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

[jibble]

Its not really a discussion about open vs closed, that discussion has been had and the community (and I agree) agree on the current position.

I just need some help understanding exactly what I am investing in, or what service XC will offer the blocknet.  At the moment offering mixing alone does not seem to be a strong enough service given it can be replicated, and given we might loose XChat and other items on the roadmap.

Soon XC will be offering decentralized advertising , decentralized storage. those are 2 things

any app you can think of making and having on the web 3.0 stuff as well

[shakesbear]

This tech already exists in another currency which have this as their primary focus. I like the idea. But now you will fundraise this tech "again"? Great plans are good, but its taking away the focus on XC which is a excellent currency. And now i am starting to get worried, and the reason for this is that i have seen these great plans before in other context where talented people have lost their focus because they want to much. In 90% the plans are spinning out of control. In this case i am concerned that XC will loose ground.

More and more people are noticing this, and the answer that they get "trust us, its best for XC" like some sort of elitistic elite. BUT, if you do not have the peoples support in this you will loose. This is not some experiment, people invest real money into this.. im supporting wtih 1900XC, not much. But when 100 people with the same amount starting to get as confused as i am regarding Dan`s involvement in other currencys and this great plans, poeple will cash out.

I just responded to you. No need to repost.

Here is my response again:


That's like saying that the internet takes away focus from Google.

It doesn't. It enables Google to thrive.

Focus has *not* been lost. A huge userbase for XC has been gained.

You should all setup Xmixers right now. :-)

I think there is many more investors concerned the same way - that is why price is slowly sinking.

I don't want to talk about theory, let's learn on history.

Short example. Nicolas Tesla was a briliant guy. He invented a lot of devices which we use today. But he died in poverty, because he didn't care about people and investors (putting simple: PR). But Edison did care about people and investors. He was not brilliant, but he's company - General Eletric exists till today. Eidosn didn't die in poverty. Tesla did, because he woas focused only on "the thing" not "the people".

Besides I have seen many times good invention may loos with worse one, when there is great sales force and PR working on the other solution. You may have genious device, but it will die if not carrying about support.

I'm a tech guy also and I know people like me have more focus to things then people, but after all the oposite counts - people.

Conclusion is:
1) not paying attention to users (user friendly easy to install wallet)
+
2) not carrying about PR, centralised exchanges and investors
result = this great tech will loose with competitors.

I like this coin and still am an investor, but I feel not only technical things are that needs to be done. I simple observed this by my own that sometimes PR and connection is more important then genious device/code/concept and the poor concept win many times, because someone carrying about connections with people stays behind the poor concept he wins.

This is a curse of inteligent people, they don't even understant it's important
And then less inteligent, but having good selling skills (people oriented) survive with their sh*t solutions. That's why the world looks like it looks generally.

+1 We should focus more on the people and get more people to use it

[synechist]

Yeah I guess I understood this, but its not much of a service.  At the moment we are the best at this, but soon it will be open source, and it wont take long for other coins to adopt this feature internally.  So in the end we will own nothing.  I thought that we would at least own the items on the roadmap like Xchat, but this is now looking doubtful and the ability to distribute content which now seems more plausibly done by Xblock.  I think xBlock is becoming what we all had hoped XC would become.

I don't think it was fair to make xBlock an owned entity, it should have been a open not-for-profit entity.  There will always be a tug-a-war between xblocks needs for profit and the coins.  I cannot see it working.  It will just implode.  Sorry I feel this way.  I would love to be proved otherwise.

Let's just keep things simple:

- XC and the Blocknet are entirely distinct, and none of XC's features are porting over to the Blocknet.
- Why not? - because that's like saying Google's features are going to port over to the internet. Huh? No. Doesn't make sense.


Did you miss my post above about "ownership" of XChat? XC holders will get shares in XC Inc and will therefore effectively "own" (i.e. get paid for) XChat twice in the event that XC Inc sells the tech to a third party.

