Bitcoin sCrypt (BTCS) – Official Bitcoin sCrypt Altcoin ...

Auroracoin (AUR) — Briefly the Number Two Cryptocurrency — Destroyed On Airdrop Impact

Auroracoin (AUR) — Briefly the Number Two Cryptocurrency — Destroyed On Airdrop Impact
The War On Shitcoins Episode 3: Auroracoin (AUR). The war on shitcoins is a Crypto.IQ series that targets and shoots down cryptocurrencies that are not worth investing in either due to their being scams, having serious design flaws, being centralized, or in general just being worthless copies of other cryptocurrencies. There are thousands of shitcoins that are ruining the markets, and Crypto.IQ intends to expose all of them. The crypto space needs an exorcism, and we are happy to provide it.
Back in the early days of crypto when there were less than 140 cryptocurrencies listed on CoinMarketCap versus nearly 2,100 cryptocurrencies today, Auroracoin (AUR) briefly became the second most valuable cryptocurrency on March 4, 2014, when its price peaked at $98.
This corresponded to a market cap in excess of $1 billion at a time when Bitcoin’s (BTC) market cap was only $7 billion. But this ended up being one of the most vicious pump and dumps in the early days of altcoins since a mere two days later AUR’s price was already more than 80 percent lower.
The reason AUR gained such a high market cap, if only briefly, is that it brought forth the original concept of national airdrops. It could also be considered the first attempt at a national cryptocurrency. The idea was that AUR would be distributed for free to all citizens of Iceland who signed up and that this would drastically increase cryptocurrency adoption in Iceland.
AUR was mineable via Scrypt Proof of Work (PoW), and the mining community believed in AUR’s potential for becoming the national cryptocurrency of Iceland. Also, AUR was very scarce before the airdrop. Only 2.5 AUR were being distributed per minute via mining, and this scarcity automatically increased its value.
There was a time when AUR was increasing beyond anyone’s expectations just before the airdrop, and numerous speculators jumped into the market only to experience catastrophic losses. But the extremely rapid price peak and subsequent crash is an excellent example of a pump and dump.
Ultimately the citizens of Iceland who signed up likely dumped their AUR immediately for cash profits versus using or adopting AUR. Thus, the original purpose for which Auroracoin was built ended up being its biggest weakness, making Auroracoin a prime example of why national airdrops — and perhaps airdrops in general — do not work. At the point the airdrop occurs, the market becomes saturated, creating strong selling pressure.
The Auroracoin airdrop occurred in 3 phases. On March 24, 2014, 31.8 AUR were given to each Icelandic citizen who signed up. Right before the airdrop started, the Auroracoin market cap was $163 million, and less than a week later it had crashed to $20 million. The earliest Icelanders who received their share of 31.8 AUR got an impressive $400, which explains why they immediately cashed out. By the time phase 1 of the airdrop ended in late July, 1.127 million AUR had been distributed across Iceland, and AUR’s market cap had been completely plundered to less than $170,000.
Phase 2 of the airdrop immediately began when phase 1 ended, and the share per citizen drastically increased to 318 AUR to account for the fall in price. This amounted to about $30, however. By the time phase 2 ended, 1.6 million AUR were distributed, and AUR’s market cap was solidly less than $100,000. Phase 3 of the airdrop then began, and the reward was doubled to 636 AUR per citizen. 1.7 million AUR were distributed by the time the airdrop ended in late March 2015, and the AUR market cap had declined to less than $40,000.
Essentially, speculators and miners worldwide invested heavily into AUR during early 2014 in the hopes that a national airdrop would make AUR a strong cryptocurrency long term. In the end, the airdrop sucked all of the money out of the AUR market. This represented a redistribution of wealth from people in the crypto space who cared about Auroracoin to about 45,000 citizens in Iceland who didn’t.
With the airdrop completed and no more purpose left for Auroracoin, the developers pulled one final trick in April 2015 and burned 5.3 million unclaimed AUR. This led to a speculative rally that increased the Auroracoin market cap back to $450,000.
Shockingly, in March 2018, AUR’s market cap increased to $20 million on strong buying pressure. This showed the tremendous disconnect between the crypto rally and reality. AUR had already been proven to be a failure more than three years earlier.
Currently, Auroracoin has a market cap of $1.6 million despite the fact that AUR has practically no community and no purpose. The trading volume is less than 0.2 Bitcoins (BTC) per day, and confined to the small exchanges Cryptopia and YoBit. This shows how shitcoins with no real trading activity or value can have a market cap in excess of $1 million, proving how meaningless market cap can be at measuring a cryptocurrency’s investment worthiness.
submitted by turtlecane to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

I've been using and evangelizing Bitcoins and the idea of cryptocurrencies in general for 5 years now. Recently, I've been troubled by some issues with energy consumption, deflation and the lack of real arguments or numbers, or even discussion about if these problems will get better, or get worse.

