[XC][XCurrency] Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat / Pos

[rdnkjdi]

Yes I am... By the way who are you?

He's a Monero pusher 

[Dungor]

I for one doesn't hope for XC being bought up. The current value for us bag-holders lies in the distribution. I'm under the assumption that the code being developed for XChat, XcNode, XCPlatform and so on all depend on the distributed nature of XCurrency. The code might be well distributed but the currency is only currently distributed among 5036 addresses. The Network effect  is what ensures us bag-holders against "a hostile take-over" scenario where a large corporation would buy the source code from Dan and his expertise.

 With larger adoption the added distribution would make the anonymity stronger and the XcNode network faster. Once you reach a critical mass a company would not be able to buy and recreate that. If they by then would like to use the XCPlatforms services they would have to buy an app on the Web 3.0 platform just like QiBuck did.

This comes back to whom is XC creating value for? it is not a simple business case. XC is both B2C and B2B, with different business cases. B2C XC provides XChat and hinted other social media features. in Web 2.0 B2C pays with their privacy that is then resold to the B2B customers. In XC's B2C business model customers could potentially have the service and their anonymity at the cost of helping spread the network as a XCNode when online, which if you look at Social Media apps now would be pretty much all the time. B2B would be hosting and advertisement on the platform.
I'm going on an repeating rant now of what I have written in earlier posts, but in short:

As a Bag-holder you don't wan't a large company to buy XC because they would not buy your coins, they would buy Dan, his team and the source code. Your coins hold 0 legal protection like a stock does, only critical mass adoption of the platform will protect your coins against this scenario if it presented itself.

[MemoryShock]

I remember about a month ago, I sold my XC (300 or so) to gamble on another coin so that I could purchase more XC.  It worked.  

It is mildly amusing to me that the coin I 'gambled' on was BitcoinDark.  Yeah...if I had just chilled I would have made over 10 BTC from .5 BTC...

While I kind of cringe at the amount of XC that would buy right now, I am not that worried.  REV 3 has been the goal all along.  Lots of big milestones ahead for this platform and an outstanding team to accomplish it.  It's a top 15 coin with a roadmap like no other...

[IMJim]

Before I'm accused of being a shill - I'm not in Monero or any anon coins.  I still think the winner hasn't shown up yet.

I find it curious that many people think there will be "one" winner in crypto.  I see a world coming with numerous crypto currencies serving different needs and uses.  I think several that are already here will be here for some time to come, XC of course being one of those.  I just can't see this all ending with just one currency!

You need to read this.  Most cryptogeeks don't understand currency.  

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2dfvoy/truth_you_dont_want_to_hear_bitcoin_price_matters/

I agree there is enough room for.

A - Store of value.
B - Smart Blockchain.
C - Anonymous Value Transfer.

It would be preferable if they did not compete and there were clear long term winners.  Hell I would prefer it was all wrapped into one coin.  Currency inherently does better when there is only one.  Not many.  People don't realize that "competition" in this area constantly steal wealth from the ecosystem as people lose it all and walk away.  I would rather a flat currency that works on adoption than this ...

The crypto scene is driven much more by people wanting to be the early adopters of the next bitcoin than revolutionizing technology or solving real world problems.  The issuance of XC is a prime example of that 

Call me ignorant but I think that Reddit post is bullshit!  I am DEFINITELY no expert when it comes to currencies but I don't think anyone could convince me at this point that there will only be "Bitcoin" in the crypto sphere.  I strongly believe there will be many, I guess time will tell:-)

[Abrupto]

Before I'm accused of being a shill - I'm not in Monero or any anon coins.  I still think the winner hasn't shown up yet.

I don't think you're a shill at all, I think you're asking some pretty tough questions that I have had myself. You appear to have an unbiased curiosity about several coins, evident by your most recent posting history. I also struggle with the currency vs corporation issue and personally don't think we can be both. We will just have to wait and see what Dan has in store for xcurrency.