What's xBlock? Did you read the PR? Nothing in there is called that. :-)

[Sabretooth]

Yeah I guess I understood this, but its not much of a service.  At the moment we are the best at this, but soon it will be open source, and it wont take long for other coins to adopt this feature internally.  So in the end we will own nothing.  I thought that we would at least own the items on the roadmap like Xchat, but this is now looking doubtful and the ability to distribute content which now seems more plausibly done by Xblock.  I think xBlock is becoming what we all had hoped XC would become.

I don't think it was fair to make xBlock an owned entity, it should have been a open not-for-profit entity.  There will always be a tug-a-war between xblocks needs for profit and the coins.  I cannot see it working.  It will just implode.  Sorry I feel this way.  I would love to be proved otherwise.

Let's just keep things simple:

- XC and the Blocknet are entirely distinct, and none of XC's features are porting over to the Blocknet.
- Why not? - because that's like saying Google's features are going to port over to the internet. Huh? No. Doesn't make sense.


Did you miss my post above about "ownership" of XChat? XC holders will get shares in XC Inc and will therefore effectively "own" (i.e. get paid for) XChat twice in the event that XC Inc sells the tech to a third party.

What's xBlock? Did you read the PR? Nothing in there is called that. :-)

I know they will be distinct but I am confused on what services will be offered by XC, or more importantly its niche.  Is it just mixing or is there more, will it still be a "Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat" or are these niches now taken by Blocknet and XC Inc.

[wooder]

Yeah I guess I understood this, but its not much of a service.  At the moment we are the best at this, but soon it will be open source, and it wont take long for other coins to adopt this feature internally.  So in the end we will own nothing.  I thought that we would at least own the items on the roadmap like Xchat, but this is now looking doubtful and the ability to distribute content which now seems more plausibly done by Xblock.  I think xBlock is becoming what we all had hoped XC would become.

I don't think it was fair to make xBlock an owned entity, it should have been a open not-for-profit entity.  There will always be a tug-a-war between xblocks needs for profit and the coins.  I cannot see it working.  It will just implode.  Sorry I feel this way.  I would love to be proved otherwise.

Let's just keep things simple:

- XC and the Blocknet are entirely distinct, and none of XC's features are porting over to the Blocknet.
- Why not? - because that's like saying Google's features are going to port over to the internet. Huh? No. Doesn't make sense.


Did you miss my post above about "ownership" of XChat? XC holders will get shares in XC Inc and will therefore effectively "own" (i.e. get paid for) XChat twice in the event that XC Inc sells the tech to a third party.

What's xBlock? Did you read the PR? Nothing in there is called that. :-)

Its what you don't see, currently we are working on wrapping up the mobile application, which features a completely redesigned UI, which takes time, along side this effort we are working on the final editions of Group XChat, and we just wrapped up decentralized mixing

For the Last 4 weeks, the combined man-hours put into development across all of this is WELL over 600 Man hours just in development effort alone ** edit ** this also includes a non-disclosed application **

Dan

when will the " ** edit ** this also includes a non-disclosed application **" be released?

thanks for the linux version. Which version should i use when i run it on debian?

[adhitthana]

Did you miss my post above about "ownership" of XChat? XC holders will get shares in XC Inc and will therefore effectively "own" (i.e. get paid for) XChat twice in the event that XC Inc sells the tech to a third party.

That's big (potentially)..

Is there scope for XChat to bypass the internet in the way that  firechat does?
http://opengarden.com/firechat

[synechist]

Yeah I guess I understood this, but its not much of a service.  At the moment we are the best at this, but soon it will be open source, and it wont take long for other coins to adopt this feature internally.  So in the end we will own nothing.  I thought that we would at least own the items on the roadmap like Xchat, but this is now looking doubtful and the ability to distribute content which now seems more plausibly done by Xblock.  I think xBlock is becoming what we all had hoped XC would become.

I don't think it was fair to make xBlock an owned entity, it should have been a open not-for-profit entity.  There will always be a tug-a-war between xblocks needs for profit and the coins.  I cannot see it working.  It will just implode.  Sorry I feel this way.  I would love to be proved otherwise.

Let's just keep things simple:

- XC and the Blocknet are entirely distinct, and none of XC's features are porting over to the Blocknet.
- Why not? - because that's like saying Google's features are going to port over to the internet. Huh? No. Doesn't make sense.


