A message to all those involved in the BlockNET debacle

[dragnar]

First let me say that these views are entirely my own, as I can only speak for myself.

Anyone who invested a considerable amount financially in this mess did not properly do his homework. Whether or not the developers of BlockNET are part of a pump group just playing their usual games remains to be seen. However, their behavior shows that whether or not they are, they have behaved in a very unethical manner. 


I have worked closely with jl777 (James) for several months on SuperNET, mainly on integrating it into the BitcoinDark core. I have watched this project grow and currently we have over 5 dozen great people involved, from testers to technical writers, to radio djs.

BlockNET was first announced and billed as "The internet of blockchains". (jl777's signature in the SuperNET forum is "SuperNET is to cryptocurrencies as the internet is to websites") This idea is taken almost completely from the SuperNET. In addition, ideas like distributed file storage (already working in the SuperNET API) have been announced as coming to BlockNET, and even the structure of SuperNET's ipo has been emulated by BlockNET. To date, BlockNET has released 0 lines of original code, as compared to the tens of thousands of lines we have worked so hard on these past months. This code is available for public viewing at github.com/jl777/btcd. (Analysis and review is very welcome)

BlockNET has claimed that their protocol will be true p2p and has even claimed that SuperNET is not. SuperNET uses kademlia distributed hash tables, the same as bittorrent. The BlockNET devs are effectively claiming that BitTorrent is not a peer to peer system. 

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and we at SuperNET certainly encourage free and open competition. However, I am discouraged to see our imitators blatantly misleading their investors. 

The SuperNET announcement thread on this forum was immediately moved to the marketplace, while the BlockNET thread has been allowed to remain in announcements. Many more news outlets have reported on BlockNET, and bittrex is helping host their ito. Whether this is indicative of a wider conspiracy against SuperNET and anything NXT-related is up for debate, but it certainly leads to some troubling questions. SuperNET's initial marketing was low key by design, but the resistance we have felt from the larger crypto community has been unexpectedly strong. It seems that new ideas with active developers are being fought. This is a disease that must be rooted out in this community!

In the end, however, I am not worried. It is my contention that superior technology will always win, and that the long term market will always choose the strongest competitor. Crypto is a vibrant and exciting world, we all need to remember to keep pushing the boundaries of what is possible daily. 

Matthew

I don't know how u cant see that 90% of the shit coins getting release are released by the same groupe

That same group also create,s massif FUD party,s against any coin that try,s to be legit ( trying every ting to bring them down )

This includes news / bitcointalk / exchanges / devs / big twitter acc <<<< loads of them are all in that group

One,s u understand this and look back @ all this shit ( past 2 yr,s ) u will see it for yourself

[Morton Bitcoin Management]

Why would people trust SuperNET when NXT's distribution was only split up between 73 account holders?  Also I don't know one superNET dev to come out and publicly state who they are. If you would rather trust unfair anonymous devs over fair known devs be my guest but don't blame the Blocknet when NXT and the superNET fails.

[EvilDave]

SuperNET isn't NXT, and SN distribution has absolutely sod all to do with NXT distribution. So, nope, that doesn't fly.
And as for SN having anon devs, there are plenty of non-anon thieves around, so that argument doesn't work either.

I've watched how both projects have run since their inceptions, and I haven't seen anything yet to contradict BTCDdevs post.
All we've seen from BlockNet so far is a lot of marketing and no code, whereas SuperNET has pretty close to no marketing and lots of code, some of which actually works.


 

[Spoetnik]

Notice how I had the idea before both of them ?

