[SDC] ShadowCash | Welcome to the UMBRA

[Cornett]

Some people are buying SDC at its real value for the next few days

This is the first sign ^. The early signal of moving to hundreds of ksat values in the future. Strong and bullish way to big highs

Going to this values ^^

[1715398662]

1715398662

[1715398662]

1715398662

[1715398662]

1715398662

[1715398662]

1715398662

[erok]

Some people are buying SDC at its real value for the next few days

This is the first sign ^. The early signal of moving to hundreds of ksat values in the future. Strong and bullish way to big highs

Going to this values ^^

I mean realistically that should have already happened months ago.

[AlexGR]

Some people are buying SDC at its real value for the next few days

This is the first sign ^. The early signal of moving to hundreds of ksat values in the future. Strong and bullish way to big highs

Going to this values ^^

I mean realistically that should have already happened months ago.

Theoretically it should but cryptsy is no indication due to the problematic wallet there.

I bought around the time of the SDC-DRK proposed merger and prices were around 0.00025... then they spiked a bit to 0.0003 and then dropped to 0.00015 or something... meanwhile DRK, which is a heavy-marketcap coin, moved to 4-5x (from 0.005 to 0.02-0.025) - so I'll need at least a 0.001 - 0.00125 price for SDC just to get what I'd get for buying DRKs (!) and much more than that to justify a proper gain. In theory it's always easier for a small marketcap coin to gain a lot, so it can happen.

One thing that DRK has working for it, is developer transparency with Evan being a known person. XC got a high marketcap, because ok it was one of the first marketed as a DRK-alternative, but it also had a dev whose name was known. If the dev is not just a nickname who might do something stupid and run away, it's easier to have trust and easier for funds to flow in.

[BlockchainBoss]

Added more today. This is still way undervalued.

[erok]

Some people are buying SDC at its real value for the next few days

This is the first sign ^. The early signal of moving to hundreds of ksat values in the future. Strong and bullish way to big highs

Going to this values ^^

I mean realistically that should have already happened months ago.

Theoretically it should but cryptsy is no indication due to the problematic wallet there.

I bought around the time of the SDC-DRK proposed merger and prices were around 0.00025... then they spiked a bit to 0.0003 and then dropped to 0.00015 or something... meanwhile DRK, which is a heavy-marketcap coin, moved to 4-5x (from 0.005 to 0.02-0.025) - so I'll need at least a 0.001 - 0.00125 price for SDC just to get what I'd get for buying DRKs (!) and much more than that to justify a proper gain. In theory it's always easier for a small marketcap coin to gain a lot, so it can happen.

One thing that DRK has working for it, is developer transparency with Evan being a known person. XC got a high marketcap, because ok it was one of the first marketed as a DRK-alternative, but it also had a dev whose name was known. If the dev is not just a nickname who might do something stupid and run away, it's easier to have trust and easier for funds to flow in.

Merely a superficial blanket imo and goes against the whole nature behind the anon movement.

[AlexGR]

Merely a superficial blanket imo and goes against the whole nature behind the anon movement.

I wouldn't have a problem ideologically as long as the devs could be anonymous even from the authorities (think NSA-level resources). But since this is extremely hard or improbable to achieve, their anonymity is not really against the establishment, rather the ordinary people, forums, investors etc. And, when that happens, people are more hesitant to throw money in a project due to all the scams and fails that are way too numerous to mention.

[Cornett]

Some people are buying SDC at its real value for the next few days

This is the first sign ^. The early signal of moving to hundreds of ksat values in the future. Strong and bullish way to big highs

Going to this values ^^

I mean realistically that should have already happened months ago.

Theoretically it should but cryptsy is no indication due to the problematic wallet there.

I bought around the time of the SDC-DRK proposed merger and prices were around 0.00025... then they spiked a bit to 0.0003 and then dropped to 0.00015 or something... meanwhile DRK, which is a heavy-marketcap coin, moved to 4-5x (from 0.005 to 0.02-0.025) - so I'll need at least a 0.001 - 0.00125 price for SDC just to get what I'd get for buying DRKs (!) and much more than that to justify a proper gain. In theory it's always easier for a small marketcap coin to gain a lot, so it can happen.

One thing that DRK has working for it, is developer transparency with Evan being a known person. XC got a high marketcap, because ok it was one of the first marketed as a DRK-alternative, but it also had a dev whose name was known. If the dev is not just a nickname who might do something stupid and run away, it's easier to have trust and easier for funds to flow in.

Well said. So i bet we'll hit 0.001 - 0.00125. It's a matter of time

[erok]

Merely a superficial blanket imo and goes against the whole nature behind the anon movement.

I wouldn't have a problem ideologically as long as the devs could be anonymous even from the authorities (think NSA-level resources). But since this is extremely hard or improbable to achieve, their anonymity is not really against the establishment, rather the ordinary people, forums, investors etc. And, when that happens, people are more hesitant to throw money in a project due to all the scams and fails that are way too numerous to mention.

THat is presumptuous.

[fearcoka]

[StevenJobs]

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/images/2012/Mar/apple-and-stocks-3.png

I approve.

[Cornett]

we are in 2005 Apple's year

[Tears on Dope]

whats going to be sold on the market?

[erok]

whats going to be sold on the market?

Pandas, Rare Tigers, the normal stuff.

[cryptocrap]

Soon the shadow cap will be $1.000.000,00  

[Automatic Monkey]

Merely a superficial blanket imo and goes against the whole nature behind the anon movement.

I wouldn't have a problem ideologically as long as the devs could be anonymous even from the authorities (think NSA-level resources). But since this is extremely hard or improbable to achieve, their anonymity is not really against the establishment, rather the ordinary people, forums, investors etc. And, when that happens, people are more hesitant to throw money in a project due to all the scams and fails that are way too numerous to mention.