Let me preface this again by saying I've been a bitcoin user and vocal supporter since 2010. I am a privacy advocate, and member of the EFF. This is a sincere post from someone who wants cryptocurrencies to succeed, but is worried about some things that no one seems to be talking about. Let me summarize the points:
  1. The Bitcoin network has, and always will, consume energy that costs about as much as the mining reward is worth. All other variables like hashes per watt efficiency improvements, total hash rate, and difficulty are totally irrelevant. The same is true for transaction fees: the value of the energy consumed will be about equal to the value of aggregate rewards for mining. Here is a detailed analysis for you number junkies.
  2. As the rewards are essentially locked to the valuation of 1 bitcoin (and transaction fees will remain negligible until the last block of coins is mined), so to is the energy consumption of the network locked to the valuation. The energy consumption of the bitcoin network is locked to the market value of a bitcoin at the time it is mined.
  3. The oft-mentioned argument that deflation is not a problem for bitcoin because it is highly divisible assumes that the deflation of bitcoins' value otherwise behaves like deflation of hugely divisible fiat currency. That assumption is false. Deflation has the very tangible and significant impact in the form of the value of total energy consumed by the bitcoin network. Is that ok? What impact will that have? I have no idea, but I'm worried because no one else is talking about it either. I would love if someone with the economist chops could tell me why this is, or isn't really a problem.
  4. All the arguments I've seen justifying the energy cost of the bitcoin network are nonsense. The main rebuttal is that fiat currencies consume much more energy. Bitcoin transactions number in the ~120,000-130,000 per day, as of this writing. Fiat currencies account for all other currency transactions, outnumbering the bitcoin network's transactions by 5 or 6 orders of magnitude. Of course fiat currency consumes more power! The number that actually matters is the energy cost per transaction. It's difficult (for me at least) to estimate the energy cost per transaction of, say, an average bank account transaction across the different forms they can take (debit, deposit, electronic, ATM, debit card, check etc.), but FDIC reports generally show most transactions to cost a bank 7 or 8 cents, with ATM transactions being the most expensive at 20-24 cents. I think we can safely assume that whatever the energy cost is, it is less than those costs, or is otherwise countered by real economic value generated. If it wasn't, being a bank wouldn't be profitable.
  5. How much the various social and political benefits of bitcoin are worth to you don't matter. If you want to pay $6 a transaction for that, great. You do that. Privacy and decentralization, while I agree I find personally quite valuable, are still subjective opinions and not valid justifications for the cost.
  6. The biggest point: that energy is consumed for no reason. What I mean by that is cryptographic hashing is a time/memory trade off. The proof-of-work for bitcoin is heavily slanted towards time: the faster you can hash, the better. And you know what? We're really good at making computation so cheap that ultimately, it's just obfuscating that bitcoin's proof-of-work is value of energy consumed. Beyond that, all technological development surrounding bitcoin mining is totally useless except for bitcoin mining. Mining hardware cannot be repurposed for anything else. If, instead, a memory-intensive rather than time-intensive hashing algorithm were used, then things would be very different. At the very least, bitcoin mining would contribute to advances in memory or bulk storage space, which is universally useful. As for the energy consumption, I am not equipped to speculate on that, but it seems like hardware cost would become the limiting factor, but how much energy was consumed producing that hardware? Who knows. I think this is the point of litecoin, which uses a memory intensive hash called scrypt. Regardless, I want to know, what is the justification for squandering energy like this, when all the benefits and capabilities of the block chain can be had using a ASIC-resistant hashing algorithm?
I know this was really long. These are concerns, what I am hoping is for people to discuss them and, ideally, do some real math that tackles these concerns and shows them to not be problems. I want you guys to tell me why I'm wrong (and trust me, I want to be wrong!). And be sure that these issues will start to become greater and ask by others as the value of bitcoin (and its energy consumption) increases, so at the very least, let's have the answers ready. Thanks for reading! If you did ;).
submitted by metacollin to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

