Topic: [ANN] CREDITS - New Blockchain for financial industry [OFFICIAL THREAD] - page 35. (Read 40273 times)

It’s true that its price is terrible now.People have lost their patience and no longer trust the team.Whether they delayed the time of the main online?What's the situation now?

and the reason why the price doesnt move on kucoin is because there is 0 volum on kucoin.

If your precious team invested some money in a reputable exchange listing, we wouldnt even be here.

Look at what quarckchain is doing.

so people who are looking for a new project to invest in will scroll past the first 2 pages on coinmarketcap?
No they wont.
BEcause people asusme everything below top200 is dogshit.

Which it is.
CS is now hanging around with the shit projects like HPB and ArcBlock.
Goodluck climbing out if it.

Sure it doesn't bro.
Price dropped below $0.07 today on your legit Kucoin exchange.

And volumes have completely died.
Meaning ZERO interest from the market in this project.

Even the so called partnership with IBM and Lenovo (which are just suppliers of credits but whatever) have done 0 for credits.

But keep hodl'ing all the way to $0. Then you'll come here and defend that credits is holding steady at $0 marketcap lol.
Btw, credits is currently at almost -60% from ICO.
Think about that one.

lol, Just as I said previously your "experts" cannot think beyond existing tech boundaries and that's why they are convinced it's not possible. I'd rather listen to what they have to say once code is out, not before, because, again, as I've said before CS builds their stuff from a scratch, not taking smth that already existed and modifying it.
Yeah, so true you were a great holder, right, but guess what, there's a group of those holders and as far as I know there's around 70-80 of them.

Either way, I'll be waiting for you to come again and say "I've warned you", c ya.

stories about top200 is just hilarious, you know better than me that almost all volume is going on by manipulations on Lban and coinbene and it causes drops & rises regularly, especially yesterday's drop to 0.4.  Price on normal exchanges holds around 0.7-0.8$ and doesn't move

Same to you, where did he specifiy what is fud and what is not? Those "experience analyst" think only in already existing technologies which is not the case for CS.  Either way, I thought you were gone from the topic because of FOMO guys like myself?

Once they release the code, which is supposed to go public after additional audits, ask your "experts" to review it

I'm just confused where exactly did Cheus specified that asking about the test is FUD? It's more like all the shit, pardon me, and negativity you've been spreading in here, though I can appreciate you trying to defend the project yesterday cause of manolit.

It's more about unconstructive shit that keep being posted in here

I ike that the admin is threatening to remove messages because he thinks that it is FUD.

Sorry, but the market fully agrees with all the criticisms being put out, as credits has fallen out of the top200.
And this time it wasnt a drop and quick recovery like last time, but a slow grind out of the top200.

Projects that drop out of top200 are usually finished and never recover.
I challenge you to prove me wrong admin.

Dropping out of the top200 is usually a final nail in the coffin for crpyto projects.
Especially those with $10k daily REAL rading volume.
Current bag holders are locked in. Non-bad holders dont care about the project.


Anyway.
When is the decentralisation test?
Currently the algoritm is unable to move the main node out of india because there are no intermediate nodes between europe and india.
That sounds like great decentralisation. An algorithm that is supposed to guarantee decentralisation being stuck in a single country.

Also, when are the audits being announced that supposedly were the reason for the delay?
It's mid january already, when are these supposed to start, execute, review, recommend, re-review, report?

It's already becoming abvious that the Q1 mainnet deadline will also NOT be reached.
It is simply unrealistic to expect this clueless team to perform:
1) Release stable beta
2) Perform 20-days decentralisation test
3) Bug fix
4) Stress test
5) Bug fix
6) Finish all audits (4 of them, of which 3 are supposed to start soon?)
7) Launch mainnet

It is simply unrealistic to expect this to happen in 2.5 months.
It will NOT happen.
In march team will find another excuse and delay again to Q2.
And then to Q3
And then to Q4, which is a realistic timeframe for mainnet.

But by then everybody will forget credits and it will end up at somewhere on rank 1000

Wow, a new definition of Fud. Now it's called fud for an experienced analyst to prove that it's not possible to do those hundreds of thousands of transactions in real time, to say that in the Credits team according to their LinkedIn accounts there is no known developer or with proven and experienced experience or to say that there's only one delay behind another. Are those allegations well-founded? That development takes time? Well, if it takes time, what's the point of setting so many dates and not meeting any at all from the beginning? Just say that you don't know how long it will take because the development is complex and takes time, but of course, that doesn't create expectation or influence the price. Don't take us for idiots, you're not transparent at all. You have a technical explanation a little above saying that this is not possible, instead of rebutting it with another technical explanation that is what you should do you hide in patents and unpublished codes. Anyone with two fingers in front and experience knows that these 200k tps tests cannot be done in a real environment. What's more, I'm not just talking, a project, contacted you to implement their token on your platform and in the end did not do it because apparently you were not as fast or had the work as advanced as you make the community see.