Did you miss my post above about "ownership" of XChat? XC holders will get shares in XC Inc and will therefore effectively "own" (i.e. get paid for) XChat twice in the event that XC Inc sells the tech to a third party.

What's xBlock? Did you read the PR? Nothing in there is called that. :-)

I know they will be distinct but I am confused on what services will be offered by XC, or more importantly its niche.  Is it just mixing or is there more, will it still be a "Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat" or are these niches now taken by Blocknet and XC Inc.

The Blocknet isn't a "decentralised trustless privacy platform". It's a way of getting nodes to communicate.

XChat is an XC feature. It will always be.

As for the relation between XCurrency and XC Inc:
- XC Inc develops tech for XCurrency. It's committed to XCurrency.
- It is the legal entity that enables XCurrency to interface with the business world. As such it gains vitally important connections for XCurrency.
- If XC Inc sells XChat, then:
   a) it'll still run on the XCurrency network
   b) XC users will still use it
   c) XChat will benefit from some enormous corporation's marketing
   d) XC Inc shareholders will earn big time from the sale.

So nothing is being taken away from XC. Nothing at all. Not one feature.

All that's happening is that the Blocknet gives XC a massively increased userbase. That's it.

[synechist]

Did you miss my post above about "ownership" of XChat? XC holders will get shares in XC Inc and will therefore effectively "own" (i.e. get paid for) XChat twice in the event that XC Inc sells the tech to a third party.

That's big (potentially)..

Is there scope for XChat to bypass the internet in the way that  firechat does?
http://opengarden.com/firechat

Yeah there was talk about that. Physical meshnets upon which XC's existing virtual meshnets run. It's doable.

Let's see where this idea takes XC. ;-)

[Sabretooth]

Yeah I guess I understood this, but its not much of a service.  At the moment we are the best at this, but soon it will be open source, and it wont take long for other coins to adopt this feature internally.  So in the end we will own nothing.  I thought that we would at least own the items on the roadmap like Xchat, but this is now looking doubtful and the ability to distribute content which now seems more plausibly done by Xblock.  I think xBlock is becoming what we all had hoped XC would become.

I don't think it was fair to make xBlock an owned entity, it should have been a open not-for-profit entity.  There will always be a tug-a-war between xblocks needs for profit and the coins.  I cannot see it working.  It will just implode.  Sorry I feel this way.  I would love to be proved otherwise.

Let's just keep things simple:

- XC and the Blocknet are entirely distinct, and none of XC's features are porting over to the Blocknet.
- Why not? - because that's like saying Google's features are going to port over to the internet. Huh? No. Doesn't make sense.


Did you miss my post above about "ownership" of XChat? XC holders will get shares in XC Inc and will therefore effectively "own" (i.e. get paid for) XChat twice in the event that XC Inc sells the tech to a third party.

What's xBlock? Did you read the PR? Nothing in there is called that. :-)

I know they will be distinct but I am confused on what services will be offered by XC, or more importantly its niche.  Is it just mixing or is there more, will it still be a "Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat" or are these niches now taken by Blocknet and XC Inc.

The Blocknet isn't a "decentralised trustless privacy platform". It's a way of getting nodes to communicate.

XChat is an XC feature. It will always be.

As for the relation between XCurrency and XC Inc:
- XC Inc develops tech for XCurrency. It's committed to XCurrency.
- It is the legal entity that enables XCurrency to interface with the business world. As such it gains vitally important connections for XCurrency.
- If XC Inc sells XChat, then:
   a) it'll still run on the XCurrency network
   b) XC users will still use it
   c) XChat will benefit from some enormous corporation's marketing
   d) XC Inc shareholders will earn big time from the sale.

So nothing is being taken away from XC. Nothing at all. Not one feature.

All that's happening is that the Blocknet gives XC a massively increased userbase. That's it.

Great thanks for clarifying Arlyn, just what I needed to hear. 

[URSAY]

Dan,

Thank you for releasing test versions of the Mac and Linux wallets.  It's some of the best news I've heard in a long time regarding XCurrency. 

