[NUD ₦ ] New Universal Dollar | Bcrypt | 0% Pre-mine | First Anonymous Crypto

[zjz_lgd]

what is Bcrypt?
And what is your next plan?
Anonymous is a great idea, and this coin looks like interesting.
But the old man on Logo is not good, we like young girls!

[1714845361]

1714845361

[1714845361]

1714845361

[1714845361]

1714845361

[IMJim]

ok, under the help of sixteen.. i rescan the QT... but still no swap...

pls check DEV.

I am having same issue as you, Dev said if it did not work to try this again tomorrow.  I would assume there is reason he said this so I will do as he asked.

[flowerpots]

ok, under the help of sixteen.. i rescan the QT... but still no swap...

pls check DEV.

I am having same issue as you, Dev said if it did not work to try this again tomorrow.  I would assume there is reason he said this so I will do as he asked.

Same here!

[sixteendigits]

ok, under the help of sixteen.. i rescan the QT... but still no swap...

pls check DEV.

I am having same issue as you, Dev said if it did not work to try this again tomorrow.  I would assume there is reason he said this so I will do as he asked.

Same here!

Oh no, everyone was right all along!  It was a scam.  Dev ran off with all the NUD so he can dump it at...........

Geez, have some patience people.  It'll show up.

[doldgigger]

In about 2 hours we went from block 936 to 998.

{
"blocks" : 936,
"currentblocksize" : 1000,
"currentblocktx" : 0,
"difficulty" : 0.00270175,
"errors" : "",
"generate" : true,
"genproclimit" : -1,
"hashespersec" : 1305,
"networkhashps" : 83936,
"pooledtx" : 660,
"testnet" : false
}

2 hours later

{
"blocks" : 998,
"currentblocksize" : 1000,
"currentblocktx" : 0,
"difficulty" : 0.00291627,
"errors" : "",
"generate" : true,
"genproclimit" : -1,
"hashespersec" : 1274,
"networkhashps" : 91986,
"pooledtx" : 660,
"testnet" : false
}


That's about 60 blocks in 2 hours. 2 minutes per block time.... What about the 10 minute block time?

Even Kimoto's Gravity Well cannot change the situation that a network with an increasing hashing power will have a below-average block time.

Right now, the hashing power seems to decrease, though.

[btler420]

shitcoins everywhere lOL

[doldgigger]

Ufff, guys, please, don't post no more nonsense, the dev told you about all of this, do you really understand how the fuck a crypto works and what is going on? If not, shut up because you don't deserve a shit! 
Read the dev answer, is clearly enought what is going on and what you will receive!

I think that's why people got upset: Because they know how crypto works. In a cryptocurrency, the crypto is responsible for securing the users' investments using a blockchain. Now, the dev circumvented the crypto, and locked people out of the blockchain they trusted in. You may be right: People who don't know how to defend themselves don't deserve any more. People could have backed up the 0.0.0.1 client and kept their blockchain. But even stupid people can get upset if someone thinks he can outsmart them using an incompatible update.

[lopalcar]

Ufff, guys, please, don't post no more nonsense, the dev told you about all of this, do you really understand how the fuck a crypto works and what is going on? If not, shut up because you don't deserve a shit! 
Read the dev answer, is clearly enought what is going on and what you will receive!

I think that's why people got upset: Because they know how crypto works. In a cryptocurrency, the crypto is responsible for securing the users' investments using a blockchain. Now, the dev circumvented the crypto, and locked people out of the blockchain they trusted in. You may be right: People who don't know how to defend themselves don't deserve any more. People could have backed up the 0.0.0.1 client and kept their blockchain. But even stupid people can get upset if someone thinks he can outsmart them using an incompatible update.

Dev clearly said that blockchain restart was a possibility since the begining "I bought 0.04 BTC worth, so maybe have reasons for be angry, but I'm not because he warned about and I gambled anyways"
I think someone uploaded first blockchain so anyone can download it, dev already said that anyone can make his own fork, but he will work in current chain. I don't see what are you complaining about...

[doldgigger]

Ufff, guys, please, don't post no more nonsense, the dev told you about all of this, do you really understand how the fuck a crypto works and what is going on? If not, shut up because you don't deserve a shit! 
Read the dev answer, is clearly enought what is going on and what you will receive!