vDinar - miners' coin from Yugoslavia

Some notes about what vDinar ISN'T before reading everything else: - not an ICO/token; - no premine; - no masternodes.
Also, vDinar is already running since 1st February 2018; this topic is not introducing you a still not published coin.
TL;DR (longer explanation below): vDinar is a coin with a local target and a new slightly improved ASIC-resistant algorithm. • For every new block mined 2% of the mining reward goes to a donations address to be spent in the former Yugoslav area. • Team of journalists behind ready to help implement vDinar in everyone's life with articles and content. • A social network, exclusively made for vDinar, in SerboCroatian language, without ads but sharing the latter news to its users to divulgate the coin. • New implementation of the original "adaptive N Scrypt" which sets the N factor based on blockchain dimensions instead of hardcoded timestamps. Renamed to vCrypt as mining vDinar requires a different protocol and users should instantly know wether their software supports it.
Longer explanation! Index: • Introduction ~ [1.1] Why vDinar? ~ [1.2] Is localization useful? • Plan ~ [2.1] 2% donations ~ [2.2] Informing people • Technical explanation ~ [3.1] vCrypt algorithm ~ [3.2] Block structure ~ [3.3] Mining • Miscellaneous ~ [*.1] Useful links
[1.1] Why vDinar? The Southern Slavic area is, even if people rarely mention it, a very profitable cryptocurrency mining area which is in fact, full of miners. Many, many miners behind your average currencies are from there. At the same moment it is not a very useful thing, if not for investment targets, to handle cryptocurrencies in our area where there is no information at all about them. vDinar takes in mind this and tries to introduce itself, as a cryptocurrency which could also make them understand better the whole system, to local people from our area: through articles, visual content and explanations.
[1.2] Is localization useful? We all admire the beauty of globally used currencies, which is great indeed, but some middle steps could help the whole revolution include usually uninterested people and let them gradually understand what they got in front of them. Making cryptocurrencies with virtual and hypotethical countrylines could bring much more to the table and give a last opportunity to those who were skeptical about cryptocurrencies until now. vDinar has an easily reimplementable code one could retake for eventual new localized coins.
[2.1] 2% donations By taking a little tax over mining rewards which is to be redistributed through manual donations to people in need from the Southern Slavic area, vDinar does both assure to be a socially useful project and to maintain its core localized target audience without direct limits to its foreign users. Donations will be spent when the coin will be valued enough.
[2.2] Informing people vDinar is a long time planned project. It is backed by newspapers and networks created and built in the last 4 years with the final target of supporting vDinar through its course. By finding new users every day, vDinar is now to be shared to its target audience made of average people from the Southern Slavic area. Documents, articles and explanations will be made to help people understand how it works and how it may help them in their daily life.
[3.1] vCrypt algorithm The original Scrypt algorithm with adaptive N factor is kept, but it is assigned based on the block's height instead of hardcoded timestamps. Why? Let's take in consideration we're doing this to avoid the eventual creation of integrated circuits for mining use and we want to keep general-purpose devices on the top. By changing the N factor we are therefore cancelling the already existent ASICs. How many coins could you do in a N timespan? If you assign N based on blockchain dimensions, you will get a fixed number; if you assign it to hardcoded timestamps, there is still some flexibility one could get from the answer. It could be rare that one would design an ASIC just because of difficulty-timespan flexibilities, but Scrypt-N currencies are supposed to increase, or in vDinar's case double, N timespans every round. It is better to keep this protocol unbreakable and avoid exceptions. vCrypt has been renamed so because of block structuring (see [3.2] "Block structure") issues one would get if mining it with an average Scrypt-N mining software. In order to avoid miscomprehensions it is now called in a different way so that occasional miners will instantly understand wether their software supports vDinar or not.
[3.2] Block structure In order to send a 2% donation from the mining reward to the donations address, vDinar's block structure includes not one but two coinbase (no-input) transactions: one sending the 98% to the miner, and a second one for the 2% donation. This little change makes a big difference when it comes to setting up a pool, a mining software or whatever software having to mess with vDinar's blocks! vDinar does not use any premine, as it would be speculative: every coin produced should be proof, as the PoW system itself expects it to be, of computational work. That's the reason vDinar rather goes through a hard revolutionary process by having to rebuild the whole system around (pools, miners, explorers and so on) than joining the mass. Take note: vDinar applies nonces to both coinbase transactions! (This may be very useful to know if you're preparing a vDinar compatible software).
[3.3] Mining Exception made for some mining softwares (ex.: ccminer) finding their solo-mining solutions in untraditional ways, mining is exclusively possible through vCrypt compatible softwares made for the evenience. As this exception goes fine for solo mining, it does not even work for pooled mining. vDinar's pooled mining runs on a different protocol which allows only compatible miners to know the needed data for building the hash merkle root with the second coinbase transaction (2% donations). When passing variables such as "coinb1" and "coinb2", a vDinar compatible stratum server sends two new values: "doncoinb1" and "doncoinb2", splitting the second coinbase transaction (just as for the first one). vDinar stratum pools also need to calculate merkle steps considering there's an empty space of two transactions instead of one. A miner is supposed to hash those two transactions and keep working with merkle steps (starting from the second merkle tree level) and their hashing result as if it was one only usual coinbase transaction.
[*.1] Useful links vDinar wallet: *Both Windows and Linux
Svarog Miner, the first vDinar compatible mining software, runs on CPU and is also mostly made for educational purposes about vDinar's protocols: *Both Windows and Linux
Svarog Pool, the first vDinar compatible pool (note you can't mine there without compatible miners):
"Jugoslaven", the SerboCroatian social network made to share vDinar to average people:
BitcoinTalk announcement:
To the moon? To Mars, the red planet!
submitted by _d3j4n to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

