Topic: [ANN] [QRK] Quark | Core 0.10 upgrade - page 122. (Read 1031025 times)

True that doesn't make any sense to me as well.

what doesn't make sense?  that i suggested a superblock whilst qrk was already under 10cents? if you mean that then perhaps i should have put the superblock would be better suited when qrk had higher value because outside coders/developers that are not already loyal to qrk would have been more interested in coming across to a coin that has higher value and they could get more immediate fiat returns for their work.

You repeated that at least three times. It's time to get into detail. What is "handeled correctly".


Handled correctly.

First clear leadership laid out.




the companion coin

 it's fully transparent - every transaction accounted for
10% excess in minting for development pot
correctly released to control movement of qrk to companion coin
the qrks taken as payment controlled correctly and released to market only as increased interest is present to keep price of QRK itself rising
developments voted for by community to get more interest and discussion going
developers engaged on best price paid only upon completion and maintained at good cost - whitepapers out well before development completion to bring more BTC into qrk
new features scanned for on board and replicated into qrk quickly to drag all new fad seekers and their BTC into the qrk community good PR and marketing essential on this board.
fully premined i say but if those out there want some % merge mined or even some % given to current QRK investors for community involvement
project managers paid 5% of all completed projects if not foundation funded and was ROI funded then they will get a nice share from their completed projects also.




Donations? i see no real difference between donations and superblock. 10% superblock is a 10% dilution given by everyone. The only difference is that donations do not return an exact proportion of any gains or losses. A super block does.


Superblock is good - but i just see the companion coin as having a little more versatility and margins for experimentation.

Sure if we can all agree to give 10% to the foundation and buy another 2 BTC each worth of QRK in the next week both ideas will probably not be needed.


Who here will donate 10% of their qrk wealth to the foundation and buy 2 BTC worth of qrk each this weekend? Please put your names below. If we can get more than 25% of all qrk holders to go for it i think the superblock and companion coin can be put on hold.

Agreed. But how I envisioned it was PoW/PoS. Disclosure: I have hundreds of thousands of qrk that I bought very cheap, thus adding PoS would obviously be super attractive to me.

That statement makes no sense to me. What truth did i bend.  The superblock idea is better than nothing even at this stage, but after thinking it over more and companion coin could solve more of the issues.

Yes the superblock idea is good, but really would be better with qrk having a higher value. It can still work but you will need a lot a good whitepaper and a solid dev team in place to generate buying pressure to the degree you need to make a 10% superblock fund everything we want to do.

However, since i see a lot of people NOT wanting anon features or POS anywhere near qrk core then the companion coin is better in that it allows new features to be brought it without introducing them into the core of qrk. Also you have the options of some % for merged mining and some % for people to claim for participation in the qrk community.

If that is not what you mean then explain in more detail.

Why am i more invested in the companion coin idea? what possible goal can i have other than increasing the value of QRK?  just because later i reason the companion coin can have a great positive effect does not mean the initial idea was without merit. Surely anyone can see 10% of QRK at 10c is going to get a lot more real work work done that 10% of QRk at 1cent.

I am yet to hear specific negative for the companion coin over what every other new coin released brings....whilst i do see multiple advantages.

Today - dark cash - releasing and just one of their proposed features

now a lot of coins release with bullshit proposals that never happen........... but quite a few coins lately are coming through on proposals and QRK has nothing. We need developers that can get things like this done for QRK but we need funding.  A super block could encourage a good dev team on board for 10% of the minting i guess. Let's try it rather than doing nothing. We have been debating for weeks and as noithor said.....qrk will talk but has nobody with the skills to do any of it.

If we don't want the companion coin let's do the superblock and bring on a new dev team now. These new coins devs are willing to work very hard for 1% so if handled correctly 10% should help get some large things done for qrk.


DARKCASH - just one of 10 coins that will be released today....
-----------------------------------------------------------------

In order for a coin to survive it has to have demand. 99% of altcoins die after the first week of hype, DarkCash will be able to sustain it's value because it will have a real use. We started working on forking the skyhook open source ATM code which can be found here: https://github.com/projectskyhook/skyhook. We will setup 1 ATM at Stanford University by September 1st, we will also setup an ATM fund, where people can contribute DRKC to buy an ATM. Since the ATM will have a fee on the conversion, all profits will be used to purchase more ATMs which will be placed in areas of high demand (Boston, LA, Vegas, Silicon Valley) In addition to the coin's anonymity it will have a real use.

