The Next Crypto Wave.

[CryptoHeaven]

Next wave is 'Stellar'. It is going to get ahead of Ripple very soon.

[Este Nuno]

on altcoins, I'm curious as to which ones are currently targeting adoption from people outside the crypto-sphere right now?

Storj coin is targeting cloud storage users. Its very early days yet but apparently they've had some commcercial interest to host video content.

If it turns out that Storj can provide fast and cheap hosting for companies that do video and other high storage/high bandwidth type operations then I think they have a good chance of success.

If they can pull it all together technically and make it work I will be amazed though. I wish them luck, it just seems too good to be true. But I would honestly love to see it work because if it does that would be incredible.

on altcoins, I'm curious as to which ones are currently targeting adoption from people outside the crypto-sphere right now?

Storj coin is targeting cloud storage users. Its very early days yet but apparently they've had some commcercial interest to host video content.

Because as a cloud user I don't want my personal data stored by a reputable company, or as a business we don't want our collaborative data stored by a business with whom we have an SLA and whose sole job is the safe storage of data, we want it spread out across random hard drives, right? Or better yet - stored on the hard drives of tens of thousands of computers infected by a botnet, where the destruction of the botnet means the destruction of every redundant copy of my data. Sounds like a great idea!

There's also this: http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/appcoins-are-snake-oil/

Well, to be fair I'd assume the data is going to be encrypted of course. And have multiple redundancies.

And I think that article is far too general and doesn't really cover all the potential use cases. Storj(if it actually ends up working) could easily be valuable considering what they are trying to achieve. And having a convenient way to compensate and give incentive to people providing hard drive space to the network has utility. I don't know exactly how they deal with Storjcoin as a currency, but I could easily see it being better than Bitcoin for this particular use. The only argument I could see against it is that they could just use Bitcoin and it would be better, but that's not necessarily true.

[hypostatization]

Next wave is 'Stellar'. It is going to get ahead of Ripple very soon.

Stellar is just a rushed-to-launch Ripple fork that has been modified to give the wealthy increased control.

[Este Nuno]

Next wave is 'Stellar'. It is going to get ahead of Ripple very soon.

Stellar is just a rushed-to-launch Ripple fork that has been modified to give the wealthy increased control.

I just checked out the website of Stellar and I noticed this:

"Stellar is a not-for-profit."

If that's true then it's already better than Ripple considering the massive issues and conflicts of interest involved with the debacle which was XRP.

[hypostatization]

Stellar is just a rushed-to-launch Ripple fork that has been modified to give the wealthy increased control.

I just checked out the website of Stellar and I noticed this:

"Stellar is a not-for-profit."

If that's true then it's already better than Ripple considering the massive issues and conflicts of interest involved with the debacle which was XRP.

Stellar org has already proven that to be a disingenuous label. Here is a great article on nonprofit millionaires. As far as I can see, Stellar is repeating the same debacle from the early days of Ripple in fast forward.

Are you aware that:

• Founder distributions exist
• Employees are planned to receive Stellar grants
• Stripe possesses 2% of all Stellar

I am in no way opposed to individuals and corporations seeking profit, but find it amusing that Stellar has attempted to market itself as somehow existing for the greater good + community. Even at a code level, the system is rigged to give advantage to the most wealthy. Incidentally, Stellar org and its founders are the most wealthy in terms of STR. If not beneficial to the world's unbanked, I am sure that Stellar will at least be great for the bank account of Jed McCaleb.

[Este Nuno]

Stellar is just a rushed-to-launch Ripple fork that has been modified to give the wealthy increased control.

I just checked out the website of Stellar and I noticed this:

"Stellar is a not-for-profit."

If that's true then it's already better than Ripple considering the massive issues and conflicts of interest involved with the debacle which was XRP.

Stellar org has already proven that to be a disingenuous label. Here is a great article on nonprofit millionaires. As far as I can see, Stellar is repeating the same debacle from the early days of Ripple in fast forward.

