how to spot scam coin?

[Daedelus]

NXT's initial supply went to few investors, and it remains strong despite the threat of large malicious holders.  There are successful others.

Nxt's distribution was to 73, to be exact, after two months of little to no interest (this is before the terms IPO/ICO etc existed in crypto). Curious to know how you came to the conclusion for the rest? What indicates to you that they are malicious?

To be exact you should say 73 anonymous accounts on Bitcointalk. It is fair to say that 50 or more of those accounts belong to one and the same group who created nxt

There isn't any definitive way to substantiate this either way so it is a moot point. But, by the same logic, you must believe Bitcoin was mined by Satoshi's small group in the early days?

There is a fundamental difference

There isn't a fundamental difference.

[Daedelus]

There is some but much less than before Zerocoin, evidenced by the market capitalizations.

What were the conclusions of Nothing-at-Stake?

Regardless, the problem of large stakes threatening a proof-of-stake network is not yet solved.

What were the conclusions of Nothing-at-Stake?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=897488.msg10152632#msg10152632

Tl:Dr - nothing to write home about. There have been 2 more papers since these results that are in the thread.

Not many attacks are likely at a $25 million market capitalization, but attacks become profitable as it rises.

No one seems to have solved the history attack; nevertheless, this isn't a problem for the Clotho-Hydra, and it still provides certainty in far shorter time.

Regardless, the problem of large stakes threatening a proof-of-stake network is not yet solved.

Define large. You still seem to imply you think 5% of a stake can damage a network, where are these large stakes in Nxt's POS that you fear so much?

Also:

Regardless, the problem of large mining pools threatening a proof-of-work network is not yet solved.

When an exchange is looted for a large percentage of a Proof-of-Stake cryptocurrency, the risk level for it rises.

This also is not a problem for the Clotho-Hydra.

1) Nxt has rolling decentralized checkpoints so the network won't accept any reorganisation of the blockchain deeper than 720 blocks, let alone the 350,000 blocks needed to carry out a history attack, as defined by Kushti.

2) When nxt was hacked from BTER, they cleared out the account. How much did they get at the height of its popularity?  50million or 5%. Nxters keep their nxt in their own accounts so they can use the asset exchange, digital goods store, encrypted messaging etc. And trading is moving to decentralized options like multigateway and instantdex. So where are the huge concentrations if Nxt that you fear?

I get the feeling I am being trolled in an attempt to promote your vapourware coin..  

[o0‡0o]

NXT's initial supply went to few investors, and it remains strong despite the threat of large malicious holders.  There are successful others.

Nxt's distribution was to 73, to be exact, after two months of little to no interest (this is before the terms IPO/ICO etc existed in crypto). Curious to know how you came to the conclusion for the rest? What indicates to you that they are malicious?

To be exact you should say 73 anonymous accounts on Bitcointalk. It is fair to say that 50 or more of those accounts belong to one and the same group who created nxt

There isn't any definitive way to substantiate this either way so it is a moot point. But, by the same logic, you must believe Bitcoin was mined by Satoshi's small group in the early days?

There is a fundamental difference

There isn't a fundamental difference.

Hello, Wakie Wakie, how is life in dreamland?
Lets assume both cases are true. So the guys behind nxt had 95% of available coins for satoshi to archive the same % stake he must single mine all coins until now and for the next 100 years.
Fundamental difference alright.

[Daedelus]

NXT's initial supply went to few investors, and it remains strong despite the threat of large malicious holders.  There are successful others.

Nxt's distribution was to 73, to be exact, after two months of little to no interest (this is before the terms IPO/ICO etc existed in crypto). Curious to know how you came to the conclusion for the rest? What indicates to you that they are malicious?

To be exact you should say 73 anonymous accounts on Bitcointalk. It is fair to say that 50 or more of those accounts belong to one and the same group who created nxt

There isn't any definitive way to substantiate this either way so it is a moot point. But, by the same logic, you must believe Bitcoin was mined by Satoshi's small group in the early days?

There is a fundamental difference

There isn't a fundamental difference.

Hello, Wakie Wakie, how is life in dreamland?
Lets assume both cases are true. So the guys behind nxt had 95% of available coins for satoshi to archive the same % stake he must single mine all coins until now and for the next 100 years.
Fundamental difference alright.

How has difficulty changed in Bitcoins POW since 2009? How long would it take a small group to mine 1,000,000+++ bitcoins today? Is it possible for that group to achieve this on their ordinary home computers?

Wakey wakey. Any advantage early adopters of Nxt compared to today are valid for early adopters of bitcoin. But no one complains about the same issues in Bitcoin..

[Daedelus]

There is some but much less than before Zerocoin, evidenced by the market capitalizations.

What were the conclusions of Nothing-at-Stake?

Regardless, the problem of large stakes threatening a proof-of-stake network is not yet solved.

What were the conclusions of Nothing-at-Stake?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=897488.msg10152632#msg10152632

Tl:Dr - nothing to write home about. There have been 2 more papers since these results that are in the thread.