A few thoughts - Wednesday, July 30, 2014

Good afternoon! A few thoughts for lunch today:

Strange timing

I did some calculations on the length of the last bubble, and determined that it lasted 181 days, about 53 days shorter than the previous two bubbles. While shorter than expected, moral_agent's charts have shown that there is a slight variability in the length of bubbles, especially in the early days.
If you make an assumption that the current bubble will be the same length (and given that the chart broke there is no evidence to support any particular length), then you end up with the next bubble peaking on the exact same day it did last year, November 30. Until we have a good model to make predictions, this means very little.
I looked up the history of the August 2012 false bubble, and found that the initial decline was about 50%, and then the price stabilized at about 65% of the high. If this bubble behaves like that cycle, then the bottom will be at $340, stabilizing at $460 for months until the next bubble.

Stepladder continues downward

I continue to remain bearish and believe the price will continue to step downward in a stepladder every few days. The recent pattern has been sharp drops over the course of an hour, followed by a recovery of maybe half the losses that lasts for days, and then another sharp drop that wipes out those gains and sets a new floor. This pattern has recurred at least three times and there is no reason to expect that it will stop.
It will be interesting to see how much speculation there actually is in the market, as most of the speculators leave over the next few months. The market is clearly supported by a number of legitimate and illegitimate uses, so there is a floor that will be hit where the demand is for actual usage of bitcoin, rather than for investing in the future.
To get an idea of what this demand might be, I looked at the "transaction volume in USD" chart to see when the amount of value flowing across the network was equal to what is is now. Interestingly, the volume has fallen back almost exactly to where it was in mid-May, when prices were $450-$500. If the threads on bitcointalk are correct about transaction volume being correlated to price, then this expected value correlates well with what happened after the August 2012 false bubble, as explained in the previous section.

/bitcoinmarkets introduces new rules

/bitcoinmarkets introduced new rules detailing expected behavior and punishments for deviating from the behavior. The most important part of the rules are that users who violate them will be banned (not just censored). So far, the moderators of the forum seem to be stepping up and taking a more aggressive approach, which is a step in the right direction. However, the entire rulebook hasn't been tested yet.
The troubling part of these rules is that these same penalties apply to both the user making attacks, and the user who is defending himself against attacks. This sounds like schoolyard bullying, or hockey fights, where the second person to fight back takes more heat than the person at fault.
A better choice of rules would have been to ban the person who makes the attack, and then simply delete both the attack post and the defense post, without banning the defense poster. The bitcoinmarkets rules now encourage people to make false allegations, be banned, and come back with a new account and repost them. People acting in bad faith can create as many accounts as they would like, whereas people attempting to correct what is being said will be banned, and are not willing to break the rules to return.
I still am thinking about a rule #2, which tackles the problem a different way. testname33 has assumed that all posts are equal, but that isn't true. In most cases, people are just voicing opinions, and those opinions are neither right nor wrong. However, there are sometimes basic facts that are correct, and people who dispute them are lying. The bitcoinmarkets rules do not make a distinction for factual posts, which allows people to present inaccurate information in a polite way. I think that, being a place for more intelligent discussion than /bitcoin, /bitcoinmarkets could have raised the bar by requiring posters to provide sources if asked. We have the opportunity to do that here. The point of posting is to be exposed to others' points of view and to learn more, but if people aren't posting the truth, then everyone's experience is degraded because they are actually believing wrong information.

Bitpay offers free service

Today, Bitpay announced that its service will now be free. They will continue to offer "premium" services to businesses at an additional charge.
While this seems like good news at first, I can't help but wonder about the timing of the announcement. If their previous business model were working well, then they would obviously not change it. The fact that they changed means that they saw some reason to do so, and one might worry that the reason is the declining transaction volume. They will take a hit to their bottom line with this new policy, so they didn't do it out of kindness to everyone.
The rate of merchant adoption slowing down would be an obvious reason that they would make this change, in the hopes of restoring previous growth. Bitcoin has always enjoyed an increasing rate of adoption, and while rumors are not enough to make decisions on, smart investors might read between the lines on this one.

