trying a cheap pump now? some Crypto are worth holding and adding too Quark is one of them.

* On page 2 i explained why monopolists can't short Quark or drive the price down as one can not sell something they don't own, unlike Precious Metals where a lot of the market does not take possession of the physical,  you can take ownership of Quark in about 6 minute from anywhere in the world.

* On page 2 Also i discussed fear of an attack by Government, individuals or Bank agents such as in-q-tel etc.

Still no one has contested the exceptional design of Quark and i get the feeling that the topic is uncomfortable to some monopolists, my apology for that.


Lets think about the Gravity of these statements i'm making:

When adults come to the crypto market, institutional investors , and when the light bulb finally switches on for them , (see Peter Schiff's begrudging statements recently) they will primarily be precious metals investors, because of their strong links to Austrian economic principals.

These people are going to try to gain as much education as possible before committing to an investment, and in part i'm here and happy to help as the fundamentals are with us on this one.

So in educating themselves so they can forward on educate others, do you think they are going to want to worry about a vector like "what kid(s) own which monopoly on what hardware?"

Or do you think they will want to invest in something that sticks more closely to the principals of cryptocurrency that being the free market and sound economic models?

Who wants to invest in something that was monopoly mined by maybe 10 kids with a new piece of hardware ?  (or for that matter any monopoly with hardware government agencies included)

Quark is free from that system, it is distributed all except the small EQ reward, when a buyer buys its simple they know the only way it can go down is if a seller sells.

I like those fundamentals for a Crypto currency, thats called the opposite of what Ripple done, its simplicity and safety.

And just think i'm contesting Quark is the only major with these sound fundamentals, and no one is saying i'm wrong ?



------------------------------------------------------->



The challenge is as follows :

I'm asking the smartest crypto minds to undertake a discussion regarding the state of crypto currency monopoly though the ability to control mining and thus control difficulty and effectively control prices.


Furthermore I state that Quark a crypto currency alternative in the top 15 of market cap is one of,  if not the only currency that cannot be subject to mining or price control and manipulation.

Not to be understated I'm asking anyone to come here and prove me wrong.

I Welcome Gavin Anderson or Vitality or any developer from any alternative crypto that generally stays true to the bitcoin protocol and the original designs and intentions of the original designers.

It should be furthermore a simple task to prove me wrong.

If Quark is not one of the only crypto that is not subject to possible and actually probable gross manipulation though control of mining and control of difficulty, if Quark is not the exception.


It should be easy to prove me wrong here in front of our peers and recorded for history.

According to a "Nash" type equilibrium a set of players would not use more than 51% of mining control to "attack" or "double spend" but in a rather more logical manner the participants would collude to their general benefits.

Which is the apparent long term direction or attempt at long term direction of the "crypto" market .

Most other participants are followers that will then generally move with this trend set by the monopoly sector.



if I'm correct , based on simple free market principles what is the best investment ?

In an entity that broadly can't be manipulated as I'm suggesting is Quark , or an entity that is subject to ongoing manipulation through mining issuance?

With one investment the capital investors has to guess what the mining monopoly will do next because price is linked not to a free market structure but to a monopoly of mining capital.

The other investment is based on crypto fundamentals such as price community , activitie , development and future wider macro economics.

So again which is the safer investment?

Let my education on this matter begin.

[digitalindustry]

I will reserve this spot for crickets chirping or a tumble weed.

[digitalindustry]

I'm Asking Satoshi himself to contribute.

[BugSpirit]

In terms of market who controls mining controls the newly generated coins. And what about coins which are already in existence. If I am one of 2 richest litecoin adresses with ~10% of all litecoins in my wallet I'm able to set a price whatever I want from a price without my coins on market to almost zero without controling 50% or 75% of hashrate. THe same for Quark.
This actually happened in Quark since February. A bunch of richest addresses dumped 10M+ QRK and price plunged from 10k satoshis to 3500. If ti is not a price manipulation then I dunno what actually is.

[digitalindustry]

In terms of market who controls mining controls the newly generated coins. And what about coins which are already in existence. If I am one of 2 richest litecoin adresses with ~10% of all litecoins in my wallet I'm able to set a price whatever I want from a price without my coins on market to almost zero without controling 50% or 75% of hashrate. THe same for Quark.
This actually happened in Quark since February. A bunch of richest addresses dumped 10M+ QRK and price plunged from 10k satoshis to 3500. If ti is not a price manipulation then I dunno what actually is.