[rdnkjdi]

Call me ignorant but I think that Reddit post is bullshit!  I am DEFINITELY no expert when it comes to currencies but I don't think anyone could convince me at this point that there will only be "Bitcoin" in the crypto sphere.  I strongly believe there will be many, I guess time will tell:-)

The problem here is world currencies ... are worth something because of nationalities / armies that define borders, GDP, and the money is worth something because it is backed by the entire nation. 

Bitcoin kinda falls in this role as internet money.  It's backed by "the internet"

In a constantly fluctuating environment where a different "currency" is literally winning every week.  And at any time the winning currency is open to takeover by superior technology / whatever the market wants.  At the same time - you are talking about basically robbing everybody's bank accounts who hold the existing "currency".  In other words - for a new one to thrive the old one has to die.  Every time one dies - you're killing bank accounts value to zero.

Bitcoin has largely staid the winner (this shows somewhat what the article was talking about.  Traditionally only one currency works out)

But litecoin might be a prime example.  Litecoin has majorly bled in favor of Darkcoin, BitSharesX, NXT, Auracoin, etc etc.  The anon money is really split now between people trying to ride the fads (above poster made money off of BTCD) and people who really believe in the technology they are backing (XC) and people who believe that consensus (fair distribution, PoW) wins (Monero).

Then there is DRK in there somewhere that had another jacked distribution model ... and it's actually still the on top anon coin.  But I think everybody knows it's dying.

[rdnkjdi]

Before I'm accused of being a shill - I'm not in Monero or any anon coins.  I still think the winner hasn't shown up yet.

I don't think you're a shill at all, I think you're asking some pretty tough questions that I have had myself. You appear to have an unbiased curiosity about several coins, evident by your most recent posting history. I also struggle with the currency vs corporation issue and personally don't think we can be both. We will just have to wait and see what Dan has in store for xcurrency.

Thank you

Exactly.  Corporation or currency?  A corporation needs a currency - so I guess you could argue the XCurrency is XC's currency side and everything else is the corporation (anon chat, tor stick, etc).  

But then the only value your corporation can bring to the table is inventing technology that will get other people to buy into your currency.  There can be many corporations because they thrive off of innovation and production.  Not consensus.  

Currency needs consensus.  Corporations do not.

[holyprofit]

and I'm not just picking on XC fwiw

I don't see why it always has to be the open source model - at the moment
it's important to build trust and confidence but ultimately there might be other models. If e.g. the XC infrastructure/code were bought
out by e.g. apple, for sure future developments would no longer be open source.
(Of course we'd all have to rely on the goodness of apple to preserve the trustless principle but that's a different question.)

And anyway first mover advantage is everything - delayed open source still keeps XC ahead of the pack.

Dude, you think the general public gives 2 shits about if something is open sourced or not? I will use the KFC analogy again, people dont care as long as its yummy... same with cryptos, they wont care as long as it "works" and is as easy as possible with all the features they want. Simple as that.

Yep - that's exactly what I was saying. Once the big corporations like google apple whoever get stuck in - and they will - you can kiss open source goodbye. There'll be
microsoftcoin, applecoin, googlecoin and linux-coin for the open source devotees.

[sidhujag]

and I'm not just picking on XC fwiw

I don't see why it always has to be the open source model - at the moment
it's important to build trust and confidence but ultimately there might be other models. If e.g. the XC infrastructure/code were bought
out by e.g. apple, for sure future developments would no longer be open source.
(Of course we'd all have to rely on the goodness of apple to preserve the trustless principle but that's a different question.)

And anyway first mover advantage is everything - delayed open source still keeps XC ahead of the pack.

Dude, you think the general public gives 2 shits about if something is open sourced or not? I will use the KFC analogy again, people dont care as long as its yummy... same with cryptos, they wont care as long as it "works" and is as easy as possible with all the features they want. Simple as that.

Yep - that's exactly what I was saying. Once the big corporations like google apple whoever get stuck in - and they will - you can kiss open source goodbye. There'll be
microsoftcoin, applecoin, googlecoin and linux-coin for the open source devotees.

Probably just devcoin which is dedicated to the open source movement.