I think that's why people got upset: Because they know how crypto works. In a cryptocurrency, the crypto is responsible for securing the users' investments using a blockchain. Now, the dev circumvented the crypto, and locked people out of the blockchain they trusted in. You may be right: People who don't know how to defend themselves don't deserve any more. People could have backed up the 0.0.0.1 client and kept their blockchain. But even stupid people can get upset if someone thinks he can outsmart them using an incompatible update.

Dev clearly said that blockchain restart was a possibility since the begining "I bought 0.04 BTC worth, so maybe have reasons for be angry, but I'm not because he warned about and I gambled anyways"
I think someone uploaded first blockchain so anyone can download it, dev already said that anyone can make his own fork, but he will work in current chain. I don't see what are you complaining about...

Do I complain? You complained to those who expressed there righteous concerns, and your statement showed a lack of understanding of crypto, which you used as an argument to ask them for keeping their mouth shut. So I decided to offer a more rational point of view.

The dev might have thrown in the comment that he might restart the blockchain somewhere in between. But as correctly pointed out by alcurex support, a serious dev would write "PREANN" instead of "ANN" so everyone would know, and not just the better informed people who used that information for scamming the exchange then. Everyone would have understood that a blockchain restart may be necessary for very intrusive changes (like converting BTC logic to NXT logic). But for a mere hash change? Everyone with a slight understanding of cryptocurrency tech would immediately see that there was no sane reason for this restart, other than some non-tech goals we are not informed about.

Also, the statement "anyone can make his own fork" doesn't seem honest, considering that the dev is running around asking people to delete the own blockchain in order to prevent them from doing so. Without an own blockchain, who would know if the uploaded one wasn't modified?

[zsnorbi]

I can confirm that i got the 1/10 part of my previously owned coins.

[lopalcar]

Do I complain? You complained to those who expressed there righteous concerns, and your statement showed a lack of understanding of crypto, which you used as an argument to ask them for keeping their mouth shut. So I decided to offer a more rational point of view.

The dev might have thrown in the comment that he might restart the blockchain somewhere in between. But as correctly pointed out by alcurex support, a serious dev would write "PREANN" instead of "ANN" so everyone would know, and not just the better informed people who used that information for scamming the exchange then. Everyone would have understood that a blockchain restart may be necessary for very intrusive changes (like converting BTC logic to NXT logic). But for a mere hash change? Everyone with a slight understanding of cryptocurrency tech would immediately see that there was no sane reason for this restart, other than some non-tech goals we are not informed about.

Also, the statement "anyone can make his own fork" doesn't seem honest, considering that the dev is running around asking people to delete the own blockchain in order to prevent them from doing so. Without an own blockchain, who would know if the uploaded one wasn't modified?

I agree that he could make a PREANN or call it like you want, but if reading the thread you see that he could restart the chain, everything you do from that point is gambling. i don't think he is asking people to delete their blockchain, only delete it if you want to continue with current fork "anyone ask you for delete it from your computer"
And I completely agree that a chain restart isn't neccessary, but he warned, so in my land: Forewarned is forearmed

Is my point of view irrational for you?

[doldgigger]

There are two kinds of people innovating on software. Those that warn you that their software is experimental, and later on work together with their user community in order to solve everything in the best interest of the community. And those who lean back on the "well, it was experimental, so don't complain if I made a huge profit due to your greenness". The Bitcoin guys belong to the former kind. Bitcoin was always advertised as experimental, but it still grew because the developers were responsible. It also had bugs. The latest larger one was the transaction malleability bug. But they did not say: "Well, we'll launch a new blockchain with a huge pre-mine, and if you want to be redeemed just write us a message." They fixed it on the existing blockchain. Which leaves us with the question why the NUD team refuses to work with the community. What I'm reading here reminds me of the MtGox story, where they suddenly stopped to process withdrawals and asked for users to identify themselves. Now we should probably grateful if you don't require us to send in passport copies in order to get some fraction of the mined coins on your new blockchain...

Can you explain what you're up to? If it was really an accident that you launched using scrypt, then this altcoin could still be an example for altcoin pioneering efforts if the blockchain will later prove that this altcoin managed to do a stable change in the hashing algorithm. It may even serve the goal of easing Bitcoin users' concerns about a change in the hashing algorithm possibly being necessary in the future, because they can see it can work out well. But what you explained sounds more like an altcoin where people will later look at the "first" 500 blocks in the blockchain and see a big red "ScamCoin" flag.

Okay first of all let me clear it up, if you want a refund (e.g. for a donation, either in NUD or Bitcoin) you would sign me a message with your public key. I wouldn't dare to coerce the network into those kinds of actions for the users to acquire their own virtual goods or else the network would fall into tyranny.