XChat users,

I'm testing XChat between 2 Mac machines currently.  Sending MAY be working.  Still trying to receive.  How do I get the key for my own XChat address?  I've tried getnewpubkey in the console for that address to use as the key.  It's returned as invalid when I try to send a message.  Any suggestions?

[Longenecker]

Yeah I guess I understood this, but its not much of a service.  At the moment we are the best at this, but soon it will be open source, and it wont take long for other coins to adopt this feature internally.  So in the end we will own nothing.  I thought that we would at least own the items on the roadmap like Xchat, but this is now looking doubtful and the ability to distribute content which now seems more plausibly done by Xblock.  I think xBlock is becoming what we all had hoped XC would become.

I don't think it was fair to make xBlock an owned entity, it should have been a open not-for-profit entity.  There will always be a tug-a-war between xblocks needs for profit and the coins.  I cannot see it working.  It will just implode.  Sorry I feel this way.  I would love to be proved otherwise.

Let's just keep things simple:

- XC and the Blocknet are entirely distinct, and none of XC's features are porting over to the Blocknet.
- Why not? - because that's like saying Google's features are going to port over to the internet. Huh? No. Doesn't make sense.


Did you miss my post above about "ownership" of XChat? XC holders will get shares in XC Inc and will therefore effectively "own" (i.e. get paid for) XChat twice in the event that XC Inc sells the tech to a third party.

What's xBlock? Did you read the PR? Nothing in there is called that. :-)

I know they will be distinct but I am confused on what services will be offered by XC, or more importantly its niche.  Is it just mixing or is there more, will it still be a "Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat" or are these niches now taken by Blocknet and XC Inc.

The Blocknet isn't a "decentralised trustless privacy platform". It's a way of getting nodes to communicate.

XChat is an XC feature. It will always be.

As for the relation between XCurrency and XC Inc:
- XC Inc develops tech for XCurrency. It's committed to XCurrency.
- It is the legal entity that enables XCurrency to interface with the business world. As such it gains vitally important connections for XCurrency.
- If XC Inc sells XChat, then:
   a) it'll still run on the XCurrency network
   b) XC users will still use it
   c) XChat will benefit from some enormous corporation's marketing
   d) XC Inc shareholders will earn big time from the sale.

So nothing is being taken away from XC. Nothing at all. Not one feature.

All that's happening is that the Blocknet gives XC a massively increased userbase. That's it.

I think what Sabretooth is questioning is what incentive will investors & traders have to buy XCurrency in light of BlockNET?  XC's unique & leading privacy tech is currently the primary element that gives XC value / marketcap, because it is a tech that only XC holders have access to.  However, BlockNET will allow all other participants of it to gain access to XC's features, without purchasing XC.  It seems like XCurrency's biggest value-adding element, its tech, may lose or dilute (at least in part) some of it's ability to add value to XC.  

Sabertooth, is this what you are questioning?  

Could it be the case that what is lost by compromise, is gained by collaboration?

[synechist]

Yeah I guess I understood this, but its not much of a service.  At the moment we are the best at this, but soon it will be open source, and it wont take long for other coins to adopt this feature internally.  So in the end we will own nothing.  I thought that we would at least own the items on the roadmap like Xchat, but this is now looking doubtful and the ability to distribute content which now seems more plausibly done by Xblock.  I think xBlock is becoming what we all had hoped XC would become.

I don't think it was fair to make xBlock an owned entity, it should have been a open not-for-profit entity.  There will always be a tug-a-war between xblocks needs for profit and the coins.  I cannot see it working.  It will just implode.  Sorry I feel this way.  I would love to be proved otherwise.

Let's just keep things simple:

- XC and the Blocknet are entirely distinct, and none of XC's features are porting over to the Blocknet.
- Why not? - because that's like saying Google's features are going to port over to the internet. Huh? No. Doesn't make sense.


Did you miss my post above about "ownership" of XChat? XC holders will get shares in XC Inc and will therefore effectively "own" (i.e. get paid for) XChat twice in the event that XC Inc sells the tech to a third party.