Thanks for being the first to contribute, and congratulations.

Incorrect , for every seller there has to be a buyer and every buyer a seller .

The only way anyone could price manipulate is by being able to Deny the market access to the entity.

For example, if I can control 70% of the mining I can deny access to the market and my group can prop up a certain target price then control the market accordingly.

In contrast it's a contradiction in terms to say you can sell an entity to control it.

The problem of course is as every who understands crypto knows it's the years distribution combined with the mining monopoly.

Quark achieved it's distribution in a free market manner which all here can contest to.

So other than the 1 unit EQ how can there be possible long term manipulation a sell is not manipulation people can try to move the market but they only get so many shots at the game , as per free market .

[digitalindustry]

Quark has no mining control you agree ?

Then moving forward it has no chance that any one entity can move the market.

[iGotAIDS]

Bottom line is QRK is a mined-out bagholder coin, period. A few people control the majority of the coins and a few other vocal people shill for it. Yes, its got services better than any other coin, yes its got Bill Still to make videos and you to blow your trumpet about it, yes its in a lameass video game redux--but the fact remains, its not really that special overall.

Whatever happened to your other 'amazing,' 'earth-shattering,' project, Nibble (or is it Nybble?)? Or the re-name on CAPs, those really went somewhere, huh? You're great at the hype and pump and dump, but that's about it. QRK has some traction, stop shilling and let it build. Get it back up to 11-12K satoshi (where a lot of people bought in) and I'll think QRK is special again. Alas, you can't, and no one wants to buy your coins to make it so.

The only reason you're here shilling for QRK is because the audience here has BTC to spend. There's no real-world traction for it as evidence by the long trailing sell off happening.

[reRaise]

Bottom line is QRK is a mined-out bagholder coin, period. A few people control the majority of the coins and a few other vocal people shill for it. Yes, its got services better than any other coin, yes its got Bill Still to make videos and you to blow your trumpet about it, yes its in a lameass video game redux--but the fact remains, its not really that special overall.

Whatever happened to your other 'amazing,' 'earth-shattering,' project, Nibble (or is it Nybble?)? Or the re-name on CAPs, those really went somewhere, huh? You're great at the hype and pump and dump, but that's about it. QRK has some traction, stop shilling and let it build. Get it back up to 11-12K satoshi (where a lot of people bought in) and I'll think QRK is special again. Alas, you can't, and no one wants to buy your coins to make it so.

The only reason you're here shilling for QRK is because the audience here has BTC to spend. There's no real-world traction for it as evidence by the long trailing sell off happening.

This isn't a censorship forum anyone is free to make alt related Topics and by your logic 99% here would be a shill, also history shows traders don't give a crap how fair a crypto is (see drk), as long as it's building infrastructure. It's usually the miners whining they didn't get free money

[BugSpirit]

In terms of market who controls mining controls the newly generated coins. And what about coins which are already in existence. If I am one of 2 richest litecoin adresses with ~10% of all litecoins in my wallet I'm able to set a price whatever I want from a price without my coins on market to almost zero without controling 50% or 75% of hashrate. THe same for Quark.
This actually happened in Quark since February. A bunch of richest addresses dumped 10M+ QRK and price plunged from 10k satoshis to 3500. If ti is not a price manipulation then I dunno what actually is.

Thanks for being the first to contribute, and congratulations.

Incorrect , for every seller there has to be a buyer and every buyer a seller .

The only way anyone could price manipulate is by being able to Deny the market access to the entity.

For example, if I can control 70% of the mining I can deny access to the market and my group can prop up a certain target price then control the market accordingly.

In contrast it's a contradiction in terms to say you can sell an entity to control it.

The problem of course is as every who understands crypto knows it's the years distribution combined with the mining monopoly.

Quark achieved it's distribution in a free market manner which all here can contest to.

So other than the 1 unit EQ how can there be possible long term manipulation a sell is not manipulation people can try to move the market but they only get so many shots at the game , as per free market .

Well, I agree that to manipulate Quark one must use market methods (have more financial resourses) while in sha or scrypt coins manipulation theoretically could be done by some cartel of miners by non-market method.

Another argument. To have 75% scrypt hashrate one need to buy a ASICs from their manufacturers and that's a lot of money. To get 75% of QUark hashrate one need to just rent an ordinary CPU power, and that could be cheap. Having e.g. 100 BTC I can setup a pool where I will pay twice a market price for Quark hashes. Then I gather a thousand or so CPUs hashing under my control, make a 51% attack and totally reap Quark with market cap 50k bitcoins or so. And it's QUark distribution model which provide the coin with such a low hashrate.
Need to think about it... 