Second of all, I have already said that I will not keep a single fraction of the NUD from the premine to myself (except the 1/10 of the donations that I got up to the block 5000 as everyone else), this can easily be verifiable since I will post the old chain on the downloads page myself, anyone could calculate and verify that this chain is as fair as the last one, I assure you that we aren't here to play tricks or to try to scam someone.

If you indeed believe that we have acquired some sort of gain from switching to another altchain please enlighten me as to how it was done.

There are many ways how profit can be gained from a scheme like this. However, I would not want to give you any more ideas which you didn't already have. It's bad enough as it is. Small hint: one scheme for profit due to chain switching involves an exchange, but this is really well-known.

[doldgigger]

It's only a test, nud has been  on exchange , it's not a test, you are waste our time and money.

The former support like a monkey, dev is Monkey man，lol.

1:1 ratio is appropriate .

Even worse. Ever thought about how hard it will be now to convince an exchange to trust NUD, considering that alcurex will sooner or later find out that the NUD update leaves them with all their customers' NUD deposits being lost? Blockchain restarts are simply a no-go for any serious altcoin dev who cares about the coin's reputation.

I didn't give any exchange permission to add NUD, that is why I ignore all the PMs from exchanges willing to add support to NUD.

Of course I am not the dictator of the network, exchanges may still add NUD without my permission, just don't be surprised when inconveniences occur.

Unfortunately we are bound to have many updates within the first weeks. I don't think that it's wise to add support for NUD so early for most exchanges.

Hello from alcurEX exchange. We got support message about your coin NUD:

Code:

Hi, 
I need you to comment on the NUD blockchain re-start. I had no idea that you were adding coins without the permission of the dev. What will happen with the NUD that is deposited with you? This is a serious trust issue.

First of all. If you clone and publish opensource coins, there is no"dev permissions".
We inform your community in your thread and PM dev, so everyone know there is exchange for NUD.
Ofcourse we expect dev inform all exchanges and pools how to keep NUD coin alive.
If your dev will not inform pools and exchanges, and want to keep this private, do not make ANN. Use like PREANN and inform you coin is not published yet.

I will freeze NUD market untill we know if we have dev support... and "permission".
Any way. Good luck with your coin. We will not leave you if there is solution to keep your coin on the market.

alcurEX support
-halibit-

I am fully with you. I think it is a huge step forward to have exchanges which pick up new cryptocurrencies, and the invention of open source software as you say, together with the security gained through cryptographic blockchain networks, can be seen as the basis for allowing this. I can't imagine what potential the cryptocurrency economy would have if exchanges could pick up new cryptocurrencies easily and without fearing damaging actions from rogue altcoin devs. For example:

* Real mining profit from day one
* Possibility to compare different altcoins on their exchange performance from the beginning

So what can be done? One thing would be to better educate people about the ethics of creating a cryptocurrency. As you correctly stated, PREANN would be at the very least appropriate if the dev plans to make blockchain restarts for no reason. But even then: Blockchain restarts should be only an ultimate resort. This becomes clear when thinking about how the blockchains are computed. No matter if it's a CPU, GPU or ASIC coin: People invest computing power into verifying the blocks and computing the hashes. So, even when policies like the hash being used change, it could be considered an environmental crime to just throw away the old data, considering that it doesn't take much development effort to make such changes to a blockchain client without a restart.

But even more can be done, thanks to the blockchain cryptography:

For this, it must be understood that the dev's attack against the old blockchain and its exchanger, miner and user community was very simple: He replaced the software on the advertised seed nodes to be incompatible with the old blockchain, and stopped to distribute the software compatible with the old blockchain.

So, to recover the funds on the exchange, the following steps can be taken:

* Advise people to use the known-to-work software release 0.0.0.1
* Put it on accessible servers and provide their hostnames for people to "addnode" them
* Notify the miners - they will be needed at least to let the difficulty adapt downwards. But they cannot mine on the new blockchain anyway

So, by appropriate usage of the potential of open source and of blockchain networks, it should even be possible to limit the power of rogue devs.

As future steps, I would recommend to make the change to bcrypt from the old blockchain - in a proper way without invalidating blocks. This way, the community NUD and the dictator-dev NUD stay maximally compatible (think CentOS and the product of a certain North American software vendor ). Maybe we can then even convince the dev to join forces. A cryptocurrency with a healthy community is even more valuable after all.

