rpietila Altcoin Observer

[AnonyMint]

This is my farewell post.

So there is some risk with an anonymous developer, that is a constant.

As a technical experiment, that's fine.  For timing speculation, okay.  In the competition for the natural monopoly of private liquidity, 0.00001% more risk on one side than on the other pre-determines the outcome.

There is never going to be one anonymous developer who can manage to develop an entire ecosystem that can rival Bitcoin. No altcoin will rise if it isn't open sourced. Other developers will join a successful launch and whether they choose to be anonymous or not is irrelevant. Being open source means that everything is transparent and if the developers aren't doing the correct developments, then the community-at-large will veto them by forking the project.

Thus your evident illogical fear of the lone savant anonymous developer who launches an altcoin that kicks Monero ass is justified. The multiple meanings of the prior sentence are all intended.

Take an example of XMR. If David Latapie, fluffypony or any of the others was exposed as a scammer, I would race to the exits, and so would everybody. Why? Because they knew I would, and wanted to exit first. The value of the coin would be destroyed.

If this would not happen with BBR, well, it talks more about the great divide concerning what kind of people invest in that vs. in Monero, and to each his own...

If you think you need to know personally the developers in order to make a decision about investment, then maybe you will not be the first to exit, but rather the last to enter.

I don't have time to go searching to quote my upthread post where I wrote that you apparently think of venture capital as a "gentleman's club". Probing personality not how I evaluate talent, design, and results, i.e. I don't need to like someone in order to respect their work.

For example, James' writing style and design appear to me to be discombobulated thus I have judged his work, not his personality.

[1713874238]

1713874238

[1713874238]

1713874238

[dga]

Since you are in drawing curves, also draw one for the profitability of a normal XMR miner and a 100x XMR miner... yes, very fair and unsuspicious for everyone involved.

There was likely never a 100x advantage. The 100x was the maximum advantage dga reported from start to finish, but the public miner got faster as well over the same period of time.

Nevertheless you can actually compute the potential value of it by looking at the total number of coins produced during that period. That is a maximum, and not a very good estimate because there were certainly non-advantaged miners during that period. It still isn't much.

This is correct.  I don't think we ever had more than a 10x advantage over the public one.  Oftentimes less - it dropped within three weeks to something like 2-3x (guesstimating from memory)

[darkota]

Personally I love the fact that zoidberg chooses never to respond to allegations about his background in an eccentric genius sort of way, much to the chagrin of deceitful anonymous wannabe economists and PR reps of competing crypto currencies. I have also noticed that the coin mill guys never talk about BBR when they could have been easily pumping it, even if it was at their expense or only to rile and further their cause of stifling XMR.

David Latapie is not a scammer, but I wouldn't trust him with $5 or to understand bubble sort.
fluffypony sells mining rigs.
othe is a failed investor of some wannabe asic resistant coin.
eizh - he is a good guy. I will not attack him but even he knows he is a namesake and might not have known what he got into.
noodledoodle was decrippling MRO slow hash and has some knowledge of miners.
smooth - most disappointing to see how he has turned out in last 2 months. Maybe plays with some bias but I understand. Has limited knowledge of coding.

tacotime - only big exception and needs to be respected.


That team doesn't hold a candle to what zoidberg has achieved and how his work is now resonating throughout the world of crypto currencies. I don't know who he is. I don't give a flying fuck who he is.


To those cribbing about BBR, it is open source. If you are competent enough to enhance the code and submit a PR, let us see it. If zoidberg refuses to merge it despite your display of excellence, it will be time to dump BBR. Until then hug your confirmation biases real tight.

I renounce personal attacks and baseless FUD.

But you should realize that is why drawingthemoon was created... because this type of stuff was all too present in Monero's community.

Well I appreciate your position.  But whoever drawingthemoon (lewis?) is he is damaging the BBR brand and driving away people who are honestly interested in the coin.  I am not rpietilla or aminorex.  I have respect for those guys but I don't care whether or not they endorse BBR.  I have considered it to be a good sister investment and/or hedge.