[rdnkjdi]

and I'm not just picking on XC fwiw

I don't see why it always has to be the open source model - at the moment
it's important to build trust and confidence but ultimately there might be other models. If e.g. the XC infrastructure/code were bought
out by e.g. apple, for sure future developments would no longer be open source.
(Of course we'd all have to rely on the goodness of apple to preserve the trustless principle but that's a different question.)

And anyway first mover advantage is everything - delayed open source still keeps XC ahead of the pack.

Dude, you think the general public gives 2 shits about if something is open sourced or not? I will use the KFC analogy again, people dont care as long as its yummy... same with cryptos, they wont care as long as it "works" and is as easy as possible with all the features they want. Simple as that.

Yep - that's exactly what I was saying. Once the big corporations like google apple whoever get stuck in - and they will - you can kiss open source goodbye. There'll be
microsoftcoin, applecoin, googlecoin and linux-coin for the open source devotees.

If the PRIMARY function of the software is privacy and money transactions.  Then yes ... the general public (that gives two shits about internet money and/or privacy) will insist on open source for good reason.

To make sure it's really private.  To make sure it's really secure.

[tr8kr]

Something about open-source code

You know that the REV 1 of XC with some good code for anon tx is open source and some coin are using it with some tweak to claim that there are anon ?

Not bad for a cyber crypto funk wanabies corporation , you dont think so ?  

[BrewCrewFan]

and I'm not just picking on XC fwiw

I don't see why it always has to be the open source model - at the moment
it's important to build trust and confidence but ultimately there might be other models. If e.g. the XC infrastructure/code were bought
out by e.g. apple, for sure future developments would no longer be open source.
(Of course we'd all have to rely on the goodness of apple to preserve the trustless principle but that's a different question.)

And anyway first mover advantage is everything - delayed open source still keeps XC ahead of the pack.

Dude, you think the general public gives 2 shits about if something is open sourced or not? I will use the KFC analogy again, people dont care as long as its yummy... same with cryptos, they wont care as long as it "works" and is as easy as possible with all the features they want. Simple as that.

Yep - that's exactly what I was saying. Once the big corporations like google apple whoever get stuck in - and they will - you can kiss open source goodbye. There'll be
microsoftcoin, applecoin, googlecoin and linux-coin for the open source devotees.

Hehe... and apple will be over priced like all of their normal shit! Then we got to see applecoin forked every 3 months for something "new" making your old stuff worthless and force you to fork out a premmy price for the "new".

[BrewCrewFan]

Something about open-source code

You know that the REV 1 of XC with some good code for anon tx is open source and some coin are using it with some tweak to claim that there are anon ?

Not bad for a cyber crypto funk wanabies corporation , you dont think so ? 

That is why I for one, support keeping all the new code under lock and key because what your saying is exactly what will happen.... people forking and profiting massively ( see coin devs ).

See cryptos do not have copy right protection like everything else does... that is why drug companies can charge hefty prices on a new drug, because they know that no one can make a generic of it ( coins that try to copy the code of XC )

[Teka]

and I'm not just picking on XC fwiw

I don't see why it always has to be the open source model - at the moment
it's important to build trust and confidence but ultimately there might be other models. If e.g. the XC infrastructure/code were bought
out by e.g. apple, for sure future developments would no longer be open source.
(Of course we'd all have to rely on the goodness of apple to preserve the trustless principle but that's a different question.)

And anyway first mover advantage is everything - delayed open source still keeps XC ahead of the pack.

Dude, you think the general public gives 2 shits about if something is open sourced or not? I will use the KFC analogy again, people dont care as long as its yummy... same with cryptos, they wont care as long as it "works" and is as easy as possible with all the features they want. Simple as that.

Yep - that's exactly what I was saying. Once the big corporations like google apple whoever get stuck in - and they will - you can kiss open source goodbye. There'll be
microsoftcoin, applecoin, googlecoin and linux-coin for the open source devotees.