[Zer0Sum]

if I'm correct , based on simple free market principles what is the best investment ?

In an entity that broadly can't be manipulated as I'm suggesting is Quark , or an entity that is subject to ongoing manipulation through mining issuance?

QRK has a market cap of $4,300,000...
In corporate terms this is a rounding error...
Anyone with $100-200K can just totally play with QRK price.

The entire Crypto Universe Cap of $7 billion...
Would be similar to an NYSE midcap stock no one here has heard of like NLY or FRC...
About the size of the 200th largest bank in the world.

Both BTC and QRK are already out-dated technology and have no future...
A Gen 2.0 or 3.0 Alt will blow by BTC sooner than anyone imagines... 12-24 months.

[l3sny]

QRK is extremely fast and very very secure. It is the most convenient coin by far comparing to BTC or even LTC. The fact that so many coins are owned by 5-6 wallets is a kind of a problem, personally I do not understand why someone is keeping some 25 mln on one address. Maybe he has a hoarding syndrome

I like the idea of fast mining and small almost microscopic inflation. I would not judge the Shaq-Fu, I will not be playing probably however some people see big potential in this coin. And do not forget that the younger generation will be adopting QRK through this game. Actually I have no idea why there are so many QRK haters. Yes it would put mining to history books as it is just madness, it consumes massive amounts of electricity so as long as we do not have access to free energy mining is hmm.... ecologically disputable.

Either way I will keep my few Quarks long and I do not care that I paid much higher than 10-11k satoshis for them. QRK is the community of the people who are devoted to this crypto and their actions sooner or later will bring positive results.

And yes , I think the price just around $0.02 per coin or some 3500 satoshis is ridiculus !! but it is great opportunity. So for all those reasons i think that every prudent crypto investor should have a few QRK.

Keep calm and continue buying Quark!

[silvermetal]

QRK is extremely fast and very very secure. It is the most convenient coin by far comparing to BTC or even LTC. The fact that so many coins are owned by 5-6 wallets is a kind of a problem, personally I do not understand why someone is keeping some 25 mln on one address. Maybe he has a hoarding syndrome

I don't think that someone is keeping 25 mln QRK on one address. It has already been shown that the "big wallets" belong to different exchanges like btc38 or bter.

http://www.reddit.com/r/QuarkCoin/comments/25rt89/52_of_quarks_belong_to_only_25_addresses/

[Coinmama2014]

QRK is extremely fast and very very secure. It is the most convenient coin by far comparing to BTC or even LTC. The fact that so many coins are owned by 5-6 wallets is a kind of a problem, personally I do not understand why someone is keeping some 25 mln on one address. Maybe he has a hoarding syndrome

I don't think that someone is keeping 25 mln QRK on one address. It has already been shown that the "big wallets" belong to different exchanges like btc38.

http://www.reddit.com/r/QuarkCoin/comments/25rt89/52_of_quarks_belong_to_only_25_addresses/

I was just in the middle of saying that when you posted, so thank you and I second what you say!!

[l3sny]

edit:
A round 25 mln figure with just six inputs and one output ?
Well.... if that's the case it's even better

[hellscabane]

Incorrect , for every seller there has to be a buyer and every buyer a seller .

The only way anyone could price manipulate is by being able to Deny the market access to the entity.

Not if the buyer and seller is the same person. Expounding on BugSpirit's post, the person would also need to have a viable equivalent of funding on the opposite end of the market (i.e. buys). Providing enough funding would essentially create a pressure that is the equivalent of a sold collar. Of course though, depending on the market cap, this could easily grow to unrealistic values (but theoretically any coin, or stock for that, is susceptible to this).

[digitalindustry]

Bottom line is QRK is a mined-out bagholder coin, period. A few people control the majority of the coins and a few other vocal people shill for it. Yes, its got services better than any other coin, yes its got Bill Still to make videos and you to blow your trumpet about it, yes its in a lameass video game redux--but the fact remains, its not really that special overall.

Whatever happened to your other 'amazing,' 'earth-shattering,' project, Nibble (or is it Nybble?)? Or the re-name on CAPs, those really went somewhere, huh? You're great at the hype and pump and dump, but that's about it. QRK has some traction, stop shilling and let it build. Get it back up to 11-12K satoshi (where a lot of people bought in) and I'll think QRK is special again. Alas, you can't, and no one wants to buy your coins to make it so.