Some of the CN stuff revealed by rethink-your-strategy and its possible relation to BBR (not saying anything one way or the other) shook me some, and when it began to rise in price, influenced by some of that info (read: some fear), I sold off my coins for a nice profit.  It kept going up and I made some lucky trades in and out of the swings (I'd have made 2x as much by just holding and selling around 10xxxx admittedly, but profit is profit).  Having rethought my position on the coin I have reestablished a position.  For a moment I held equal numbers of it and XMR, but the constant bickering and trolling has just put such a bad taste in my mouth that I am more comfortable with a hedge position for now (~10% of XMR holding size).  It just makes me feel like there is something dirty going on somewhere and I feel safer with XMR than BBR because of it.

That's honestly who I am, and what I have done BBR trading wise.  I am being honest and transparent.

I think drawing the moon is a fucking moron, an embarrassment to this community, and people like him posting here and in the XMR thread make BBR look bad.  I say this fully knowing one reason I feel this way is he is attacking ME PERSONALLY for some reason, and I am not even claiming XMR does not also have trolls and idiots involved in their community.

Take it for what it's worth.

I am unwatching this thread, and will resist posting here. So I guess drawinghtemoon gets his wish?  Fucking retarded cabbage of a child.  It irritates me he was successful at getting under my skin.  

I will most likely continue to hold some BBR, and I honestly with the project the best of luck.

[drawingthesun]

This is my farewell post.

Take care Anonymint.

[visual111]

This is my farewell post.

keep your website up please! its an interesting perspective

[cAPSLOCK]

Anonymint is one of a kind.  In so many ways.

God bless.

[NASdaq]

Anonymint is one of a kind.  In so many ways.

God bless.

Smart guy, probably could benefit from getting laid a bit more. Hope he comes back!

[sdersdf2]

To get a sense of whether SuperNet ICO is worth investing in, I've done a cursory search on Google for some of jl777's often-mentioned assets, including

PrivateBet: https://nxtforum.org/nxtventures/privatebet-fully-decentralized-peer-to-peer-betting/
multigateway: http://multigateway.org/    https://nxtforum.org/multigateway-jl777/mgw-assets-withdrawals-history/msg97324/#msg97324
InstantDEX: http://instantdex.org/wip/


to get a sense of his past performance prior to BTCD and the value of these assets he frequently mentions.

I cant seem to find much about any of this stuff on the web, including the NXT Forum.

Basic question is: exactly what has jl777 done - as in completed - besides his masterful stoking of BTCD's massive price rise?

At the very least, the question is whether this guy is spread thin and has fully finished anything he's started -- anything that stands as a significant innovation that's widely used? Assets that have value beyond their current market prices?

This thread seems more thoughtful, informed, level-headed and analytical than most, so I ask the question here.

[AlexGR]

Hmm... that was interesting (as predicted / discussed earlier):

After careful deliberation, we have decided to not participate in the SuperNet ICO. I understand that a large community is excited about SuperNet, and since we were initially announced as the ICO host, I wanted to take a moment to explain how we came to arrive at this decision.
 
For the past couple of days, we’ve been in discussions with our attorneys about hosting the SuperNet ICO. As several community members pointed out in this very thread, the sale of SuperNet tokens could be interpreted as the sale of unregistered securities. Our attorneys came to the same conclusion and have since advised us against taking part in the SuperNet ICO for this reason.
 
Further, one of our ICO requirements is identity verification (https://www.poloniex.com/icoRequirements); this requirement exists to protect investors and to lend credibility to the ICO. Despite several attempts to convince James the importance of revealing his identity, we were ultimately unable to reach an agreement that satisfied both parties.
 
We needed time for due diligence, to carefully assess the legal implications of taking part in SuperNet, and also the time to set up our backend systems to support it. James was very eager to get this going, however, so he chose to go with another host before we could communicate to him our findings and final decision.
 
We have since communicated with James, and we wish him the best of luck.

[sdersdf2]

Hmm... that was interesting (as predicted / discussed earlier):

After careful deliberation, we have decided to not participate in the SuperNet ICO. I understand that a large community is excited about SuperNet, and since we were initially announced as the ICO host, I wanted to take a moment to explain how we came to arrive at this decision.
 