What's xBlock? Did you read the PR? Nothing in there is called that. :-)

I know they will be distinct but I am confused on what services will be offered by XC, or more importantly its niche.  Is it just mixing or is there more, will it still be a "Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat" or are these niches now taken by Blocknet and XC Inc.

The Blocknet isn't a "decentralised trustless privacy platform". It's a way of getting nodes to communicate.

XChat is an XC feature. It will always be.

As for the relation between XCurrency and XC Inc:
- XC Inc develops tech for XCurrency. It's committed to XCurrency.
- It is the legal entity that enables XCurrency to interface with the business world. As such it gains vitally important connections for XCurrency.
- If XC Inc sells XChat, then:
   a) it'll still run on the XCurrency network
   b) XC users will still use it
   c) XChat will benefit from some enormous corporation's marketing
   d) XC Inc shareholders will earn big time from the sale.

So nothing is being taken away from XC. Nothing at all. Not one feature.

All that's happening is that the Blocknet gives XC a massively increased userbase. That's it.

I think what Sabretooth is questioning is what incentive will investors & traders have to buy XCurrency in light of BlockNET?  XC's unique & leading privacy tech is currently the primary element that gives XC value / marketcap, because it is a tech that only XC holders have access to.  However, BlockNET will allow all other participants of it to gain access to XC's features, without purchasing XC.  It seems like XCurrency's biggest value-adding element, its tech, may lose or dilute (at least in part) some of it's ability to add value to XC.  

Sabertooth, is this what you are questioning?  

Could it be the case that what is lost by compromise, is gained by collaboration?

Other coins will be able to use these XC features through the Blocknet - by paying XC nodes for the service.

Now how might this affect XC's value?
- You've never had to buy XC coins to use XChat. It works without owning coins. So nothing has changed here.
- Blocknet users will all use XChat. This makes XC a "household name" on the Blocknet and establishes its central value.
- This is same way in which XChat relates to XC's price today. So nothing fundamental will change. XC will just get better known and more widely used.

Secondly, the success of private payments on the Blocknet will simply mean more people buy 1000XC to set up Xmixers. This will drive up XC's price a whole lot.

And finally, XC holders will get paid for their nodes' services - and the money for this comes from other coins being sold for XC, again putting up the price.

So there's no way in which the Blocknet dilutes XC's value or puts the price down. It can only put it up.

In reality what we're creating is an entire economy around XC. And that's exactly what XC needs the most.

[flashbit]

Yeah I guess I understood this, but its not much of a service.  At the moment we are the best at this, but soon it will be open source, and it wont take long for other coins to adopt this feature internally.  So in the end we will own nothing.  I thought that we would at least own the items on the roadmap like Xchat, but this is now looking doubtful and the ability to distribute content which now seems more plausibly done by Xblock.  I think xBlock is becoming what we all had hoped XC would become.

I don't think it was fair to make xBlock an owned entity, it should have been a open not-for-profit entity.  There will always be a tug-a-war between xblocks needs for profit and the coins.  I cannot see it working.  It will just implode.  Sorry I feel this way.  I would love to be proved otherwise.

Let's just keep things simple:

- XC and the Blocknet are entirely distinct, and none of XC's features are porting over to the Blocknet.
- Why not? - because that's like saying Google's features are going to port over to the internet. Huh? No. Doesn't make sense.


Did you miss my post above about "ownership" of XChat? XC holders will get shares in XC Inc and will therefore effectively "own" (i.e. get paid for) XChat twice in the event that XC Inc sells the tech to a third party.

What's xBlock? Did you read the PR? Nothing in there is called that. :-)

I know they will be distinct but I am confused on what services will be offered by XC, or more importantly its niche.  Is it just mixing or is there more, will it still be a "Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat" or are these niches now taken by Blocknet and XC Inc.

The Blocknet isn't a "decentralised trustless privacy platform". It's a way of getting nodes to communicate.

XChat is an XC feature. It will always be.