Last but not least, we are also in the process of implementing a P2P exchange. We will be using Coinffeine's open source platform which can be found here: https://github.com/Coinffeine/coinffeine. Coinffeine is a P2P exchange implementation which uses a decentralized trading algorithm. Cryptocurrency is decentralized by nature, however, in this sea of decentralization there are centralized services which are powered by the distributed cryptocurrency. Coinffeine provides secure peer-to-peer transactions. Coinffeine's algorithm implements a distirbuted contract. It is also known as a micropayment channel, in this channel both parties engage in a multi step transaction. In other words, the algorithm is the escrow, after the initial commitment of the funds is completed the algorithm verifies that both parties have submitted the funds then broadcast's it to the network. Our development team will use the alpha open source P2P exchange and fork it to use DarkCash. This will enable us to offer a decentralized exchange right from the wallet. Have you noticed how there are so many different altcoin exchanges out there wouldn't it be nice if there was one main exhcange built into the coin? Well we thought so and that is why we are working on this feature. Since the code is still in alpha it will take us some time to get it developed, so the projected date for this project is August 15th. We still have to work out a few bugs and setup the wallet.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Other approaches were already presented. Once people get to the conclusion that it is more productive to invest than to sell people will donate. But yeah look it up, the discussion was more complex

I am with QuarkFx. The whole idea of a companion coin takes away the focus and strength of Quark. I do agree there has to be more incentive for developers and funding for projects. Isn't there another way with the current infrastructure?

YC

True that doesn't make any sense to me as well.

Also


You repeated that at least three times. It's time to get into detail. What is "handeled correctly".


The only argument I see is the team funds. We can raise those funds or even donations as well. We don't need another coin for it. But again,  I'd be interested in the exact handling to get more in detail with my critic.
 

When you first suggested a superblock Quark was already well below 10c...now you are so invested in the competition coin idea you bend the truth.

Hi there,

The main issue we have is no developer or development team, and no funds to bring any on.
We do have some talented people creating services and that have some nice ideas without anyone to fund their time or their ideas.

The superblock would could have solved those 2 if qrk was still 10cents at least.

However, encouraging back investors outside of this board into ROI projects and attracting new blood via the latest features and hype are not solved since many do not want these new features incorped into the core of qrk

The companion coin can solve all issues if handled correctly.

Coins like drk, xc, cloak, bc  and every other new coin that actually has active development teams , clear leadership and some funds to get things done are going to see QRK sucked down and down..... we need to start facing this. We have some smart people and talented people in the QRK community but we have no developer and no funds. QRK is going to struggle to stay in the top 50 if nothing is done.

No, it's not the same. Proof of burn allows to proceed without pre- or instamine. Like Counterparty a proof of burn concept would be created on the top of Quark. People don't need to trust or pay any third party. Whoever wants the coin burns it on his or her own. Destroying Quark is not as radical as you may think it could even have positive effects. This coin can still be mineable. It can even have a different inflation rate.

But yeah, it all comes down to where I expect the companion coin to be seen as what it is: a desperate move to get money and hashrate. While I have doubts that people get into it shortterm I see no way how it can be successful midterm.

But then, even though I dislike the plan I still see the Quark IPO as the best alternative. Guess you like to hear that.

3 If this is only about raising money I would prefer sidechain solutions (proof of burn etc.) or donations.

This is about putting in place development/marketing/project managing teams.
However first you need to raise funds to get that going. We have some talented individuals with a lof of good ideas. These people are held back by zero funds, and most of the qrk holders sitting outside the reach of this board.

Proof of burn is the same as a QRK only IPO but the QRK is not destroyed or locked away. It is too held by the foundation for future payments of the teams that are put in place. I see no point burning it? burning it reduces minting and pushes up value i guess. However, it is better to use the teams developments/services/marketing and planned ipo projects  to increase qrk uptake and use the qrks that were not burned to give incentive/payment for the qkr teams we want to put in place. I mean it is almost the same thing but burning yes pushes the price up, but the foundation still needs to get their hands on the  QRK to pay the teams out this will require donations again.

I see no advatage of burn over qrk only ipo.

Fund raising is merely the fuel. The important part is organising and planning the journey correctly.

A side chain was more or less what i wanted at the start but thinking it through the qrk only ipo works a lot better.

That's how i feel when you talk here also quark was yesterday proven to have no premine or hidden premine, so your claims were all false and your credibility went to zero.