Are you aware that:

• Founder distributions exist
• Employees are planned to receive Stellar grants
• Stripe possesses 2% of all Stellar

I am in no way opposed to individuals and corporations seeking profit, but find it amusing that Stellar has attempted to market itself as somehow existing for the greater good + community. Even at a code level, the system is rigged to give advantage to the most wealthy. Incidentally, Stellar org and its founders are the most wealthy in terms of STR. If not beneficial to the world's unbanked, I am sure that Stellar will at least be great for the bank account of Jed McCaleb.

I'm not surprised really. It sounds too good to be true and didn't line up with what I've been hearing anyway. They are probably legally "not for profit", which as you point out doesn't necessarily mean much.

[gjhiggins]

Since you seem to be an expert on altcoins, I'm curious as to which ones are currently targeting adoption from people outside the crypto-sphere right now?

Not an expert, I just collected a lot of metadata which occasionally prompts me to ask some obvious questions of prognosticators.

... such as the one you just asked, it's a good question ...

The short and honest answer is that I've no real idea. In a small number of instances both intention and action are clear, e.g. DOGE, TIPS, WKC but there's a larger untold number where intention/action is unclear.

In essence, there's no reliable way to tell unless the user-base is already slapping you in the face with a fish or the programme is sufficiently extensive as to be unmissable. Is a dedicated subreddit evidence? An FB page? A merchant adoption programme? Without a close inspection of the details, it's impossible to distinguish between actual targeting and the results of merely ensuring that the pre-launch check-boxes for the latest PnD are all apparently ticked.

There's nothing in the metadata that would directly signify explicit targeting but perhaps there's an opportunity to derive such. I'll make a note to check. I have yet to put the DOACC dataset through its paces properly. If I've got it right, it'll be a useful resource.

F'rinstance, there's a recent bitcointalk thread Sleepers, in which BitcoinNational maintains a list of trading symbols and btctalk thread links. I can extract the trading symbols (by hand, sadly), wrap them in a SPARQL query to retrieves additional data. The query phrasing requires a bit more boilerplate than usual but the core of the query is quite SQL-like (symbols taken from an early post):

Code:

PREFIX skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#>
PREFIX doacc: <http://purl.org/net/bel-epa/doacc#>
SELECT ?node ?label ?symbol ?incept ?ps ?pow WHERE { 
 ?node skos:prefLabel ?label .
 ?node doacc:symbol ?symbol . 
 ?node doacc:incept ?incept . 
 ?node doacc:pow ?pows .
 ?pows skos:prefLabel ?pow .
 ?node doacc:protection-scheme ?prots .
 ?prots skos:prefLabel ?ps .
 FILTER (str(?symbol) IN ("DGB", "MYR", "SFR", "FCC", "NET", "FLO",
"GLC", "LKY", "PYC", "EMD", "DMD", "CACH", "RT2", "ARK", "TEK",
"HBN", "CAP", "PHS", "BTG", "PXC", "ORB", "LK7", "SMC", "BTC",
"MRY", "SPT", "WAS", "888", "RIC", "GRC", "YAC", "BET", "P$", "MZC",
"XJO", "FFC", "TAK", "BTE", "PLT", "BCC", "BITS", "MAST", "SAT",
"WAS", "AC", "CAIX", "LGD", "DEM", "NEC", "STR", "NOAH", "420"))
} ORDER BY ?label

I can then post this to DOACC's public HTTP API, get the results back in a standard XML format, transform the XML with an XSL stylesheet and get something I can literally paste into this very textarea (edited for brevity and expository clarity):

node	label	symbol	incept	protectionscheme	powscheme
doacc:D0565c828-dbf2-4bd7-9cad-8d2e224f0cbb	OctoCoin	888	2014-04	pow	scrypt
doacc:D99e1c6f8-6944-4786-ae6f-1b32e61da00e	Diamond	DMD	2013-06	pos	scrypt
doacc:Dd4ad86c1-dc4b-4446-93a3-e7be249b735d	Emerald	EMD	2013-06	pow	scrypt
doacc:D7cada03a-4cc1-4bb7-a86d-fcb4e09fc3c2	FlorinCoin	FLO	2013-06	pow	scrypt
doacc:D5c772d1c-e970-45a6-a779-e33733c3c85e	GlobalCoin	GLC	2013-06	pow	scrypt

You can check the full results for yourself by copynpasta, dump the above query into the web form that's fronting the SPARQL endpoint on Minkiz: http://minkiz.co/sparql/ In this example, query and results are quite straightforward, more complex queries can be posed, I just need to get a sense of what's worth querying.