Existing code is not thread safe

I read yesterday that the Scrypt Guild, a mining pool that was in some ways a direct competitor (but which did not have all features) to our upcoming pool, will be shutting down just around the time we ramp up testing. When asked for a reason for the shutdown, the owner stated that he would have had to rewrite the pool's code to be up to the level of quality a pool requires.
This brings up an interesting point that I mentioned before, but not in depth. I discussed that the reason many bitcoin projects fail is because the supporting open source code is of extremely poor quality and is poorly documented. While there are many obvious issues with all the code, the most significant is that none of the open source mining pool software packages I reviewed is thread safe.
A lack of thread safety in these programs results in difficult to locate bugs, like rejected shares, disconnections, and lost revenue. Unlike most bugs, where you can put in breakpoints and log statements to figure out what's happening, networking code can have variables change out from under you in the middle of seemingly unimportant operations. For example, if you record the buy price and the sell price of a coin in a table, and write the buy price first, then if a trade occurs on the exchange and you receive the new data between the two prices being written, you could end up with the sell price being higher than the buy price, a nonsensical situation.
While your code would logically be interpreted like this:
  1. Buy and sell prices are stored in memory from some previous network message
  2. Write buy price to disk
  3. Write sell price to disk
what actually happens is this:
  1. Buy and sell prices are stored in memory from some previous network message
  2. Write old buy price to disk
  3. A new buy and sell price are stored in memory from a new network message, overwriting the previous values
  4. Write new sell price to disk
If you didn't know this issue could happen, then you wouldn't even know to test for it. Worse, the data would only be incorrect for small fractions of the time, because this issue would occur infrequently, and in most cases the price doesn't change much between trades, making it almost impossible to reproduce.


submitted by quintin3265 to BitcoinThoughts [link] [comments]

Why Vertcoin Should Implement One More Good Thing

So let me start off by saying that Vertcoin is amazing in that it offers significant improvements to how mining works. Its ASIC resistance helps make it more fair for everyone, and its difficulty adjustment not only makes it more resistant to profit switching pools, but also allows for more smooth adjustments. Should an event happen that influences the number of miners mining it, it won't remain stuck at an extremely high difficulty for a long time causing slow confirmations.
The thing is, while the mining of Vertcoin is great, it offers no real advantage to those who do not mine. Speculators may buy the currency, but it would take a community behind it and some form of feature that makes it stand out for it to gain a community behind it. Tons of people will be willing to mine it, especially when scrypt becomes overrun by ASICs, but without many people willing to buy or any infrastructure behind it, the coin will become massively unprofitable.
This is why I think Vertcoin should be updated with something else to make it stand out. I don't know what, but it needs something to make it appeal to people besides miners.
Note the following is just some of my personal ideas and may not be a good idea, it's just examples that would make Vertcoin stand out.
Perhaps also it could implement some system that allows for the blockchain to be trimmed to an older point after a high amount of confirmations(such as 200,000), so that the blockchain never becomes too large, and can always be stored on a consumer harddrive. I don't know how this would ideally work, but basically miners would vote on whether an older block is legitimate through part of a block, and if an overwhelming majority says it is(perhaps 85%). Combine this with a high block size limit such as 100 MB(when it becomes needed), and we can easily see Vertcoin support massive amounts of volume that it would need to be a world currency.
I personally was thinking something like having the block reward have a minimum reward of something small like 0.05 following the many years of halving, so that miners do not have to charge ridiculous fees to profit once block rewards "run out".
Both of those ideas combined, if possible, would give Vertcoin long term sustainability and immense reason for people to use it. Bitcoin is about to run into serious issues with it's blockchain, as its 1 MB block limit combined with 10 minute blocks won't support all of the usage it's about to see. Developers are reluctant to raise this limit, and plan to implement a new system that eventually could raise transaction fees even higher if the blockchain sees too much traffic. They seem to support off blockchain transactions, which defeat the purpose of Bitcoin; requiring a third party service to keep your transactions at a low cost causes centralization, as you would need to trust them not to get hacked, run off with your coins, deny service to some industries, track your usage and disclose it with others, or charge insane fees of their own.
Also, with Bitcoin being run by ASICs that will likely become solely profitable for the most efficient select few, a monopoly could eventually exist. Once block rewards are gone, miners will be mining for fees alone. This could cause a complete monopoly on mining, here's why:
Those with a lot of money from mining could temporarily accept transactions with extremely low fees to kill off any competition. Since they have a lot of money they can temporarily mine at a loss, as they can cause competitors to go bankrupt since they would be mining for a loss. Once other miners back out, they can raise their fees as high as they want.
With a minimum block reward of something negligible like 0.05 VTC, newer miners cannot be driven out by large companies temporarily removing fees. I feel like ideally the block reward should be created such that there is a 0.1% rate of annual inflation. This is significantly lower than almost any existing fiat currency. It also doesn't count for lost or destroyed coins. A slight rate of inflation from an economical standpoint is good, as it encourages spending which creates a less stagnant economy. It's not like Dogecoin with it's 5% rate where it would cause the currency to rapidly lose value. You'd be looking at less than a 11% loss of value with an entire 100 year lifetime-which can easily be avoided with simple investments.
I feel like both of these changes would make Vertcoin the first permanently sustainable cryptocurrency. Bitcoin and others work great now, but I feel like they aren't built to last with the inevitable mining monopoly that could occur, or with the infinitely growing blockchain that would eventually become impossible to store as moore's law comes to a halt.
Any other ideas are also welcomed here, I honestly just want to see something that makes Vertcoin stand out to people besides miners.
Feel free to repost this to Bitcointalk or any other forum you see fit.
submitted by skilliard4 to vertcoin [link] [comments]