(Kademlia was mentioned in the topic starters first post)

I proposed years before and went on in detail on how to make a currency using ed2k and KAD faaaaar before both (here in the forum)
Because I am an old and well known eMule dev and many MANY people have downloaded and used my file sharing client.
I have a looong list of firsts I put into emule feature wise and I still to this day have my client and use it ocasionaly.
I was the first guy to port eMule and all it's 3rd party libs to 64bit for example.

so uhhh Supernet and Blocknet you both should be giving me the credit LOL
and proof is here in the search box.. I have brought up my concept many times on many topics
then well well what do you know.. hhahaha

See why I was pissed off at these idea stealing greedy grubby little scamming Blocknet weazles way back ?
So what ever happened to fuckwad and his Blocknet scam ?
seems it was pumped and dumped like everything else.. I have not seen it come up almost at all since it was posted.
idiots LOL

[nutildah]

Why would people trust SuperNET when NXT's distribution was only split up between 73 account holders?   Also I don't know one superNET dev to come out and publicly state who they are. If you would rather trust unfair anonymous devs over fair known devs be my guest but don't blame the Blocknet when NXT and the superNET fails.

Noob Necromancy Bash = FUD farmer for hire

So what ever happened to fuckwad and his Blocknet scam ?
seems it was pumped and dumped like everything else.. I have not seen it come up almost at all since it was posted.
idiots LOL

This thread has posts going up to Dec 26th:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=841223.820

[Morton Bitcoin Management]

SuperNET isn't NXT, and SN distribution has absolutely sod all to do with NXT distribution. So, nope, that doesn't fly.
And as for SN having anon devs, there are plenty of non-anon thieves around, so that argument doesn't work either.
 

My argument wasn't that there aren't any non-anon thieves. I'm just wondering why somebody would trust a fintech system that does not give any of the devs names? If their project is so legit why would they not take credit for it? I can understand Satoshi's anonymity in exposing revolutionary blockchain technology but cats already out of the bag so why wouldn't devs stand by their creation and stake their reputation if their product is really that legit?

[Liquid71]

SuperNET isn't NXT, and SN distribution has absolutely sod all to do with NXT distribution. So, nope, that doesn't fly.
And as for SN having anon devs, there are plenty of non-anon thieves around, so that argument doesn't work either.
 

My argument wasn't that there aren't any non-anon thieves. I'm just wondering why somebody would trust a fintech system that does not give any of the devs names? If their project is so legit why would they not take credit for it? I can understand Satoshi's anonymity in exposing revolutionary blockchain technology but cats already out of the bag so why wouldn't devs stand by their creation and stake their reputation if their product is really that legit?

yeah I don't trust Bitcoin because Satoshi valued his privacy and we don't know his identity 

Ripple labs just got fined by the government for $750,000, so privacy does have value.

[Morton Bitcoin Management]

SuperNET isn't NXT, and SN distribution has absolutely sod all to do with NXT distribution. So, nope, that doesn't fly.
And as for SN having anon devs, there are plenty of non-anon thieves around, so that argument doesn't work either.
 

My argument wasn't that there aren't any non-anon thieves. I'm just wondering why somebody would trust a fintech system that does not give any of the devs names? If their project is so legit why would they not take credit for it? I can understand Satoshi's anonymity in exposing revolutionary blockchain technology but cats already out of the bag so why wouldn't devs stand by their creation and stake their reputation if their product is really that legit?

yeah I don't trust Bitcoin because Satoshi valued his privacy and we don't know his identity 

Ripple labs just got fined by the government for $750,000, so privacy does have value.

 Literally just said I understand Satoshi's anonymity because of safety reasons. If I created a program that could undermined the federal reserve I would fear for my life as well. Ripple isn't the best example because how it functions is different than most cryptocurrencies and they started off as a company.

 I don't need to start a company to write a piece of code that others can choose to support or not. It would be incredibly difficult for any government to prosecute a couple coders who decided to create software that anyone could run and technically be a part of. Furthermore, I really don't like the anonymous unfair distribution of NXT which basically is the backbone of the superNET. In reality, there's no way of determining the integrity of the anonymous creators who also control the distribution of their cryptocurrency. With bitcoin it was impossible to control the distribution therefore the only thing that really matters is the code.