If I can formulate some hypotheses about relationships I can fish around and see if the results form a consistent pattern. Short block target times might be indicative, biggish number of coins and short transaction confirmations. That'll do for a start. The info is in the metadata (not consistently tho', it depends on what info was originally available, there's nothing to prevent backfilling the data, if the gain in statistical confidence is considered worth the effort).

Working on an update atm, another 140-odd coins to add.

Cheers

Graham

Edit, extended examples

[Este Nuno]

Since you seem to be an expert on altcoins, I'm curious as to which ones are currently targeting adoption from people outside the crypto-sphere right now?

Not an expert, I just collected a lot of metadata which occasionally prompts me to ask some obvious questions of prognosticators.

... such as the one you just asked, it's a good question ...

The short and honest answer is that I've no real idea. In a small number of instances both intention and action are clear, e.g. DOGE, TIPS, WKC but there's a larger untold number where intention/action is unclear.

In essence, there's no reliable way to tell unless the user-base is already slapping you in the face with a fish or the programme is sufficiently extensive as to be unmissable. Is a dedicated subreddit evidence? An FB page? A merchant adoption programme? Without a close inspection of the details, it's impossible to distinguish between actual targeting and the results of merely ensuring that the pre-launch check-boxes for the latest PnD are all apparently ticked.

There's nothing in the metadata that would directly signify explicit targeting but perhaps there's an opportunity to derive such. I'll make a note to check. I have yet to put the DOACC dataset through its paces properly. If I've got it right, it'll be a useful resource.

F'rinstance, there's a recent bitcointalk thread Sleepers, in which BitcoinNational maintains a list of trading symbols and btctalk thread links. I can extract the trading symbols (by hand, sadly), wrap them in a SPARQL query to retrieves additional data. The query phrasing requires a bit more boilerplate than usual but the core of the query is quite SQL-like (symbols taken from an early post):

Code:

PREFIX skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#>
PREFIX doacc: <http://purl.org/net/bel-epa/doacc#>
SELECT ?node ?label ?symbol ?incept ?ps ?pow WHERE { 
 ?node skos:prefLabel ?label .
 ?node doacc:symbol ?symbol . 
 ?node doacc:incept ?incept . 
 ?node doacc:pow ?pows .
 ?pows skos:prefLabel ?pow .
 ?node doacc:protection-scheme ?prots .
 ?prots skos:prefLabel ?ps .
 FILTER (str(?symbol) IN ("DGB", "MYR", "SFR", "FCC", "NET", "FLO",
"GLC", "LKY", "PYC", "EMD", "DMD", "CACH", "RT2", "ARK", "TEK",
"HBN", "CAP", "PHS", "BTG", "PXC", "ORB", "LK7", "SMC", "BTC",
"MRY", "SPT", "WAS", "888", "RIC", "GRC", "YAC", "BET", "P$", "MZC",
"XJO", "FFC", "TAK", "BTE", "PLT", "BCC", "BITS", "MAST", "SAT",
"WAS", "AC", "CAIX", "LGD", "DEM", "NEC", "STR", "NOAH", "420"))
} ORDER BY ?label

I can then post this to DOACC's public HTTP API, get the results back in a standard XML format, transform the XML with an XSL stylesheet and get something I can literally paste into this very textarea (edited for brevity and expository clarity):

node	label	symbol	incept	protectionscheme	powscheme
doacc:D0565c828-dbf2-4bd7-9cad-8d2e224f0cbb	OctoCoin	888	2014-04	pow	scrypt
doacc:D99e1c6f8-6944-4786-ae6f-1b32e61da00e	Diamond	DMD	2013-06	pos	scrypt
doacc:Dd4ad86c1-dc4b-4446-93a3-e7be249b735d	Emerald	EMD	2013-06	pow	scrypt
doacc:D7cada03a-4cc1-4bb7-a86d-fcb4e09fc3c2	FlorinCoin	FLO	2013-06	pow	scrypt
doacc:D5c772d1c-e970-45a6-a779-e33733c3c85e	GlobalCoin	GLC	2013-06	pow	scrypt

You can check the full results for yourself by copynpasta, dump the above query into the web form that's fronting the SPARQL endpoint on Minkiz: http://minkiz.co/sparql/ In this example, query and results are quite straightforward, more complex queries can be posed, I just need to get a sense of what's worth querying.

