What? Have you seen the code? It's sloppy as hell. The labels don't make sense. There's few notes/comments in the code itself. The coin set itself apart before it launched as a coin with some good ideas. The implementation and launch failed miserably. That's why the original thread had to be locked.
1. How could the difficulty level have increased so quickly if nobody was mining? That makes no sense. People were indeed mining. The developers and his buddies were mining along with a few people who had 1000 cpus or 500 cpus. They got the early coins. Mining was going on for 12 hours before the first pool was up with all the smaller users getting no blocks. Only those with 50+ CPUs got blocks before 1gh was up.
2. 18 hours after launch, still no pool.
2. something like 8% of the total was pre-mined.
3. You are a complete fool if you don't believe that there are a lot of ways to exploit this coin. Oh, that's right. Your programming skills are probably as poor as your grammar. I'm out of this thread. This shit is amateur hour.
FrankieSaysRelax, your points are mostly wrong. I usually don't do this, but let me please:
The code is not sloppy (I work as developer); good code does not need notes; implementation is fine. The original thread was locked by keccak512 himself cause it's a pre-ANN thread that is continued here in the ANN thread.
1. difficulty level increased quickly because everyone was mining with the wallet after launch. This lead to equal distribution of block rewards. there was no chance to instamine the coin in an unfair manner.
2. there is a pool at 1gh. other than that, yes, its suboptimal that no stratum implementation is up yet but it shortly will. It is not an easy task and you can rest assured it is being worked on.
3. there was an IPO to kickstart the coin as well as premine to set up bounties (which is done) in order to improve HVC's infrastructure
4. Judging from your posts I do not believe that you have knowledge in development
Be well
Code is sloppy. If you can't see that, that is your fault and speaks about your skill.
1. That's not the point. The point was WHO was able to mine it - especially considering that it was pitched as fairly decentralized and distributed - which was the ONLY reason this coin would have had a chance to be successful. That did not turn out to be the case - that is a fact. You are entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts.
2. One pool came up after 12 full hours of solo mining by the big guys. "suboptimal"
The whole premise of the coin is a democratic system of voting. Only the big guys got votes in during that period. Votes that would keep block rewards as high as possible to keep small guys from getting even 1 coin. So you have all those you claimed that downloaded the wallet to mine who, in reality, were not mining anything. This guaranteed the launch was not democratic or fair in any way, shape, form, scope, measure or capacity. The first large miners got to "set the playing field". What type of democratic voting system is based off 1% of votes counting? You don't think that sorta defies the pitch of "decentralized currency"?? These guys got a HUGE head start over everyone else. How is that democratic or decentralized?
3. By infrastructure, I assume you mean the pockets of the developers. The infrastructure failed at launch. Pools are still not up 18 hours later. That is not good infrastructure. That is failure.
4. Make any assumption you want. You are obviously just desperately attempting to defend the coin which means 1. you have been involved early and are trying to protect your time/money investment. That's completely reasonable but it's not a good excuse to deny reality.
5. All the desperation and attempts to keep people interested failed. Price is down 70% from open. (currently around 0.065 mBTC).
LOL Heavycoin....more like HeavyDream
! 