NobleCoin This Past Week - Update

This is a time for cool heads and calm composure. This past week it's come to our attention our coin is getting 51% abused by someone to dump coins on exchanges, definitely for profit, most probably to also 'destroy' the reputation/potential people see in NOBL alongside it.
I'd just like to make some statements.
  1. This is more common than people realise. If someone can 51% NOBL, they can 51% coins with 10-20x our market cap. At 2-3Ghs on occassion and a scrypt difficulty between 10 and 40, we're relatively high.
  2. After conversations with the exchanges they will be upping the confirmation requirements to try and increase security. A number of them also have 'proprietary' means of protecting themselves to varying degrees to such fork abuse. I genuinely wish them luck, I personally think there's a very tough battle going on just beneath the surface of services trying to protect themselves 24/7 from people taking advantage of a fledgling 'industry'.
  3. Some very, very successful coins have had to go through rough periods like this, considered a 'testing' time. They are perfectly fine today as the community/support has grown naturally and stuck with their coin.
  4. We don't blame ASICs nor GPUs. Farms of either are entirely capable of 51% 95% of scrypt coins today with relative ease.
In light of this, I feel obliged to release some more of our longer-term plans and things in the works. This scene moves fast, and people want news faster than it can be delivered. Please read below.
a) -
This scene is going to change, fast, perhaps for the worst before the better. So I'm going to share a little 'secret' with you guys. In order to protect NOBL in any worst case scenario we are going to be releasing a number of 'partner' coins, all under the Noble brand. We are going to have a Proof of Stake coin, a 'cut supply' coin, a SHA coin. We are going to look into the right time for merge-mining, which might be now, because mark my words when I said in the PDF merge-mining or a new revolutionary mining method is going to become mandatory.
We are going to back these coins with the infrastructure we've built, tie them directly to gold (at prices beneath spot with deals ranging between 12% and 25%), and ensure that they are supported by a team that we've worked hard to prove can be trusted to continue on with cryptocurrency for better or for worst. All are going to be Noble, all are going to be related to charity, Steps, the marketplace, our crypto vision, community, infrastructure and backed by the same team. This team is going to become larger and a registered Australian business, that acts to promote and support Noble and cryptocurrency but never on an 'official/Foundational' level.
Each of these coins will be an 'IPO', for lack of a better word, in NOBL. You only have to show proof of holdings, and you'll get an equivalent % supply of each new technology partnered with Noble. This won't dilute us, because it will be offering completely different technical preferences that wouldn't work together in a single coin, that you can trade or hold depending on your personal tastes.
I have also been looking hard at CryptoNote ( on the side, and will most probably be working to release a ring-signature privacy-centric coin alongside these 'Noble' branded coins.
We can blame ASICs or GPU farms, they are both just as capable so it's a moot point, and NOBL is more secure than most. I'm not going to cause a panic, instead try to convince anyone here or looking to get involved that if you really want a long-term coin that understands this scene more than most will let on and will work to pull through anything that we're worth holding. Anyone that wants to argue the maths and technicalities with me over how a PoS like BC is secure because it doesn't have mining I will personally ensure is put in their place with the new 'State of Alternative Crypto', because it is a marketing trick designed to 'kill' PoW coins. Apologies, by this I meant they have their own vulnerabilites just like PoW, they are not immune. We do however see the value in 'investment' coins that don't require huge electricity/hash costs.
I didn't really want to share this too openly until it was 100% ready, instead just post obvious hints, because it takes time, has to be thought out and is a game-changer. 95% of coins don't make it nor intend to make it to 5 months with the original team so they don't need to worry about long-term survival, but we're not going anywhere. But I need to release news to keep people confident in a market that has lost most of its confidence.
In the meantime, a lot of information about a lot of coins will probably start coming to light. Initially it will be on the exchanges to ensure they can better accomodate being taken advantage of, then it will be up to everyone involved in this sickening scene how we intend to take cryptocurrency forward.
Cheers.. Jason
b) -
Yes. (Ethereum type thing)
And the dumping, looks like someone 51% us and it looks like it's since resolved. The exchanges are working on an improved system as far as I'm aware for all PoW coins, fork abuse and will most probably increase confirmation requirements.
Rather than using a PoS/PPC coin for example to milk/scam this scene of BTC, we want to release a Noble equivalent that doesn't ask for money. It only asks for the same level of trust we asked for day 1 and proof that you hold NOBL (improving the value of what our community holds in NOBL if people see the value in/desire a new coin with those specifications). You'll receive the fair equivalent in a newly released coin that we will then work/promote under the Noble banner. There will also be room for newcomers to get on board obviously to widen the base, but the deals will focus on Noble supporters.
Just send a fraction of a NOBL to an address we can verify on an explorer (we will snapshot the top 500+ addresses to prevent people taking advantage by constantly moving coins) and your equivalent will be moved to each new coin. This system will become automated as we refine it.
On release these coins will have the expected basics (explorer, exchanges) as well as CoinPayments (ASAP), acceptance on the Marketplace, use on 'Steps', and their own promotional deals to entice a first wave of interested 'investors'/users/speculators/buyers. Some will also be backed by a guaranteed exchange rate on the marketplace, similar to our 'Phoenix card' detailed initially here. They will then receive the same support as the others. Some might think this is too much work to take on in terms of 'development', but our focus has been on innovative infrastructure and services and that will be complete soon enough. This infrastructure, emails, correspondence and testing is a lot more work than upgrading wallets or forks, and once complete means we can focus on the technical aspects while providing an economy to use the coins. Ideally I don't want to personally, there are a number of developers we're talking to that also have the skills to do so while I get the rewritten 'State of Alternative Cryptocurrency' complete and published.