First people with funds have a working brain and can read the audit themself.You can be sure they will never ever join quark with the big scammer wallets.Real investors are not that dumb to give power over their money to somebody else.
Next the dev team or better max is a joke.Always disappearing.No real updates.False promises etc .
He was already working on another coin when quark price went higher.
So taking max into board would be like suicide.
Another thing is what evan knows exectly is the value of a coin is not based on security or features but based on marketing and public acceptance.
So adding just a new coin wont change anything if you wont have any big fellas who will promote that coin in a big audience.A second time evan wont be able to bribe with his worthless coins bill still or get into max keiser.A sponsored reuters report wont help too as people are aware of evans old trick.
About evan himself i remember like quark was at $0.4 and evan also said its a good sign that people are "trolling" because it shows the government has fear because of quark and there is only one way up.Looks like he was wrong like always.
Which government would fear a scammer coin which was a ponzi which had at it highest a 2 million trade volume and these just because of the hype that quark will be promoted at max keiser.
It was cleary a jump and dump coin.But for Evan it was a nice possibility to dumb a lot of coins for good real money.You could see each and every night big dumbs of coins.
Today the price is at $.12 and with a small dumb i'm pretty sure it would go instantly under $0.05 .


Holding on digitalindustry is the worste you can do and even a new messageboard or new foundation wont help as you still didnt understand the basics of money.It was also often written here quark is not understood as money a medium but as a product to make money.
And no real investor is going to take the contaminated sites (old quark owners) of a dead coin just because some big wallet owners want to keep making money out of worthless coins with their scammer wallets and because a dumb guy like evan is claiming so.

Remeber quark went down in the majority as they found out that quark was basicly completly mined by a few people and that over 60% of all coins belongs to just 100 wallets.
The idea of crypto was to escape the banking control.The issue is that these 100 wallets which arent all from diffrent people are getting the new banks who will control the coin.
Adding just a new companion wont change anything about the master issue quark had and has

Also the current secuirty issue of quark is a joke but as always evan promised some months ago this would never ever happen.Looks like he was again like always wrong.

One personal question to evan : Where is the great distribution of quark into many small wallets which you claimed will happen evan ?I dont see them ?Hey Evan maybe you wanna give us some more of your brilliant understanding of economic

Guys i have nice idea how to how to increase the attractiveness of the quark for miners and newber.

use the formula

block_reward = log2(difficulty)

for example if difficulty = 1024 then block_reward = log2(1024)= 10.

it will be attractive to the masses and better for use )

@Vic & CH

I know I am repeating this on and on but the same as CH didn´t hear any specific argument against the companion coin I don´t see how a companion coin wouldn´t damage the Quark brand. Money is not a product, it is a medium. If it was a product I can see the argument to market it to different groups but as it is a medium I think we should focus on making the medium better instead of launching a better medium that is suppose to replenish Quarks purpose.

Now, I want to get the arguments straight as there seem to be a lot of different directions in this discussion. I try to list the arguments why we went into this discussion in first place. I believe them to be very different and so are the conclusions we can draw from them. I list them with the contra arguments:

1. Hashrate is too low >> "Companion" coin with merge mining - however: people (e.g. mako, who is a developer) argued that this is in fact not a real issue because of automated checkpointing, which is why the companion coin is not necessary from a technical side.
2. Value is too low >> making the coin more attractive (more features, more projects, more prospects)  - People argued that the main issue is that we have no money to finance projects.
3. No Community Funds >> "companion" coin as a "product" we sell for QRK, proof of burn, donations, superblock
4. Dev is inactive >> involve developer stronger (talk to developer) / find other coop developers


@1 I was bit astonished that the hashrate in fact is no real issue, I would like to hear more about that from another developer.
@2 I personally think that is not the case in terms of exchange rate, however we need to raise a substantial share of the whole distributed money to use for future projects. I am against a companion coin as I don´t see any way to create real distinguishing features. Also if merge mining isn´t that important (which may not be the case) the main reason seems to be raising money.
@3 If this is only about raising money I would prefer sidechain solutions (proof of burn etc.) or donations.
@4 As I argued before, I think paying a Dev in QRK is the best solution to get a dev involved in Quark. With regard to latest coops I am positive about including other devs ( than Max)

Let's test it!

Wallet test Update from Max Guevera!:

"This weekend I spent time on the Quark 0.9.2 upgrade, specifically the synchronised checkpoint feature.

Most of the upgrade is done, but a lot of testing is still needed. The mining features still need to be ported to the 0.9.2 version.