Not many attacks are likely at a $25 million market capitalization, but attacks become profitable as it rises.

No one seems to have solved the history attack; nevertheless, this isn't a problem for the Clotho-Hydra, and it still provides certainty in far shorter time.

Regardless, the problem of large stakes threatening a proof-of-stake network is not yet solved.

Define large. You still seem to imply you think 5% of a stake can damage a network, where are these large stakes in Nxt's POS that you fear so much?

Also:

Regardless, the problem of large mining pools threatening a proof-of-work network is not yet solved.

When an exchange is looted for a large percentage of a Proof-of-Stake cryptocurrency, the risk level for it rises.

This also is not a problem for the Clotho-Hydra.

1) Nxt has rolling decentralized checkpoints so the network won't accept any reorganisation of the blockchain deeper than 720 blocks, let alone the 350,000 blocks needed to carry out a history attack, as defined by Kushti.

2) When nxt was hacked from BTER, they cleared out the account. How much did they get at the height of its popularity?  50million or 5%. Nxters keep their nxt in their own accounts so they can use the asset exchange, digital goods store, encrypted messaging etc. And trading is moving to decentralized options like multigateway and instantdex. So where are the huge concentrations if Nxt that you fear?

I get the feeling I am being trolled in an attempt to promote your vapourware coin..  

1)  Could you explain how they are decentralized?  How is consensus of the 720 figure reached?

2)  It doesn't bother me since the Clotho-Hydra doesn't have this problem, but the risk is always there for large holders to cause mischief.

1) It is hard coded into the software not to accept blockchain re-orgs after 720 blocks. It is a simple as that. Once a block has 721 confirmations, it is set in stone.

If someone buys old keys that once controlled 90% of the stake, rebuilds a chain, then broadcast it, it will get rejected as it is asking all the nodes of the network to re-org 350,000+ blocks.

Usually next response is to fork from 719 blocks ago and "build a better chain". Details of how this is achieve are never described as (shown by Kushti's work), so called stake grinding/multi-branch forging tends towards POW as the number of branches grows exponentially in your search for a better chain. So no luck there either.

2) Large holders can cause mischief, but you have evaded every question asking for clarification of large. Nxt doesn't have any large enough holders to cause mischief, which you seem to tacitly agree to. Maybe you should switch your statements to "newly launched POS" where stakes are very concentrated?

[Daedelus]

There is some but much less than before Zerocoin, evidenced by the market capitalizations.

What were the conclusions of Nothing-at-Stake?

Regardless, the problem of large stakes threatening a proof-of-stake network is not yet solved.

What were the conclusions of Nothing-at-Stake?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=897488.msg10152632#msg10152632

Tl:Dr - nothing to write home about. There have been 2 more papers since these results that are in the thread.

Not many attacks are likely at a $25 million market capitalization, but attacks become profitable as it rises.

No one seems to have solved the history attack; nevertheless, this isn't a problem for the Clotho-Hydra, and it still provides certainty in far shorter time.

Regardless, the problem of large stakes threatening a proof-of-stake network is not yet solved.

Define large. You still seem to imply you think 5% of a stake can damage a network, where are these large stakes in Nxt's POS that you fear so much?

Also:

Regardless, the problem of large mining pools threatening a proof-of-work network is not yet solved.

When an exchange is looted for a large percentage of a Proof-of-Stake cryptocurrency, the risk level for it rises.

This also is not a problem for the Clotho-Hydra.

1) Nxt has rolling decentralized checkpoints so the network won't accept any reorganisation of the blockchain deeper than 720 blocks, let alone the 350,000 blocks needed to carry out a history attack, as defined by Kushti.

2) When nxt was hacked from BTER, they cleared out the account. How much did they get at the height of its popularity?  50million or 5%. Nxters keep their nxt in their own accounts so they can use the asset exchange, digital goods store, encrypted messaging etc. And trading is moving to decentralized options like multigateway and instantdex. So where are the huge concentrations if Nxt that you fear?

I get the feeling I am being trolled in an attempt to promote your vapourware coin..  

1)  Could you explain how they are decentralized?  How is consensus of the 720 figure reached?

2)  It doesn't bother me since the Clotho-Hydra doesn't have this problem, but the risk is always there for large holders to cause mischief.

1) It is hard coded into the software not to accept blockchain re-orgs after 720 blocks. It is a simple as that. Once a block has 721 confirmations, it is set in stone.

If someone buys old keys that once controlled 90% of the stake, rebuilds a chain, then broadcast it, it will get rejected as it is asking all the nodes of the network to re-org 350,000+ blocks.

Usually next response is to fork from 719 blocks ago and "build a better chain". Details of how this is achieve are never described as (shown by Kushti's work), so called stake grinding/multi-branch forging tends towards POW as the number of branches grows exponentially in your search for a better chain. So no luck there either.