[reflector]

It's only a test, nud has been  on exchange , it's not a test, you are waste our time and money.

The former support like a monkey, dev is Monkey man，lol.

1:1 ratio is appropriate .

Even worse. Ever thought about how hard it will be now to convince an exchange to trust NUD, considering that alcurex will sooner or later find out that the NUD update leaves them with all their customers' NUD deposits being lost? Blockchain restarts are simply a no-go for any serious altcoin dev who cares about the coin's reputation.

I didn't give any exchange permission to add NUD, that is why I ignore all the PMs from exchanges willing to add support to NUD.

Of course I am not the dictator of the network, exchanges may still add NUD without my permission, just don't be surprised when inconveniences occur.

Unfortunately we are bound to have many updates within the first weeks. I don't think that it's wise to add support for NUD so early for most exchanges.

Hello from alcurEX exchange. We got support message about your coin NUD:

Code:

Hi, 
I need you to comment on the NUD blockchain re-start. I had no idea that you were adding coins without the permission of the dev. What will happen with the NUD that is deposited with you? This is a serious trust issue.

First of all. If you clone and publish opensource coins, there is no"dev permissions".
We inform your community in your thread and PM dev, so everyone know there is exchange for NUD.
Ofcourse we expect dev inform all exchanges and pools how to keep NUD coin alive.
If your dev will not inform pools and exchanges, and want to keep this private, do not make ANN. Use like PREANN and inform you coin is not published yet.

I will freeze NUD market untill we know if we have dev support... and "permission".
Any way. Good luck with your coin. We will not leave you if there is solution to keep your coin on the market.

alcurEX support
-halibit-

I am fully with you. I think it is a huge step forward to have exchanges which pick up new cryptocurrencies, and the invention of open source software as you say, together with the security gained through cryptographic blockchain networks, can be seen as the basis for allowing this. I can't imagine what potential the cryptocurrency economy would have if exchanges could pick up new cryptocurrencies easily and without fearing damaging actions from rogue altcoin devs. For example:

* Real mining profit from day one
* Possibility to compare different altcoins on their exchange performance from the beginning

So what can be done? One thing would be to better educate people about the ethics of creating a cryptocurrency. As you correctly stated, PREANN would be at the very least appropriate if the dev plans to make blockchain restarts for no reason. But even then: Blockchain restarts should be only an ultimate resort. This becomes clear when thinking about how the blockchains are computed. No matter if it's a CPU, GPU or ASIC coin: People invest computing power into verifying the blocks and computing the hashes. So, even when policies like the hash being used change, it could be considered an environmental crime to just throw away the old data, considering that it doesn't take much development effort to make such changes to a blockchain client without a restart.

But even more can be done, thanks to the blockchain cryptography:

For this, it must be understood that the dev's attack against the old blockchain and its exchanger, miner and user community was very simple: He replaced the software on the advertised seed nodes to be incompatible with the old blockchain, and stopped to distribute the software compatible with the old blockchain.

So, to recover the funds on the exchange, the following steps can be taken:

* Advise people to use the known-to-work software release 0.0.0.1
* Put it on accessible servers and provide their hostnames for people to "addnode" them
* Notify the miners - they will be needed at least to let the difficulty adapt downwards. But they cannot mine on the new blockchain anyway

So, by appropriate usage of the potential of open source and of blockchain networks, it should even be possible to limit the power of rogue devs.

As future steps, I would recommend to make the change to bcrypt from the old blockchain - in a proper way without invalidating blocks. This way, the community NUD and the dictator-dev NUD stay maximally compatible (think CentOS and the product of a certain North American software vendor ). Maybe we can then even convince the dev to join forces. A cryptocurrency with a healthy community is even more valuable after all.

Maybe it's time to move on for you.

[NUD]

I am fully with you. I think it is a huge step forward to have exchanges which pick up new cryptocurrencies, and the invention of open source software as you say, together with the security gained through cryptographic blockchain networks, can be seen as the basis for allowing this. I can't imagine what potential the cryptocurrency economy would have if exchanges could pick up new cryptocurrencies easily and without fearing damaging actions from rogue altcoin devs. For example:

* Real mining profit from day one
* Possibility to compare different altcoins on their exchange performance from the beginning

So what can be done? One thing would be to better educate people about the ethics of creating a cryptocurrency. As you correctly stated, PREANN would be at the very least appropriate if the dev plans to make blockchain restarts for no reason. But even then: Blockchain restarts should be only an ultimate resort. This becomes clear when thinking about how the blockchains are computed. No matter if it's a CPU, GPU or ASIC coin: People invest computing power into verifying the blocks and computing the hashes. So, even when policies like the hash being used change, it could be considered an environmental crime to just throw away the old data, considering that it doesn't take much development effort to make such changes to a blockchain client without a restart.