As for the relation between XCurrency and XC Inc:
- XC Inc develops tech for XCurrency. It's committed to XCurrency.
- It is the legal entity that enables XCurrency to interface with the business world. As such it gains vitally important connections for XCurrency.
- If XC Inc sells XChat, then:
   a) it'll still run on the XCurrency network
   b) XC users will still use it
   c) XChat will benefit from some enormous corporation's marketing
   d) XC Inc shareholders will earn big time from the sale.

So nothing is being taken away from XC. Nothing at all. Not one feature.

All that's happening is that the Blocknet gives XC a massively increased userbase. That's it.

I think what Sabretooth is questioning is what incentive will investors & traders have to buy XCurrency in light of BlockNET?  XC's unique & leading privacy tech is currently the primary element that gives XC value / marketcap, because it is a tech that only XC holders have access to.  However, BlockNET will allow all other participants of it to gain access to XC's features, without purchasing XC.  It seems like XCurrency's biggest value-adding element, its tech, may lose or dilute (at least in part) some of it's ability to add value to XC.  

Sabertooth, is this what you are questioning?  

Could it be the case that what is lost by compromise, is gained by collaboration?

Any truth to this Arlyn?

Holy crap I haven't seen XC price this low in some time. The trend doesn't look good. Very disappointing indeed.

[synechist]

Any truth to this Arlyn?

Holy crap I haven't seen XC price this low in some time. The trend doesn't look good. Very disappointing indeed.

Just replied above :-)

There's been a bot supressing the price since yesterday. Quite frustrating. I wonder who it is...

[Longenecker]

Yeah I guess I understood this, but its not much of a service.  At the moment we are the best at this, but soon it will be open source, and it wont take long for other coins to adopt this feature internally.  So in the end we will own nothing.  I thought that we would at least own the items on the roadmap like Xchat, but this is now looking doubtful and the ability to distribute content which now seems more plausibly done by Xblock.  I think xBlock is becoming what we all had hoped XC would become.

I don't think it was fair to make xBlock an owned entity, it should have been a open not-for-profit entity.  There will always be a tug-a-war between xblocks needs for profit and the coins.  I cannot see it working.  It will just implode.  Sorry I feel this way.  I would love to be proved otherwise.

Let's just keep things simple:

- XC and the Blocknet are entirely distinct, and none of XC's features are porting over to the Blocknet.
- Why not? - because that's like saying Google's features are going to port over to the internet. Huh? No. Doesn't make sense.


Did you miss my post above about "ownership" of XChat? XC holders will get shares in XC Inc and will therefore effectively "own" (i.e. get paid for) XChat twice in the event that XC Inc sells the tech to a third party.

What's xBlock? Did you read the PR? Nothing in there is called that. :-)

I know they will be distinct but I am confused on what services will be offered by XC, or more importantly its niche.  Is it just mixing or is there more, will it still be a "Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat" or are these niches now taken by Blocknet and XC Inc.

The Blocknet isn't a "decentralised trustless privacy platform". It's a way of getting nodes to communicate.

XChat is an XC feature. It will always be.

As for the relation between XCurrency and XC Inc:
- XC Inc develops tech for XCurrency. It's committed to XCurrency.
- It is the legal entity that enables XCurrency to interface with the business world. As such it gains vitally important connections for XCurrency.
- If XC Inc sells XChat, then:
   a) it'll still run on the XCurrency network
   b) XC users will still use it
   c) XChat will benefit from some enormous corporation's marketing
   d) XC Inc shareholders will earn big time from the sale.

So nothing is being taken away from XC. Nothing at all. Not one feature.

All that's happening is that the Blocknet gives XC a massively increased userbase. That's it.

I think what Sabretooth is questioning is what incentive will investors & traders have to buy XCurrency in light of BlockNET?  XC's unique & leading privacy tech is currently the primary element that gives XC value / marketcap, because it is a tech that only XC holders have access to.  However, BlockNET will allow all other participants of it to gain access to XC's features, without purchasing XC.  It seems like XCurrency's biggest value-adding element, its tech, may lose or dilute (at least in part) some of it's ability to add value to XC.  

Sabertooth, is this what you are questioning?  

Could it be the case that what is lost by compromise, is gained by collaboration?

Other coins will be able to use these XC features through the Blocknet - by paying XC nodes for the service.