We will then be moving the marketplace and Steps longer-term onto a decentralized platform (there are a few that are looking more promising by the day) that allows direct payments between merchants/buyers for all cryptocurrencies under the Noble banner. We don't want a centralized point of hosting and we don't want to have to micromanage it, we'd rather focus on pushing services forward alongside support for the tech of each coin. Whether or not we keep some centralized 'control' over what is added to the Marketplace is still under consideration, because we don't want it to sink into a den of illegal products and heinous material (you know the type).
Someone might do this first with all the info. I've been pushed to release, but we'll always do it at 0% fees, asking for zero money upfront, and stay as true as is possible to the underlying ideals of cryptocurrency that is meant to be taking the economics of this world to another level.
Of course none of this is 100% set in stone and there is plenty of room for improvement and refinement. We forget how brand new this 'industry' is and no system we plan is perfect, but we're going to be damn sure we're an important part of it. It's the reason some of us have been quiet, a lot of work, planning, discussion and thinking needs to go into something like this to make it more than hot air. To us, doesn't matter what our price is in the short term. Maybe I'm a dreamer, but the work myself and others have been putting into this is real.
c) -
It won't dilute the coin (edit: any more so than the dozen being released daily) because some people want PoW, some people want PoS, some people want X11, some people want a dozen other specifications. They can't be provided all in one coin, but they can provided by a trusted team that will accommodate them all in a decentralized marketplace and fundraising platform. I don't want them to be paired purely with NOBL nor could we stop exchanges from doing so, only the initial 'IPO' or distribution, if the specification requires one.
What we're seeing, and feel free to disagree, is there are about a dozen 'products/specifications' people want. The problem is the people providing these products can't be trusted, are doing so in a dodgy fashion, or are leaving/scamming the coins behind so that they have no future. We want one of each of these accommodated and supported under the Noble brand, with this original NOBL itself the core/'seed' coin.
d) -
Giving value to the freebie coins is definitely something that needs to be considered. Perhaps it will be the value of the NOBL itself that acts as an initial holding incentive and that acts as a 'share' in a new specification. We will have to work on %s and ensure fair distribution as well as rewards for current holders while accomodating newcomers, that balance is why this isn't so simple and requires a lot of foresight, input and thinking.
It takes less time for us to work on the development/code side of coins than you think. I shamelessly admit I am a fan of open source and am using it to NOBLs advantage. We will use the updates done by dedicated development teams while attributing them for our own coins. We also can 'contract' out/bounty other work, but that is only becoming more of an option now that I have built some relationships with the more trusted developers. Otherwise, the general maintenance I can do myself, Heartbleed, checkpoints, etc etc. including customised branded wallets for NOBL that we are incorporating a lot of features into. There are definitely exceptions to this, DRK is not something I would want to touch as the work being put into that by Ed behind closed doors is inspiring and not something we could even attempt to match unless we stopped working on everything else. That is why CryptoNote looks appealing, it's more open source and the team behind it promote forking and sharing of the technology.
I definitely agree with flavour of the month which is why we don't do it that month. Some specifications might be hot one month and then not so crash hot the next, but longer-term they still will play a role and are still the preference of some. Personally I think this includes SHA, PoS (act as a NOBL 'saver', and tie to gold), X11, perhaps some up-and-coming mining algo., anonymity (as well as open/transparent), 5xMYR (although I do respect their approach and wouldn't want to 'use' it too soon without letting it come of its own).
You're also right in that people don't give two hoots about scams, so long as they think they can get in and get out in time to profit also. That's how the scene works right now and we all know it. Our niche no longer feels like it's just charity, but also for longer-term altcoin supporters who see potential in all these 'experiments' and feel they will have a place in one form or another if/when this place grows up. Which is why we'd like to cover every angle. If a coin isn't as supported in 6 months, that's fine. We gave the option, supported it with a team that provided services, updates and didn't scam, and held the core NOBL value up with it.
Our work has always focused on the the merchants/services/economies underlying crypto and ensuring in the future it can be used internationally to the best of its abilities. Fast, charitable, little fees, global, decentralized, etc. We can then use these services to increase the demand of all specifications that we support, whether they last or otherwise. It lets NOBL act as a 'share' and arguably could entice holding.
Like I said, we definitely need feedback. It's not something we even wanted to bring to the table at this point, but this place expects big news faster than that big news can be delivered. So these are the types of things we're including in the game plan and intending to deliver in one form or another.
The biggest problem with us and NobleCoin is we just don't quit. You throw something like this at us and we'll lap it up as motivation to keep working. Sooner or later this pays off, whether we have to force it to or otherwise.
Some people attribute a low price to death. It is a mistake to think so.
Thanks for your time and patience.
submitted by NobleCoin-Rofo to NobleCoin [link] [comments]