If I can formulate some hypotheses about relationships I can fish around and see if the results form a consistent pattern. Short block target times might be indicative, biggish number of coins and short transaction confirmations. That'll do for a start. The info is in the metadata (not consistently tho', it depends on what info was originally available, there's nothing to prevent backfilling the data, if the gain in statistical confidence is considered worth the effort).

Working on an update atm, another 140-odd coins to add.

Cheers

Graham

Edit, extended examples

Very interesting work you're doing.

Is Bitmark(BTM) in your next batch of 140 you're adding? Just wondering. Thanks.

[dreamhouse]

memecoin? that was long gone, you still remember it? It was a first attempt by a scamcoin creator.

[HunterMinerCrafter]

Not an expert, I just collected a lot of metadata which occasionally prompts me to ask some obvious questions of prognosticators.

Good stuff.  <3 RDF.

The data on MOTO looks to be very outdated, though.  It would be quite an effort to keep this background graph continuously curated.  Otherwise it is awesome.

[gjhiggins]

Is Bitmark(BTM) in your next batch of 140 you're adding? Just wondering. Thanks.

Bitmark wasn't included, it is now. Thanks for alerting me. Having corresponded a while ago with coinsolidation, I was aware of progress but must've missed the release.

Thanks for the kind words.

Cheers

Graham

Edit: corrected mis-recalled pseudonym, sigh.

[CoinHoarder]

There's also this: http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/appcoins-are-snake-oil/

This article is speculation. He connects a lot of dots and passes it off as fact. For instance, in a proper debate.. people can use facts and statistics to support the argument for each side of the debate. However, it doesn't mean that either side of the debate is more right or wrong than the other. In this case, it is one side of the debate written as if it's a fact and there isn't a debate to be had, or in other words... another side to the story.

Furthermore, the author is clearly biased and heavily invested in Bitcoin so I would take it with a grain of salt. The same author also wrote this article which is also speculation, one side of the debate, written as fact: http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/the-coming-demise-of-altcoins/

It is pretty obvious to me "the satoshi nakamoto institute" was established for one thing and one thing only, spreading pro-Bitcoin propaganda and ALT coin FUD. I plan on addressing both of these articles extensively when I get a chance, proving there are two sides of the debate, and those articles are not facts- only speculation supported by facts. I can support the other side of the debate with just as many facts and connect the dots just as well as those articles did, but in support of the other side.

[Este Nuno]

There's also this: http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/appcoins-are-snake-oil/

This article is speculation. He connects a lot of dots and passes it off as fact. For instance, in a proper debate.. people can use facts and statistics to support the argument for each side of the debate. However, it doesn't mean that either side of the debate is more right or wrong than the other. In this case, it is one side of the debate written as if it's a fact and there isn't a debate to be had, or in other words... another side to the story.

Furthermore, the author is clearly biased and heavily invested in Bitcoin so I would take it with a grain of salt. The same author also wrote this article which is also speculation, one side of the debate, written as fact: http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/the-coming-demise-of-altcoins/

It is pretty obvious to me "the satoshi nakamoto institute" was established for one thing and one thing only, spreading pro-Bitcoin propaganda and ALT coin FUD. I plan on addressing both of these articles extensively when I get a chance, proving there are two sides of the debate, and those articles are not facts- only speculation supported by facts. I can support the other side of the debate with just as many facts and connect the dots just as well as those articles did, but in support of the other side.

Yes, I agree with you. I'm surprised I see that article linked so often. The arguments seem vague and weak.