But the worst scams and fails have not involved anonymous people.

[Automatic Monkey]

Just busted 40K. Effing A!

[StevenJobs]

Merely a superficial blanket imo and goes against the whole nature behind the anon movement.

I wouldn't have a problem ideologically as long as the devs could be anonymous even from the authorities (think NSA-level resources). But since this is extremely hard or improbable to achieve, their anonymity is not really against the establishment, rather the ordinary people, forums, investors etc. And, when that happens, people are more hesitant to throw money in a project due to all the scams and fails that are way too numerous to mention.

These developers are delivering on their promises. Hands down the best design and development team currently working on any blockchain based technology. All they ask in return is to respect their privacy while they build the next generation financial privacy platform. This project has been around since July 19th 2014 and they are still here. We are far beyond the point of scam speculation. If they were going to dump and dip they would of

A) done it a long time ago when the volume was 800BTC and bitcoin was still $700

B) taken part in the BlockNet pump scam for quick exit profit

C) accepted Evan's Darkcoin merger proposal as an exit strategy (at the time would of bumped the coin to 700-800k)

D) accepted XC's buyout offer for an exit strategy (at the time would of bumped the coin to 170k)

Any credible investor can look to the above key points as validation that SDC is an honest project and is here for the long term.

My counter argument is XC's Dan Metcalf was "public" and look how that turned out. The "Metcalf Bump" was him colluding with pump groups and reviewing his own tech to turn quick profits with shitcoins.

It's my view that anyone asking for the identities of anyone is in the wrong market and is probably LE.

Satoshi is still unknown and Bitcoin has the highest marketcap of any project with "public" developers so your point is invalid. In the future there might be contributing developers who don't care about their own privacy but that would be their own choice. Nobody from within this community or any outside of the community should ask a developer, designer or investor for their identities. This entire vertical market is built on the idea of preserving the individual's right to privacy. There are plenty of coins to invest in with "public" developers.

Will you get the same return on development? Nope.

[AlexGR]

Merely a superficial blanket imo and goes against the whole nature behind the anon movement.

I wouldn't have a problem ideologically as long as the devs could be anonymous even from the authorities (think NSA-level resources). But since this is extremely hard or improbable to achieve, their anonymity is not really against the establishment, rather the ordinary people, forums, investors etc. And, when that happens, people are more hesitant to throw money in a project due to all the scams and fails that are way too numerous to mention.

But the worst scams and fails have not involved anonymous people.

If something *seems* legit but it isn't, it has the potential to scam people more money.

However this isn't about scamming anyone with SDC. Obviously there has been work done in the rings on a btc blockchain, so there's proof-of-talent so to speak. It's just that to the whale investors, it seems that a project has greater accountability when the devs are known and that's when they can invest more. Everyone profits indirectly as the price goes higher.

It's not a blocker if there's work going on that seems ok, even if the dev is unknown. It just increases the possible investment if people know him.

Case in point: Spreadcoin. DRK people kind of learned about two projects from the DRK thread. One was SDC due to the proposed merger (and many of us came here and invested a few coins) another one was Spreadcoin as Spreadcoin was the first one to try to clone DRK and evolve a bit on the code on some stuff. At some point the Spreadcoin dev found a bug in DRK and that gained the DRK communitys attention for investment.

Anyway, things were going well with Spread, price was rising and then the anonymous dev went AWOL, never to be seen again. Now it's on a community takeover status with price at 1/10th or something from the peak. It's kind of "reminder to self: Never go big with unknown devs"...

[erok]

Merely a superficial blanket imo and goes against the whole nature behind the anon movement.

I wouldn't have a problem ideologically as long as the devs could be anonymous even from the authorities (think NSA-level resources). But since this is extremely hard or improbable to achieve, their anonymity is not really against the establishment, rather the ordinary people, forums, investors etc. And, when that happens, people are more hesitant to throw money in a project due to all the scams and fails that are way too numerous to mention.

But the worst scams and fails have not involved anonymous people.

If something *seems* legit but it isn't, it has the potential to scam people more money.

However this isn't about scamming anyone with SDC. Obviously there has been work done in the rings on a btc blockchain, so there's proof-of-talent so to speak. It's just that to the whale investors, it seems that a project has greater accountability when the devs are known and that's when they can invest more. Everyone profits indirectly as the price goes higher.

It's not a blocker if there's work going on that seems ok, even if the dev is unknown. It just increases the possible investment if people know him.

Case in point: Spreadcoin. DRK people kind of learned about two projects from the DRK thread. One was SDC due to the proposed merger (and many of us came here and invested a few coins) another one was Spreadcoin as Spreadcoin was the first one to try to clone DRK and evolve a bit on the code on some stuff. At some point the Spreadcoin dev found a bug in DRK and that gained the DRK communitys attention for investment.

Anyway, things were going well with Spread, price was rising and then the anonymous dev went AWOL, never to be seen again. Now it's on a community takeover status with price at 1/10th or something from the peak. It's kind of "reminder to self: Never go big with unknown devs"...

Bitcoin.

*drops mic*

[tokona44]

My shadow osx wallet crash and crash and crash.  
im trying to sync it, takes a long time.

make sure you're running latest version, 1.3.1.0
use bootstrap, see: http://shadowcash.info/x/MAAV

What version of OSX? I have noticed greater stability issues with some versions of OSX over others.
Please come in IRC (devs might find crash logs useful)

I have used bootstrap, and i have osx 10.10.2. IRC im on bu its almost dead over there.....