So asking where the decentralisation test is, which was promised for end of december, is classified as FUD?
For real?

Comrades, stop the FUD please, everything that was planned will be fulfilled, there will be both the main network and swap tokens, please be patient. Software development is not opening a tin can of beans.
All the latest news on the project appear on all our official social networks. If you need a test platform, go to the developer portal https://developers.credits.com/, if you have any difficulties, contact our supports, they will help you.
For those who have not seen the latest news, then we have opened a section on the enterprise direction, read more here https://creditsenterprise.com

I warn you that for frank FUD I will remove the messages, although I really do not want to do that. Thank you for understanding!

Anyway, 18 december they said: next week decentralisation test.
Anyone seen the test?

Bear market, remember? Everyone has to optimize their funds to ensure project's survival.  They always said tech comes first then funds spend on exchanges and personally I like this strategy especially during this bearish market.  I won't talk about possibility of a delay, because it's always there from the start with any project, because, don't be surprised, this is software development process and no one knows what shit can happen at any stage and cause something to go completely wrong.

Well, even if they achieve only 100K+ with security and decentralization in place, they still will be the best and will recognized.  But okay, that's your opinion I can understand that, not everyone has balls of steel either to see the project  till the end or sell at a loss.

Best of luck to you.

oh, another ICO 200K+ holder who sold, there are so many of them recently though all of the whales I know in TG are still there and keep accumulating little by little.  Patent is underway you've got application numbers and can monitor in case they will be rejected so that you can come here again and talk bs once more.
Yeah, those reputable people can only think in already existing technologies which is not the case for CS that's build from a scratch.
Nevertheless, that's your opinion and that's okay.

You sound a little biased and bitter because you bought high and sold low

Yes it might go to $0 soon if they delay q1 launch

It might also go to $10 If They deliver.

A huge big if that is.


Anyway, 18 december they said: next week decentralisation test.
Anyone seen the test? It’s been freaking 31 days already.
Does “next week” mean something else in russia?

Although I think the ship is about to sink. Half the staff have been laid off. Lbank and Coinbene have fake volumes. They know it, but they want people to see more than a million volumes every day. The real volume there are days that does not even reach 30k dollars and even yesterday barely reached 20k. That is worrying, a lot, not even the worst projects have that volume. They are never going to enter Binance and they have had enough money to do it in the past and in a market with fewer bears, now it would be absurd in this market, but Binance only lists real and proven projects. A lot of people haven't sold because they bought at 0.8, 0.6... they're trapped. On the other hand, most of the new projects have already fallen 10 times below their value. Credits still stands firm in comparison. It may fall another 5 times in value because if they continue to add delays I am convinced that a large part of the community will jump out of the boat without thinking about it. And believe me, more delays will come because it's obvious and proven that they can't do what they say. And they're soon unlocking the team's tokens. I'm curious to know what they're going to invent to raise the price of the token and sell them before abandoning the project. Because I'm sure of one thing, the mainnet in Q1 is not going to be, it's only foreseen that it will be and knowing Credits when they talk about forecasts = new delay. I have never written in this group nor will I ever write more or answer the nonsense that some of you put to my comments, I also said them when I had my mind cloudy. I'm very clear and I'm not going to play that game.  I am one more investor who entered Ico and even bought something more expensive later and I feel swindled and deceived, they have lost all credibility and if they use my arguments to other investors I would be happy. For those who still have blind confidence, I hope they wake up before they have lost all their money. By the way, I sold in December when they delayed the mainnet again, I've had enough of their lies.

Let's give them the benefit of doubt one more time.

The version they will release this week, HAS to be stable and HAS to work for the decentralisation test.

The decentralisation test HAS to happen in february.

The stress test HAS to happen in february.

Otherwise they will delay mainnet AGAIN.


Just look at some of the projects that started at the same time as Credits.
Ocean protocol, SingularityNET, etc.

They are all reporting beta launches to happen soon.
Credits hasn't even finished an Alpha yet lol.

No that excuse of a testnet is not a BETA.
A BETA will be a fully functional product, meaning capable of handling the 1mtps that they claim, without a signal server, without the constant forking and crashing of the network.
Once they remove the SS and fix the forking, then i'll accept it as an Alpha.
Once they publish all code, i'll accept it as beta.

I'm tired of seeing people who do not understand anything and only defend the projects by the created fomo. Awake friends. Investigate for yourselves and draw your own conclusions.

Technical explanation of André Cronje. He is an experienced analyst and blockchain developer with a great proven experience. Dag and Blockchain technology.:

Two nomenclatures to first clear up;

1. Blockchain the category
2. Blockchain the structure

A blockchain is a DAG.

Directed (moves in one direction only)
Acyclic (you can't return to a node from the current node)
Graph

All blockchain (structures) are DAGs. A DAG can be a blockchain (category)

That out of the way, there are lots of DAGs already; ethereum, even has leaf nodes (uncles).

So I don't get the DAG vs Blockchain argument.