Mining 30 MangoCoinz in 10 minutes, without Scrypt ASIC Hardware  10 MCZ mango coins per day Gridseed ASIC dual litcoin scrypt miner How to mine bitcoins with scrypt.CC DualMiner Gridseed Based Scrypt asic USB miner Unboxing Beastlymac How to mine Scrypt Bitcoin - IBH iBitHub Crypto currency - $600 Winner inside!

Bitcointalk speculation. Hacking each android game daily. It has survived not only five centuries, but also the leap into electronic typesetting industry. Lorem Ipsum is simply dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book. Bitcointalk Org it has survived not only five centuries, but also the leap into electronic ... Child Boards: Mining support, Pools, Mining software (miners), Hardware, Mining speculation: Bitcoin Technical Support Questions regarding issues with Bitcoin Core, nodes, the Bitcoin network, transactions, and addresses. Moderator: achow101. 96331 Posts 11388 Topics Last post by David Dagher in Re: Using Bitcoin Core w... on Today at 12:09:28 AM Project Development Organization of Bitcoin and ... Bitcoin is actually a great investment option but one thing I discovered over time is that it is not possible to mine bitcoin so don’t be deceived. I invested 15BTC on a particular website ... BitcoinTalk; Twitter; Facebook; Bitcoin-sCrypt Coin (BTCS) Peer-to-Peer Digital Money. Proof-of-Stake Coin Staking. Use BTCS to generate BTCS. Fast Transactions . 3 minute transaction blocks. Decentralized Blockchain Voting. Vote on Development Issues (Coming 2021) Low Fees. Send money cheaply. Censorship-Resistant Messaging. Decentralized Messaging (Coming 2021) ASIC-Resistant. Kimoto Gravity ... Bitcoin Discussion General discussion about the Bitcoin ecosystem that doesn't fit better elsewhere. News, the Bitcoin community, innovations, the general environment, etc. Discussion of specific Bitcoin-related services usually belongs in other sections. Moderator: hilariousandco. 2275123 Posts 92013 Topics Last post by kawetsriyanto in Re: Jamie Dimon's ( "Bit... on October 25, 2020, 11:47 ...

[index] [47114] [38314] [33584] [43446] [4840] [12080] [8539] [50437] [36636] [43863]

Mining 30 MangoCoinz in 10 minutes, without Scrypt ASIC Hardware 10 MCZ mango coins per day

Trading Bitcoin - Just Happy to Be Back Streaming :) Tone Vays 851 watching Live now Trillions of Dollars Have Vanished and No One Is Talking About It - Duration: 12:36. Video was taken by member "Klintay" during visiting our scrypt farm in Hong Kong after we have setup our first rig. Our Scrypt hash team is going deploy a 1Gh/s scrypt farm using ... Bitcoin is like digital Gold and Litecoin is like digital Silver. For more infos visit Live Bitcoin Trading With Crypto Trading Robot DeriBot on Deribit DeriBot Backup 890 watching Live now USB Asic Miner Red Fury bitcoin miner 2.4~2.9 GH/s ~new and improved version~ - Duration: 3:17. This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue