rpietila Altcoin Observer

[digitalindustry]

You know what - i nearly just purchased some MRO -


Why - ?

1 because it has an EQ reward -

2. its interesting an genuinely innovative -

3. obviously this dude thinks he run Bitcointalk and is interested in it.



you know what stopped me - ( i even went to poloniex)  ?

you guys aren't scammers -

- I know Taco isn't a scammer

- this dude doesn't seem like scammer

- the "government" will never support something with an EQ reward.

so you won't be able to hold the price up .

there is no Proof of Scam.

[1714804752]

1714804752

[digitalindustry]

I will buy the Scam version of MRO - that has an ASIC on it (that only two guys own) (or the Gov") that can ramp the price up and keep it there while selling compound negative interest to the semi retarded public.

i want to buy a sure thing like Dark.

i want the IPO MRO -

[elviselvis101]

I care 0 % about Wolong. Fuck him. I care about good innovative tech in coins or good coin/community management.

Agreed. The guy is an absolute cnut who really doesn't give a fuck about anyone. I almost lost 4 BTC because of his self-serving inbred recklessness when he decided to crash Pandacoin. As far as I'm concerned any coin he is supporting is inevitably jinxed by association.

Right, that name was not good hear in connection with that coin

Why not?  Wolong isn't the XC coin dev or something, he's just some guy that just started to buy XC yesterday to hedge in case it beats Darkcoin.  He was a big DRK bagholder so had to have a backup plan in case XC beats it.  Are you not a good enough trader to work around the Wolong factor?  People post noob tips all the time for trading like "work with the bots on the exchange, not against them".  Wolong is for all intents and purposes the same thing as a cryptsy bot.  If you know what the bots are going to do, make use of that info.

You are right, what I meant was only in the emotional sphere - I was even more new here when the panda thing happen and that was not a nice experience.
And I am still working on the trader thing

[AlexGR]

Why not?  Wolong isn't the XC coin dev or something, he's just some guy that just started to buy XC yesterday to hedge in case it beats Darkcoin.  He was a big DRK bagholder so had to have a backup plan in case XC beats it.  Are you not a good enough trader to work around the Wolong factor?  People post noob tips all the time for trading like "work with the bots on the exchange, not against them".  Wolong is for all intents and purposes the same thing as a cryptsy bot.  If you know what the bots are going to do, make use of that info.

I'm not following wolong since the doge & unobtainium days... where is he writing that stuff about drk and xc? I haven't seen something mentioned in either thread (and I read ~90-95% of the posts).

[elviselvis101]

I will buy the Scam version of MRO - that has an ASIC on it (that only two guys own) (or the Gov") that can ramp the price up and keep it there while selling compound negative interest to the semi retarded public.

i want to buy a sure thing like Dark.

i want the IPO MRO -

trying to understand - think its the second time I hear something about asic and only some owning it, could you elaborate on that ?

[Peter R]

so you won't be able to hold the price up .

there is no Proof of Scam.

I believe you are on to something here.  Proof-of-scam can actually be argued as a reason for making a speculative purchase in an alt-coin.  A speculator buys in just for the hype--he doesn't drink the "this-will-be-the-next-bitcoin" koolaid--and he plans to trade back into bitcoin before the bubble is over.  

If this theory turns out to be empirically true, I think it adds more evidence to the notion that all alt-coins will eventually die as the life-and-death cycle of altcoins becomes more clear.  According to your proof-of-scam theory, since the scamcoins have the greatest chance of being pumped (and later dumped), there is less interest in non-scamcoins because their is little incentive to pump them in the first place.  

Personally, I support the spin-off mechanism for launching new experimental alt-coins.  Bootstrapping the coin with a Blockchain-based initial coin distribution makes it more difficult to pump and dump, and automatically piggybacks all bitcoin holders to any real innovations in cryptocurrency.  Spin-offs allow for innovation without threatening the wealth encoded in the Blockchain Ledger   

[digitalindustry]

I will buy the Scam version of MRO - that has an ASIC on it (that only two guys own) (or the Gov") that can ramp the price up and keep it there while selling compound negative interest to the semi retarded public.

i want to buy a sure thing like Dark.

i want the IPO MRO -

trying to understand - think its the second time I hear something about asic and only some owning it, could you elaborate on that ?

it means you lose,  most of the time -

unless you can ID the PoS.

[digitalindustry]

I believe you are on to something here.  Proof-of-scam can actually be argued as a reason for making a speculative purchase in an alt-coin.  A speculator buys in just for the hype--he doesn't drink the "this-will-be-the-next-bitcoin" koolaid--and he plans to trade back into bitcoin before the bubble is over.  

If this theory turns out to be empirically true, I think it adds more evidence to the notion that all alt-coins will eventually die as the life-and-death cycle of altcoins becomes more clear.  According to your proof-of-scam theory, since the scamcoins have the greatest chance of being pumped (and later dumped), there is less interest in non-scamcoins because their is little incentive to pump them in the first place.  

indeed - i am onto something,  its a fact - however Quark is not a scam that posed for a while as a scam - i guess.

i'd buy MRO later after everyone has attacked it and beat it down.  ( as you the non-scammers won't be able to scam the price up )

Personally, I support the spin-off mechanism for launching new experimental alt-coins.  Bootstrapping the coin with a Blockchain-based initial coin distribution makes it more difficult to pump and dump, and automatically piggybacks all bitcoin holders to any real innovations in cryptocurrency.  Spin-offs allow for innovation without threatening the wealth encoded in the Blockchain Ledger   

^^
sounds shady I'm in !

; D

[r0ach]

Personally, I support the spin-off mechanism for launching new experimental alt-coins.  Bootstrapping the coin with a Blockchain-based initial coin distribution

Your one world currency, Bitcoin dictatorship model is not in the best interests of the public, traders, or virtually anyone except a small percent of Bitcoin holders, so there's little reason for anyone to support it.  All it does is reward dumb money investors.

[Its About Sharing]

Personally, I support the spin-off mechanism for launching new experimental alt-coins.  Bootstrapping the coin with a Blockchain-based initial coin distribution

Your one world currency, Bitcoin dictatorship model is not in the best interests of the public, traders, or virtually anyone except a small percent of Bitcoin holders, so there's little reason for anyone to support it.  All it does is reward dumb money investors.

No matter how strong bitcoin is, I think it is VERY dangerous to put all your eggs in one basket.
That said, I think side tree's are a great idea for Bitcoin, but should not be the only game in town.
The more decentralized the overall structure, the more powerful imo it will be.

I see a future where Crypo's can organically connect and mingle with one another, much like a side tree/chain anyway.


IAS

[MrBig]

What's your take on safecoin? I've been doing a lot of reading on it and I think it actually proposes some meaningful improvements over bitcoin with their proof-of-resource model. How well they can actually put it into practice though, is a totally different matter.

[Peter R]

Personally, I support the spin-off mechanism for launching new experimental alt-coins.  Bootstrapping the coin with a Blockchain-based initial coin distribution

Your one world currency, Bitcoin dictatorship model is not in the best interests of the public, traders, or virtually anyone except a small percent of Bitcoin holders, so there's little reason for anyone to support it.  All it does is reward dumb money investors.

The beauty of spin-offs is that they hardly require active support.  To kill a spin-off, bitcoin holders need to actively vote against it.  If they are impartial, they have no effect on the price.  Alt-coin are the opposite: they require people to actively vote for it.  I am looking forward to the launch of the first spin-off clone of an interesting alt.  It will be fascinating to watch the market caps of the clone vs the original.    

It is also important to note that the economic majority within the cryptocurrency community will naturally be impartial to spin-offs, since these individuals preserve their wealth whether the spin-off sinks or swims.  

The only argument I can see against spin-offs is that the distribution of wealth in bitcoin is somehow "unfair."  I don't think this view will garner much sympathy, however.    

[Peter R]

No matter how strong bitcoin is, I think it is VERY dangerous to put all your eggs in one basket.
That said, I think side tree's are a great idea for Bitcoin, but should not be the only game in town.
The more decentralized the overall structure, the more powerful imo it will be.

A spin-off is different than a side-chain or a tree-chain because the payment network for the spin-off is completely independent of bitcoin.  The spin-off pre-mine only preserves the distribution of wealth encoded in the Blockchain at a certain Block #.  The spin-off is bootstrapped such that bitcoin holders can claim their pre-mine from Block 0 by producing a signed message with their bitcoin private keys. Once the spin-off launches, it becomes entirely untethered from bitcoin, evolving as nature sees fit.  This adds redundancy without wealth redistribution. 

[the_darkness]

The only argument I can see against spin-offs is that the distribution of wealth in bitcoin is somehow "unfair."  I don't think this view will garner much sympathy, however.    

So you are saying that Bitcoin, a cryptocurrency whose users likely number in the hundreds of thousands at most, is the be-all and end-all determinant of how any future cyptocurrencies should be distributed? What would be the incentive for any new users who did not happen to hold Bitcoin?

[r0ach]

Personally, I support the spin-off mechanism for launching new experimental alt-coins.  Bootstrapping the coin with a Blockchain-based initial coin distribution

Your one world currency, Bitcoin dictatorship model is not in the best interests of the public, traders, or virtually anyone except a small percent of Bitcoin holders, so there's little reason for anyone to support it.  All it does is reward dumb money investors.

The beauty of spin-offs is that they hardly require active support.  To kill a spin-off, bitcoin holders need to actively vote against it.  If they are impartial, they have no effect on the price.  Alt-coin are the opposite: they require people to actively vote for it.  I am looking forward to the launch of the first spin-off clone of an interesting alt.  It will be fascinating to watch the market caps of the clone vs the original.    

It is also important to note that the economic majority within the cryptocurrency community will naturally be impartial to spin-offs, since these individuals preserve their wealth whether the spin-off sinks or swims.  