The only reason you're here shilling for QRK is because the audience here has BTC to spend. There's no real-world traction for it as evidence by the long trailing sell off happening.

Thanks for the comments but unfortunately you just confirm the free market aspects at play while not addressing the prevalent mining monopolies both actual and possible.

And yes it's a big difference, you can have a Trillion paper dollars but you can't sell something you don't own.thus is crypto.

As for the price being high and price movement , welcome to the free market .

Your comment affirms more than rejects my claims .

[digitalindustry]

In terms of market who controls mining controls the newly generated coins. And what about coins which are already in existence. If I am one of 2 richest litecoin adresses with ~10% of all litecoins in my wallet I'm able to set a price whatever I want from a price without my coins on market to almost zero without controling 50% or 75% of hashrate. THe same for Quark.
This actually happened in Quark since February. A bunch of richest addresses dumped 10M+ QRK and price plunged from 10k satoshis to 3500. If ti is not a price manipulation then I dunno what actually is.

Thanks for being the first to contribute, and congratulations.

Incorrect , for every seller there has to be a buyer and every buyer a seller .

The only way anyone could price manipulate is by being able to Deny the market access to the entity.

For example, if I can control 70% of the mining I can deny access to the market and my group can prop up a certain target price then control the market accordingly.

In contrast it's a contradiction in terms to say you can sell an entity to control it.

The problem of course is as every who understands crypto knows it's the years distribution combined with the mining monopoly.

Quark achieved it's distribution in a free market manner which all here can contest to.

So other than the 1 unit EQ how can there be possible long term manipulation a sell is not manipulation people can try to move the market but they only get so many shots at the game , as per free market .

Well, I agree that to manipulate Quark one must use market methods (have more financial resourses) while in sha or scrypt coins manipulation theoretically could be done by some cartel of miners by non-market method.

Another argument. To have 75% scrypt hashrate one need to buy a ASICs from their manufacturers and that's a lot of money. To get 75% of QUark hashrate one need to just rent an ordinary CPU power, and that could be cheap. Having e.g. 100 BTC I can setup a pool where I will pay twice a market price for Quark hashes. Then I gather a thousand or so CPUs hashing under my control, make a 51% attack and totally reap Quark with market cap 50k bitcoins or so. And it's QUark distribution model which provide the coin with such a low hashrate.
Need to think about it... 

Thanks for the contribution and think about this :


Quark is distributed.

Quark was distributed by cpu primarily possible some GPU went to zero upon which pure market forces took over.

One can mine 75% of the EQ reward but you can have literally all the fiat money on the earth but you can't mine s monopoly amount or control the price though mining.

If you want to move the market you have to first own Quark to sell it .

And that was the more pure original intention of crypto.

[digitalindustry]

if I'm correct , based on simple free market principles what is the best investment ?

In an entity that broadly can't be manipulated as I'm suggesting is Quark , or an entity that is subject to ongoing manipulation through mining issuance?

QRK has a market cap of $4,300,000...
In corporate terms this is a rounding error...
Anyone with $100-200K can just totally play with QRK price.

The entire Crypto Universe Cap of $7 billion...
Would be similar to an NYSE midcap stock no one here has heard of like NLY or FRC...
About the size of the 200th largest bank in the world.

Both BTC and QRK are already out-dated technology and have no future...
A Gen 2.0 or 3.0 Alt will blow by BTC sooner than anyone imagines... 12-24 months.

Ha we hear this argument all the time on crypto forums.

So much Trillions of fiat money etc , the problems of course with this argument is that we are not talking about fake Bank issued inflated money, we are talking about Crypto.

And you have to own Crypto to move it, or move the market.

One way Trillions of dollars of paper CAN have an impact is if it can be used in the paper accepted world to gain a monopoly on mining to then thus control a market , but Quark is outside that and thus not part of that control.

Which I can prove , hence this topic.

[l3sny]

It is a very important discussion. Especially now when the price of QRK is so low so it is available cheap for the masses

[Polycoin]

No Trolling:

This is such as a pathetic/lame attempt to gain interest for Quark.

That coin has been out forever, it's dead, it's not going anywhere...It offers absolutely nothing besides "ASIC Resistence"

Shit coins stay shit coins.

Polycoin is the one to rule them all.