Hehe... and apple will be over priced like all of their normal shit! Then we got to see applecoin forked every 3 months for something "new" making your old stuff worthless and force you to fork out a premmy price for the "new".

There already is amazon coin.

[holyprofit]

Hehe... and apple will be over priced like all of their normal shit! Then we got to see applecoin forked every 3 months for something "new" making your old stuff worthless and force you to fork out a premmy price for the "new".

But you'll be able to trade in three of your old coins for one of the new iCoins - and you'll be able to go to a genius bar if they don't stake properly - as long as the warranty hasn't expired on them. (God that sounds so likely I just scared myself)  

[akula999]

Apple is actually going to go this route -

http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.html&r=10&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=PG01&S1=(apple.AS.+AND+20130606.PD.)&OS=An/apple+and+pd/6/06/2013&RS=(AN/apple+AND+PD/20130606)

iMoney

[BrewCrewFan]

Hehe... and apple will be over priced like all of their normal shit! Then we got to see applecoin forked every 3 months for something "new" making your old stuff worthless and force you to fork out a premmy price for the "new".

But you'll be able to trade in three of your old coins for one of the new iCoins - and you'll be able to go to a genius bar if they don't stake properly - as long as the warranty hasn't expired on them. (God that sounds so likely I just scared myself)  

The warranty would only cover coins that are in the original addy too.... if it was transferred to another addy at any time, that warranty is void.

WTF on the 15 BTC worth of XC dump....

[akula999]

Hehe... and apple will be over priced like all of their normal shit! Then we got to see applecoin forked every 3 months for something "new" making your old stuff worthless and force you to fork out a premmy price for the "new".

But you'll be able to trade in three of your old coins for one of the new iCoins - and you'll be able to go to a genius bar if they don't stake properly - as long as the warranty hasn't expired on them. (God that sounds so likely I just scared myself)  

The warranty would only cover coins that are in the original addy too.... if it was transferred to another addy at any time, that warranty is void.

WTF on the 15 BTC worth of XC dump....

It's a coin, people want to make profit or if they perceive profit somewhere else, they will dump XC but eventually come back.
Real move would be to allow large coin holders possible 'stake' in the company through shares.
Think about it, if Google or Microsoft or Joe Schmoe wanted to buy the tech behind XC, they can theoretically kill the coin.  But I don't think this will happen - very drastic.   

[BrewCrewFan]

Hehe... and apple will be over priced like all of their normal shit! Then we got to see applecoin forked every 3 months for something "new" making your old stuff worthless and force you to fork out a premmy price for the "new".

But you'll be able to trade in three of your old coins for one of the new iCoins - and you'll be able to go to a genius bar if they don't stake properly - as long as the warranty hasn't expired on them. (God that sounds so likely I just scared myself) 

The warranty would only cover coins that are in the original addy too.... if it was transferred to another addy at any time, that warranty is void.

WTF on the 15 BTC worth of XC dump....

It's a coin, people want to make profit or if they perceive profit somewhere else, they will dump XC but eventually come back.
Real move would be to allow large coin holders possible 'stake' in the company through shares.
Think about it, if Google or Microsoft or Joe Schmoe wanted to buy the tech behind XC, they can theoretically kill the coin.  But I don't think this will happen - very drastic.   

I guess the only real thing I am ticked about is that I put in some recent cash ~ 130K.... I kinda had hoped that the 150k would have been the next floor... I hate flipping cryptos for profit, but I was going to cash out a few for school shit for the kids... guess that is on hold now ... they have all the supplies I guess that is good enough for now :/

BTW, I have seen this mentioned a few times...  but what is all this about shares and selling XC as a company? COnfused.

[The-C-Word]

As a Bag-holder you don't wan't a large company to buy XC because they would not buy your coins, they would buy Dan, his team and the source code. Your coins hold 0 legal protection like a stock does, only critical mass adoption of the platform will protect your coins against this scenario if it presented itself.

I was actually thinking about this recently and came to the same conclusion, which is concerning. I feel like the likelihood of major companies being interested in acquiring this tech is extremely high. I'm curious about Dan's stance on the issue.