Also, when looking at DAG, what implementation?

You get storage DAG (like Avalanche, where the UTXO are stored in DAGs)
You get block DAG (ghost / spectre/ phantom)
You get consensus DAG (Fantom / Hashgraph and derivatives, where the output can still be a normal blockchain (structure) or it could be another DAG (structure)

There are account level DAGs (Nano) and transaction level DAGs (IOTA).

So you can't really say DAG vs blockchain.

But what I will infer, is the "Are DAGs more scalable than blockchains". And that answer is entirely dependent on your network graph and consensus architecture.

In a POA / permissioned / consortium solution, DAGs are definitely more scalable. In a completely unpermissioned environment blockchains are more secure.

It's a very difficult question to answer because there are so many variables at play.

Personally, I think DAG's are fantastic for aBFT consensus, so I like them there, but I think traditional blockchain is the better structure for time based sequences. So most of my research work is focused on how to order a DAG to output a blockchain

So how do a lot of these other projects achieve high TPS? Not as a function of the output structure, but instead as a function of consensus.

An easy example, let's take Ethereum right now. Currently it's Proof of Work at ~13s block time @ 9 TPS, but what if we simply decrease the block time to 1s? Would we then get ~117 TPS? (Here we need to look at data transmission, I will cover that a bit later).

Next let's look at consensus, if we change from PoW to PoS and keep the block time the same, does anything change? No, since proof of work is just the security, not the scalability. If we change block size (or gas limit in ethereum) or block time then we can achieve more throughput.

So what options do we have to achieve more throughput? Let's look at traditional technology scaling, if you have a single threaded process that does 1 action per second, and you want to increase it, you simply add more threads, 10 threads equals 10 actions per second. But what if all of these threads at some point need to share the same data? This is called a dead lock, where the system needs to make a decision. Normally fairly easily resolved in centralized systems, first come first serve for example (but here you don't have any malicious actors).

So the problem we are trying to solve is one of ordering, which event happened first? This is done in proof of work based systems because the proof of work is essentially a timer that makes sure to only allow events to trickle in and not cause a deadlock.

But let's assume we could get rid off that time limit, but still achieve scalability, you could do this via standard BFT, but that increases message complexity (since you need at least 3 rounds of messages x the amount of participating nodes and the delays on messages can be unbounded). So a lot of systems use BFT but they limit the amount of validators (for example only selecting 9/12/21/... validators out of thousands - dPoS with BFT).

Another solution is sharding, an easy example is namespace sharding, group 1 handles all accounts that start with the letter A, group 2 handles B and so forth. Now you could essentially have one PoW network that handles all the A accounts and another all the B accounts etc. You could also do this based on some namespace, for example ETH could have a consensus layer per ERC20 (all separated for parallel / concurrent throughput).

So it's less blockchain vs DAG and more storage / consensus / abstraction considerations.

But even with all of the above, there is an easier answer, any blockchain saying they can do hundreds of thousands of TPS are simply lying.

On the block size (as mentioned above)

A few time types to break down (using bitcoin as an example).

Confirmation time (essentially 1 block time) 10 minutes.
Transactions in a block (3000 - based on block size limit)
Transactions per second  5
Time to finality (3 blocks - after 3 blocks a re-org is unlikely), 30 minutes

Backlog, if we assume first in first out, and there are 10 transactions generated per second, your wait time would be 2 blocks before your's is confirmed, so from receiving a transaction into the network, until finality, would be 50 minutes.

So why not just increase block size? (pack more transactions in), bigger blocks, take longer to propagate in the network. This means more forks (a block has to propagate the entire network within the time for a next block to be generated for the network to be optimal). If a block was 1TB, and it took 1 hour to propagate, but the block time was 10 minutes, we would have 6+ forks. This means that the finality rule (3 blocks) would have to increase, so again the whole ecosystem takes longer.

The trick is that balance between block size + block time.

BFT systems are different though

Every version they release fails more than the previous one. The stability is null. I'm seeing a lot of frustrated testers. They keep talking nonsense like development takes time. I'm seeing new and good Dag blockchain projects like Fantom that are much more recent than Credits and with fewer developers and the first testnet they've released is much more stable than Credits. That yes, it is only 25000 tps, but they are in a real environment, well, the only thing is ironically, right now no one is approaching in a real environment. I bet my neck that Credits is not able to reach that speed in the same conditions.  André Cronje is an expert in code analysis. A long time ago he analyzed the Credits code and said they were rookies. Now he's on the Fantom team. Fantom is open source, hence its transparency in everything. Credits only publishes the piece of code that interests him and in the meantime the months go by and they continue to fool people with the subject of patents. If Dag technology is not capable of doing that in a real environment, as André Cronje already said, "Any chain of blocks that says it makes hundreds of thousands of tps in a real environment is simply lying. By the way, he's proven it technically, it's not gossip.

https://cctube.pro/watch/fantom-blockchain-explained_uEQnBBHao68fBYw.html