For the past couple of days, we’ve been in discussions with our attorneys about hosting the SuperNet ICO. As several community members pointed out in this very thread, the sale of SuperNet tokens could be interpreted as the sale of unregistered securities. Our attorneys came to the same conclusion and have since advised us against taking part in the SuperNet ICO for this reason.
 
Further, one of our ICO requirements is identity verification (https://www.poloniex.com/icoRequirements); this requirement exists to protect investors and to lend credibility to the ICO. Despite several attempts to convince James the importance of revealing his identity, we were ultimately unable to reach an agreement that satisfied both parties.
 
We needed time for due diligence, to carefully assess the legal implications of taking part in SuperNet, and also the time to set up our backend systems to support it. James was very eager to get this going, however, so he chose to go with another host before we could communicate to him our findings and final decision.
 
We have since communicated with James, and we wish him the best of luck.

Bigger concern for me was the unwillingness to agree to POD, the question of whether this guy has stretched himself too thin and the lack of substance I'm finding (so far, early in research stage) on what he's actually completed/accomplished of value (beyond stoking market price rallies on BTCD and other assets).

[visual111]

To get a sense of whether SuperNet ICO is worth investing in, I've done a cursory search on Google for some of jl777's often-mentioned assets, including

PrivateBet: https://nxtforum.org/nxtventures/privatebet-fully-decentralized-peer-to-peer-betting/
multigateway: http://multigateway.org/    https://nxtforum.org/multigateway-jl777/mgw-assets-withdrawals-history/msg97324/#msg97324
InstantDEX: http://instantdex.org/wip/


to get a sense of his past performance prior to BTCD and the value of these assets he frequently mentions.

I cant seem to find much about any of this stuff on the web, including the NXT Forum.

Basic question is: exactly what has jl777 done - as in completed - besides his masterful stoking of BTCD's massive price rise?

At the very least, the question is whether this guy is spread thin and has fully finished anything he's started -- anything that stands as a significant innovation that's widely used? Assets that have value beyond their current market prices?

This thread seems more thoughtful, informed, level-headed and analytical than most, so I ask the question here.

he has completed Multigateway (MGW), a feature in the NXT platform


we will see what happens in the next month. people will either profit massively or lose everything. stay tuned...Teleport *should* be out soon


as for Supernet ICO...i am waiting. might throw in a BTC for fun, but it is a complete mess right now...

[dEBRUYNE]

Hmm... that was interesting (as predicted / discussed earlier):

After careful deliberation, we have decided to not participate in the SuperNet ICO. I understand that a large community is excited about SuperNet, and since we were initially announced as the ICO host, I wanted to take a moment to explain how we came to arrive at this decision.
 
For the past couple of days, we’ve been in discussions with our attorneys about hosting the SuperNet ICO. As several community members pointed out in this very thread, the sale of SuperNet tokens could be interpreted as the sale of unregistered securities. Our attorneys came to the same conclusion and have since advised us against taking part in the SuperNet ICO for this reason.
 
Further, one of our ICO requirements is identity verification (https://www.poloniex.com/icoRequirements); this requirement exists to protect investors and to lend credibility to the ICO. Despite several attempts to convince James the importance of revealing his identity, we were ultimately unable to reach an agreement that satisfied both parties.
 
We needed time for due diligence, to carefully assess the legal implications of taking part in SuperNet, and also the time to set up our backend systems to support it. James was very eager to get this going, however, so he chose to go with another host before we could communicate to him our findings and final decision.
 
We have since communicated with James, and we wish him the best of luck.

This worries me more. If he wanted to set up something legitimate, why doesn't he want to reveal his identity? Personally if I invested in this I would be more confident and less worried if I knew the identity of the man who set it up.

[JorgeStolfi]

Further, one of our ICO requirements is identity verification (https://www.poloniex.com/icoRequirements); this requirement exists to protect investors and to lend credibility to the ICO. Despite several attempts to convince James the importance of revealing his identity, we were ultimately unable to reach an agreement that satisfied both parties.

In a commercial exchange, the party that delivers first has the right to know the identity and past history of the other party.  If someone asks you to pay upfront but refuses to identify himself, you should assume he is a scammer, and not have any business with him. 

[visual111]

Hmm... that was interesting (as predicted / discussed earlier):

After careful deliberation, we have decided to not participate in the SuperNet ICO. I understand that a large community is excited about SuperNet, and since we were initially announced as the ICO host, I wanted to take a moment to explain how we came to arrive at this decision.
 
For the past couple of days, we’ve been in discussions with our attorneys about hosting the SuperNet ICO. As several community members pointed out in this very thread, the sale of SuperNet tokens could be interpreted as the sale of unregistered securities. Our attorneys came to the same conclusion and have since advised us against taking part in the SuperNet ICO for this reason.
 
Further, one of our ICO requirements is identity verification (https://www.poloniex.com/icoRequirements); this requirement exists to protect investors and to lend credibility to the ICO. Despite several attempts to convince James the importance of revealing his identity, we were ultimately unable to reach an agreement that satisfied both parties.
 
We needed time for due diligence, to carefully assess the legal implications of taking part in SuperNet, and also the time to set up our backend systems to support it. James was very eager to get this going, however, so he chose to go with another host before we could communicate to him our findings and final decision.
 
We have since communicated with James, and we wish him the best of luck.

This worries me more. If he wanted to set up something legitimate, why doesn't he want to reveal his identity? Personally if I invested in this I would be more confident and less worried if I knew the identity of the man who set it up.

I believe he is worried about personal safety. I don't know what his plans are for crypto, but he has expressed a distrust for the powers that be... understandably so. we are not talking about opening a supermarket chain here, but rather revamping the financial industry. some may not like this


just a perspective...not right nor wrong

[NewLiberty]

You should realize that some of the XMR holders are into anonymity before XMR or BCN even appeared on the scene

Your claim is too small. 
Some were into anonymity decades before Bitcoin appeared on the scene.

[rpietila]

Further, one of our ICO requirements is identity verification (https://www.poloniex.com/icoRequirements); this requirement exists to protect investors and to lend credibility to the ICO. Despite several attempts to convince James the importance of revealing his identity, we were ultimately unable to reach an agreement that satisfied both parties.

In a commercial exchange, the party that delivers first has the right to know the identity and past history of the other party.  If someone asks you to pay upfront but refuses to identify himself, you should assume he is a scammer, and not have any business with him. 

To be fair, James understands this and has contacted reputable, public, community members as regards escrowing the whole thing.

[visual111]

~980 BTC sold in the first 70 minutes of Supernet ICO on BTer. Not including NXT Asset Exchange volume

[klee]

Further, one of our ICO requirements is identity verification (https://www.poloniex.com/icoRequirements); this requirement exists to protect investors and to lend credibility to the ICO. Despite several attempts to convince James the importance of revealing his identity, we were ultimately unable to reach an agreement that satisfied both parties.

In a commercial exchange, the party that delivers first has the right to know the identity and past history of the other party.  If someone asks you to pay upfront but refuses to identify himself, you should assume he is a scammer, and not have any business with him. 

To be fair, James understands this and has contacted reputable, public, community members as regards escrowing the whole thing.

Will you buy?

[darkota]

~980 BTC sold in the first 70 minutes of Supernet ICO on BTer. Not including NXT Asset Exchange volume

Busoni is raking in so much cash from trading/escrow fees lol

[NewLiberty]

Further, one of our ICO requirements is identity verification (https://www.poloniex.com/icoRequirements); this requirement exists to protect investors and to lend credibility to the ICO. Despite several attempts to convince James the importance of revealing his identity, we were ultimately unable to reach an agreement that satisfied both parties.

In a commercial exchange, the party that delivers first has the right to know the identity and past history of the other party.  If someone asks you to pay upfront but refuses to identify himself, you should assume he is a scammer, and not have any business with him. 

You are confusing "rights" with "right to negotiate".  Either side can say no for many reasons.