The obvious pro-Bitcoin agenda and apparent lack of objectivity on most of the opinion pieces there really jump out at me. They remind me of Mircea Popescu's writings.

[gjhiggins]

Good stuff.  <3 RDF.

Thanks. RDF is proving quite useful, the blockchain is also an acyclic graph and can be spooled straight to RDF.

The data on MOTO looks to be very outdated, though.  It would be quite an effort to keep this background graph continuously curated.  Otherwise it is awesome.

Yes, that's an unfortunate but inevitable problem, the current punishing frequency of altcoin launches isn't helping either. If I can give DOACC enough clout so that it is perceived to have value, there'll be some motivation for coin reps to submit changes to the graph. Quiescent coins don't change, only the active ones do, so it's a relatively small subset and should be manageable. It might even be amenable to partial automation.

I've been puzzling for a while over how to model change without unduly complicating the graph. To publish full-on LOD, we should by rights be including explicit provenance and change statements but it eventually dawned on me that the git commit history will handle that. After I've effected these additions, I'll work out an easier approach to using pull requests to communicate updates to the graph and write it up.

Cheers

Graham

[rokkyroad]

The Next Crypto Wave will create fancier scam/sleaze coins too.

Scams and sleaze coins are upping their game now.

Buying their way into affliations with established coins through ipo funds.  "We are in business with 'such and such' coin so we must be good".  Established coin dev makes a few btc and sleaze coin gets a pump.

Several sleaze coins 'holding hands'. Power in numbers. "We work together for the common good of mankind".  One decent IPO can get a few coins off the ground offering more shitty ipos and the moon. They can support one another by creating volume for each other's coin.

Exciting times ahead!

[CoinHoarder]

The Next Crypto Wave will create fancier scam/sleaze coins too.

Scams and sleaze coins are upping their game now.

Buying their way into affliations with established coins through ipo funds.  "We are in business with 'such and such' coin so we must be good".  Established coin dev makes a few btc and sleaze coin gets a pump.

Several sleaze coins 'holding hands'. Power in numbers. "We work together for the common good of mankind".  One decent IPO can get a few coins off the ground offering more shitty ipos and the moon. They can support one another by creating volume for each other's coin.

Exciting times ahead!

If it weren't for IPOs, some wonderful ideas would have never come into existance. You can thank them later when crypto coin 3.0s are filled with wonderful improvements and features.

[rokkyroad]

The Next Crypto Wave will create fancier scam/sleaze coins too.

Scams and sleaze coins are upping their game now.

Buying their way into affliations with established coins through ipo funds.  "We are in business with 'such and such' coin so we must be good".  Established coin dev makes a few btc and sleaze coin gets a pump.

Several sleaze coins 'holding hands'. Power in numbers. "We work together for the common good of mankind".  One decent IPO can get a few coins off the ground offering more shitty ipos and the moon. They can support one another by creating volume for each other's coin.

Exciting times ahead!

If it weren't for IPOs, some wonderful ideas would have never come into existance. You can think them later when crypto coin 3.0s are filled with wonderful improvements and features.

I'm sure there will be a diamond or two. The trick will be recognizing them. Right now for every legit coin we have 100 shitcoins(hyperbole).

[CoinHoarder]

The Next Crypto Wave will create fancier scam/sleaze coins too.

Scams and sleaze coins are upping their game now.

Buying their way into affliations with established coins through ipo funds.  "We are in business with 'such and such' coin so we must be good".  Established coin dev makes a few btc and sleaze coin gets a pump.

Several sleaze coins 'holding hands'. Power in numbers. "We work together for the common good of mankind".  One decent IPO can get a few coins off the ground offering more shitty ipos and the moon. They can support one another by creating volume for each other's coin.

Exciting times ahead!

If it weren't for IPOs, some wonderful ideas would have never come into existance. You can think them later when crypto coin 3.0s are filled with wonderful improvements and features.

I'm sure there will be a diamond or two. The trick will be recognizing them. Right now for every legit coin we have 100 shitcoins(hyperbole).

I agree. It is getting better though. A year and a half ago was a flood of copy and paste coins with no innovation.