But even more can be done, thanks to the blockchain cryptography:

For this, it must be understood that the dev's attack against the old blockchain and its exchanger, miner and user community was very simple: He replaced the software on the advertised seed nodes to be incompatible with the old blockchain, and stopped to distribute the software compatible with the old blockchain.

So, to recover the funds on the exchange, the following steps can be taken:

* Advise people to use the known-to-work software release 0.0.0.1
* Put it on accessible servers and provide their hostnames for people to "addnode" them
* Notify the miners - they will be needed at least to let the difficulty adapt downwards. But they cannot mine on the new blockchain anyway

So, by appropriate usage of the potential of open source and of blockchain networks, it should even be possible to limit the power of rogue devs.

As future steps, I would recommend to make the change to bcrypt from the old blockchain - in a proper way without invalidating blocks. This way, the community NUD and the dictator-dev NUD stay maximally compatible (think CentOS and the product of a certain North American software vendor ). Maybe we can then even convince the dev to join forces. A cryptocurrency with a healthy community is even more valuable after all.

It certainly sounds like an interesting experiment, the only problem is that I don't see a single person who is as upset about the fork as you.

In any case I sincerely wish you the best of luck, if you manage to find enough people to save your 218,901NUD in the old blockchain (that were made in a dishonest manner) your fork will certainly tramp our cryptocurrency and I will have no choice but to join you.

[doldgigger]

NBDAsFC9yUefDDpDwNM3R4SG8Wah1Vcphx 218901.919000100

Is this guy present? Could someone confirm to be holding these coins? Are they up for sale or speculation

Probably the dev's pre-mine. Otherwise, in the spirit of his "I restart the blockchain if I don't like the balances as they are" policy, he would have removed these funds by now...

[YarkoL]

Probably the dev's pre-mine.

You can ascertain whether premine exists either by looking
at source or alternatively, investigating the early blocks
with your client/wallet.

If you haven't done it, you're spreading fud.

[koriander]

Probably the dev's pre-mine. Otherwise, in the spirit of his "I restart the blockchain if I don't like the balances as they are" policy, he would have removed these funds by now...

Your frustration from the decisions that developer takes suggests that this address is belongs to you.

[doldgigger]

Probably the dev's pre-mine. Otherwise, in the spirit of his "I restart the blockchain if I don't like the balances as they are" policy, he would have removed these funds by now...

Your frustration from the decisions that developer takes suggests that this address is belongs to you.

Strange logic. Why would I suggest that the developer should remove this balance while being at the process of blockchain invalidating, if it were my funds?

Would it be mine, it would still be a worthwhile amount, no matter if before or after an 1:10 exchange. No need for emotions then. I'm just slightly concerned because I am very enthusiastic about the cryptocurrency economy, and what I saw here looked just pretty wasteful on resources, with no real motivation. I don't really understand why you're assuming personal motives here. To be honest, if NUD flies, the blockchain switch would be even an advantage to me, considering that I have more NUD on the new blockchain compared with the old one.

[lopalcar]

Probably the dev's pre-mine. Otherwise, in the spirit of his "I restart the blockchain if I don't like the balances as they are" policy, he would have removed these funds by now...

Your frustration from the decisions that developer takes suggests that this address is belongs to you.

Strange logic. Why would I suggest that the developer should remove this balance while being at the process of blockchain invalidating, if it were my funds?

Would it be mine, it would still be a worthwhile amount, no matter if before or after an 1:10 exchange. No need for emotions then. I'm just slightly concerned because I am very enthusiastic about the cryptocurrency economy, and what I saw here looked just pretty wasteful on resources, with no real motivation. I don't really understand why you're assuming personal motives here. To be honest, if NUD flies, the blockchain switch would be even an advantage to me, considering that I have more NUD on the new blockchain compared with the old one.

And what's the logic for restart the chain with 1/10 if that coins belong to the dev? Is he retarded? And it's more, if he mined that ammount is because he have a bunch of asics, what's the point for him in changing the algorithm to one "asic resistent"?
Cryptocurrency economy is like any other, rich gets richer and sometimes one poor have a little chance to get many coins if he is in the correct place at exact time, so don't expect miracles or reaching utopias with cryptos