Now how might this affect XC's value?
- You've never had to buy XC coins to use XChat. It works without owning coins. So nothing has changed here.
- Blocknet users will all use XChat. This makes XC a "household name" on the Blocknet and establishes its central value.
- This is same way in which XChat relates to XC's price today. So nothing fundamental will change. XC will just get better known and more widely used.

Secondly, the success of private payments on the Blocknet will simply mean more people buy 1000XC to set up Xmixers. This will drive up XC's price a whole lot.

And finally, XC holders will get paid for their nodes' services - and the money for this comes from other coins being sold for XC, again putting up the price.

So there's no way in which the Blocknet dilutes XC's value or puts the price down. It can only put it up.

Hmm, this makes a lot of sense and could be quite lucrative if BlockNET becomes a success.  Makes me a little excited!

[Longenecker]

That is some nice incentive for XC holders, but would you mind laying out the incentives for participating coins?  Because unless they own XC, they will not be collecting payments / fees.  Is their incentive only that they will gain access to the features of all other participating coins on the BlockNET?  Or are there other incentives that I am missing?  (I suppose a 10% discount on BlockNET ITO is incentive as well)

[infinitechaos]

Synechist, I just downloaded the latest Mac wallet and sent you a message. Did you get it? The pub key that automatically showed up when I entered your XChat address was not the same as the one you have listed in your sig.

Something else I noticed is that there doesn't seem to be an option to select which wallet address is used for XChat. It just picks one and I can't seem to be able to change it.

[synechist]

That is some nice incentive for XC holders, but would you mind laying out the incentives for participating coins?  Because unless they own XC, they will not be collecting payments / fees.  Is their incentive only that they will gain access to the features of all other participating coins on the BlockNET?  Or are there other incentives that I am missing?  (I suppose a 10% discount on BlockNET ITO is incentive as well)

The incentive to use the Blocknet is the same as the incentive to use the internet: a massively larger userbase for your services.

Every coin that joins the Blocknet does so in the hope that Blocknet users will use its technology. Secondly they improve their services offering by incorporating an XBridge and offering other coins' services - but in a way that benefits whoever provides the services.

[synechist]

Synechist, I just downloaded the latest Mac wallet and sent you a message. Did you get it? The pub key that automatically showed up when I entered your XChat address was not the same as the one you have listed in your sig.

Something else I noticed is that there doesn't seem to be an option to select which wallet address is used for XChat. It just picks one and I can't seem to be able to change it.

Hmm... I have two XC addresses in my sig. The bottom one is my XChat address (and the corresponding public key is correct).

I haven't received anything...

The option to choose an address is now enabled in my (Windows) app. If it isn't in yours, it will be in forthcoming updates.

[Longenecker]

That is some nice incentive for XC holders, but would you mind laying out the incentives for participating coins?  Because unless they own XC, they will not be collecting payments / fees.  Is their incentive only that they will gain access to the features of all other participating coins on the BlockNET?  Or are there other incentives that I am missing?  (I suppose a 10% discount on BlockNET ITO is incentive as well)

The incentive to use the Blocknet is the same as the incentive to use the internet: a massively larger userbase for your services.

Every coin that joins the Blocknet does so in the hope that Blocknet users will use its technology. Secondly they improve their services offering by incorporating an XBridge and offering other coins' services - but in a way that benefits whoever provides the services.

I see.  Thanks for the reply.  But what would you say to my same argument above if XC was replaced with CoinX (representing any coin on the BlockNET)?  Your previous reply to how it would benefit XC was unique to XC because XC is the one developing BlockNET and running it off of XC's xnodes.  So it is easy to see how XC holders profit.  

How would you reply to a participant coin of BlockNET below?:

"CoinX's unique & leading privacy tech is currently the primary element that gives CoinX value / marketcap, because it is a tech that only CoinX holders have access to.  However, BlockNET will allow all other participants of it to gain access to CoinX's features, without purchasing CoinX.  It seems like CoinX's biggest value-adding element, its tech, may lose or dilute (at least in part) some of it's ability to add value to CoinX."

Is the increased user-base really worth it at the cost of the reasoning above?