The only argument I can see against spin-offs is that the distribution of wealth in bitcoin is somehow "unfair."  I don't think this view will garner much sympathy, however.    

It doesn't have that big of a future.  If a developer wants fame or recognition, they will start their own coin rather than stay in BTC's shadow.  If a developer wants profit, they will start a coin, buy while it's low or have some kind of IPO or something, then build features to increase their worth.  It's not really something that interests traders as much either compared to the altcoin penny stock lotto.

[dewdeded]

r0ach: Do any of the XC privacy features actually work?

[dewdeded]

I'm not following wolong since the doge & unobtainium days... where is he writing that stuff about drk and xc? I haven't seen something mentioned in either thread (and I read ~90-95% of the posts).

All Wolong-quotes are from public and private Pump-and-Dump IRC channels on Freenode (IRC Network). Like #marketmakers or where ever the P-and-D crowd chills now.

Wolong has no forum accounts, website, twitter or facebook.

[ErisDiscordia]

so you won't be able to hold the price up .

there is no Proof of Scam.

I believe you are on to something here.  Proof-of-scam can actually be argued as a reason for making a speculative purchase in an alt-coin.  A speculator buys in just for the hype--he doesn't drink the "this-will-be-the-next-bitcoin" koolaid--and he plans to trade back into bitcoin before the bubble is over.  

If this theory turns out to be empirically true, I think it adds more evidence to the notion that all alt-coins will eventually die as the life-and-death cycle of altcoins becomes more clear.  According to your proof-of-scam theory, since the scamcoins have the greatest chance of being pumped (and later dumped), there is less interest in non-scamcoins because their is little incentive to pump them in the first place.  

Personally, I support the spin-off mechanism for launching new experimental alt-coins.  Bootstrapping the coin with a Blockchain-based initial coin distribution makes it more difficult to pump and dump, and automatically piggybacks all bitcoin holders to any real innovations in cryptocurrency.  Spin-offs allow for innovation without threatening the wealth encoded in the Blockchain Ledger   

I have been following your spin-off idea since its inception and I have to say it's a really interesting one and I would love to see it implemented, just to see what happens. Are there currently any plans for such an implementation? Unfortunately my coding knowledge is zero but I'm willing to support such an endeavour by donating BTC.

This then begs the question of which protocol would be a good candidate for the first try. I suppose it should be one which offers some features which are incompatible with Bitcoins core protocol and thus can't be implemented on the Bitcoin blockchain. This thread has made me painfully aware of how little I know about the alt-coin universe so I don't have any suggestions for likely candidates. Any ideas?

Also thanks Risto, for another quality thread, as usual.

[Its About Sharing]

No matter how strong bitcoin is, I think it is VERY dangerous to put all your eggs in one basket.
That said, I think side tree's are a great idea for Bitcoin, but should not be the only game in town.
The more decentralized the overall structure, the more powerful imo it will be.

A spin-off is different than a side-chain or a tree-chain because the payment network for the spin-off is completely independent of bitcoin.  The spin-off pre-mine only preserves the distribution of wealth encoded in the Blockchain at a certain Block #.  The spin-off is bootstrapped such that bitcoin holders can claim their pre-mine from Block 0 by producing a signed message with their bitcoin private keys. Once the spin-off launches, it becomes entirely untethered from bitcoin, evolving as nature sees fit.  This adds redundancy without wealth redistribution.  

Thanks for the clarification there Peter. I know I heard this mentioned before and I must have repeatedly misread things.  
This is a fascinating way of taking alternate coins forward for supporters of Bitcoin. It sounds a little bit like NXT or Ether in that if you own the tokens you have a stake in other entities created.
Are the tokens distributed based on your bitcoin holdings, such that you sign a message (where?) to receive the tokens? At least initially I take it.
Are there any active plans or threads regarding this? Thanks in advance Just saw the embedded link.

IAS

[Peter R]

The only argument I can see against spin-offs is that the distribution of wealth in bitcoin is somehow "unfair."  I don't think this view will garner much sympathy, however.    

So you are saying that Bitcoin, a cryptocurrency whose users likely number in the hundreds of thousands at most...

Are you saying that bitcoin's users likely number in the tens of thousands at worst then?  This sounds like hyperbole. 

...is the be-all and end-all determinant of how any future cyptocurrencies should be distributed?

I believe it is the method the market will select, regardless of my perception of fairness.  The more I study alt-coins, the less likely it seems to me that any open-source and decentralized crytpocurrency could out-compete bitcoin or a bitcoin spin-off.

What would be the incentive for any new users who did not happen to hold Bitcoin?

A very credible argument can be made that a new user benefits most strongly by joining the dominant network.   The largest network would tend to have the widest acceptance, greatest liquidity, largest market capitalization, and the strongest user base (allowing the new user to benefit as per Metcalfe's Law).  If bitcoin tends to appreciate on average at a faster rate than a basket of alt-coins, this only gives more reasons for new users to prefer bitcoin.