2) Large holders can cause mischief, but you have evaded every question asking for clarification of large. Nxt doesn't have any large enough holders to cause mischief, which you seem to tacitly agree to. Maybe you should switch your statements to "newly launched POS" where stakes are very concentrated?

1)  So a new node could possibly download the wrong chain and reject the new chain?  This is not a problem with Proof-of-Work or the Clotho-Hydra; though the Clotho-Hydra can identify the correct data much more quickly.

2)  I agree that large holders can cause mischief, but, no, their potential to cause mischief also depends upon many factors such as market capitalization, and you'll have to excuse me since I've seen no request for clarification of "large" until now.  Large is a function of the costs a proportion can inflict, market capitalization, opposition within the community like the 10MB empty threat from some parts of the BTC community, etc.  The Clotho-Hydra suffers from none of these defects.  A cartel of powerful Clearinghouses or a cartel of accountholders cannot increase the costs of The Ideal Reserve network by using their proportions of MØ, and almost no cryptocurrency can be hindered by a trading strategy unless if the developers choose to give it credibility.

1) Economic clustering is the solution to this. Vitalik calls this 'Weak Subjectivity'

2) I agree, new POS have a danger of being dumped to death. I guess you have adopted my suggested phrasing or more likely just continue to couch your answers in a veil of "all POS are equally bad" without actually stating it.


Seeing as you have no apparent desire to apply your general characterizations to Nxt in a direct discussion, I think we are done here.

[coinpr0n]

Developers are one of the important things to me in any new coin that comes out. Keeping an eye on their GitHub repos to see if they're actually coding instead of just promoting is a good idea.

[Daedelus]

Why do you state commonly understood economic ideas as though they are a revelation? Nxt solution doesn't use security deposits, you sound like you are describing Nxt.

Again, raising undefined problems and undefined risk conditions. Along with generous servings of claims of an unlaunched coin you're promoting.

Why don't we having a specific discussion where each response is related to the questions and response of the previous post? Can Clotho-Hydro do that too?

[Daedelus]

More vagaries and cherry picking... I'll take that as a no then.

[spirit of btc]

at this point I'm scared to check any new wallets

Beware of Increasingly Sophisticated Malware Infection Attempts
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=935898.0

[§]

-nothing unique
-cloned features
-substantial premine
-instamine
-newby dev account
-dumb devs who ask community for everything, i.e cant code or compile a wallet for that matter
-threads full of newbie accounts, all of them are dev.
-shit roadmaps which usually offer nothing new or nothing at all.
-ico, ico/ipo=shit

[deluxeCITY]

I dont know what i should be look for how do i know coin is scam? people cant do premine anymore so how are they trying to scam us now? It seem to me every coin is scam how can i avoid this?

They can do premines of course they can there are loads out and continue to be released everyday, the way to notice a scam coin is just open up the alternative announcements they will soon come flooding  in, you are right to think that most are scam coins if they are not scam coins they are shit coins and will lose all value the minute the dev and his mining buddies start dumping. I have stayed away from them for quite awhile now after getting rapped up in a few that i got burned on.

[iGotSpots]

Apparently anything I'm involved with is a big no-no

[centauribit]

unfortunately there is a lot of alts where peoples lost time and money

[benthach]

at this point all new coins are scam coin. everyone is just want in and out for a quick bucks or get caught holding bag, simple as that. any promise and technology now is just nonsense, it don't work or already exist.

[deluxeCITY]

Apparently anything I'm involved with is a big no-no

Listen to the guy for once he is not lying, anything that he is involved in is most definitely a crap coin at best but more than likely a scam as he was the first to mine it while others are trying to get there wallets set up.

He scammed 1+million from ecash and then dumped them on guys who paid over 1000sat this guy got that down to 70sat in the morning he is one of a kind tos*er and is not to be trusted.

[iGotSpots]

Apparently anything I'm involved with is a big no-no

Listen to the guy for once he is not lying, anything that he is involved in is most definitely a crap coin at best but more than likely a scam as he was the first to mine it while others are trying to get there wallets set up.

He scammed 1+million from ecash and then dumped them on guys who paid over 1000sat this guy got that down to 70sat in the morning he is one of a kind tos*er and is not to be trusted.

Lol you're a fuckin idiot

[Bergman]

Well, there are a lot of opinions here. I believe there are a lot of cryptos with good intentions and a lot of 'scam' coins too.

The key to not getting scammed is patience and research. Don't get over excited about a single feature or concept and run and buy it.

Here are some example questions:
How long have they been around?
What does their history show in terms of price and support?
Are the features gimmicky or substantial?
Is the Dev active?
Does it have a supportive community?
*Have they gone beyond the technology and looked at what it will take to really become successful? (This is an important one, one of the pitfalls is that a feature or technology alone will drive the coin into success, in reality it will take much more than that.) Follow up question, are they taking action in those other areas?

[speedy1987]

You should never invest more than you can afford to lose.

[nutildah]

Just assume each coin is a scam until proven otherwise. For the most part, they all are. As a general rule of thumb, a coin is a scam.