I did some testing on:

1. Syncing the block-chain from scratch
2. Sending coins from 0.8 wallet to 0.9 wallet
3. Sending coins from 0.9 wallet to 0.8 wallet
4. Sending coins from 0.9 wallet to 0.9 wallet
5. Synchronised checkpointing

Please assist with additional testing where you can and report issues to me or Geoffrey.

I made Windows builds of the latest version here (0.9.2r1 test1):

32 bit - https://www.dropbox.com/s/tmuonqp5ejh9o9v/quark092r1_w32_test1.zip
64 bit - https://www.dropbox.com/s/q894lebpkb5z9iu/quark092r1_w64_test1.zip

NOTE: This is a test release, so be sure to backup your quark data directory and wallet before running this version."

Great to hear you say that Vic. I still have yet to hear 1 solid specific negative of the companion coin sold via QRK IPO only.

The thing is we don't actually need the full involvement of the current qrk development team. If they wish to remain apart from the idea actually they are free to do this. Of course if would be great to have a dual wallet etc and complete co-operation and unity between the 2 coins with the same governance. The features you mention would really work nicely under one team.



QRK needs a development pot, price boost that can be maintained, renewed forced interest from the outside investors that have forgotten qrk, new blood with their energy and BTC that will come if you give them a reason, new features bring new BTC, but so do many other things like seeing an active community, seeing future projects discussed and projects that are currently being actioned etc.  I do accept it is possible that the companion coin would in the long term big picture possibly have little positive effect on QRK. BUT that is only a possibility, i think it is likely that if smart managed it will bring a lot of great things qrks way and solve a lot of the current issues.

The worst case is that it turns into competition with QRK like the other 400 alts. In reality the worst case looks like tomorrow if only one new alt is released.

In the premined scenario there are no real stretches of trust being asked. There can be public wallets fully transparent transactions. I mean only cryptsy has any kind of qrk turnover. That can be slammed shut if  the pot started moving without community knowledge.

It's seems the wanting to let things playout and wanting to make some radical changes will split the qrk community. However, let's be honest. There is no community without leadership and clear signs of future development. QRK died with the last wave of coins. The difference is qrk has still a lot of potential if used correctly. Some of the CORE members are very talented and skillful with great ideas but zero funding. We have Bill this is HUGE, but next time we need to engage him only when we have 100% ROI projects that WILL make good returns or even one HUGE ROI project that the entire community could get behind and invest in. Quarks name is still something people know about and we have some nice things coming in the future like shaqfu and QRKfx has some nice ideas too. QRK is possibly being held down artificially, but i don't see it like that. It just looks like there is not enough buy interest in the coin. There are more attractive looking coins for the future, this is mainly because they have the funding and active development/marketing teams behind them.

The first part is

1. set out the qrk leadership so we have a captain and supporting team to get behind.
2. set out a clear plan for the development fund
3. find a development team that would become involved for a potential 5%? of total minting released over a long time frame


Yes, some have said why would qrk be needed for this, why  not make a entirely new coin and not help qrk at all.

Well i see the reason would be a symbiotic relationship. This new development team or current team with new vigour would get

1. association with the qrk foundation - so legitimacy
2. the qrk core of talent that has done so much for nothing will be working alongside with funding also. If they can get us on the shaqfu game with no funding imagine with some funding.
I see quite a few talented and motivated people at the core. This i think is worth a lot.
3. we have BIll for releasing legitimate investment opportunities to investors when we have some ROI projects ready and thrashed out.
4. Large % of minting available and agreed upon already. To be released to them in a responsible way. Most devs get flack for 1% premine and rightly so if they are able to dump it first day on exchange.

I agree CH - I was and am a strong proponent of a companion coin for exactly these reasons - we need a development fund, a real stake for the developer and development team to keep people motivated, and merge mining to secure the blockchains. The companion coin can be set up so it is not in direct competition with Quark proper - my idea was to give the coin a personal/business finance slant, and to see if we could give it ring signatures for anon features. I would've liked to see a dual wallet with in wallet trading set up so that you could convert between the two coins. Quark would then be the day to day transparent transaction currency, while the partner was the
personal bank account/back end that had anon features. In this manner, we could advocate for merchant adoption of Quark proper, and then perhaps set up banking services for the companion.

Its all just a matter of figuring out scenarios where you have clear product differentiation.

But I agree - we absolutely need a development fund to compete. If we had one, we wouldn't need to be selling shares of the game, etc - it would just be getting done.

Vic

Bitcoin's security has been questioning ever since, i think QRK's secure hashing algorithm is the main reason that QRK will never dip to 3-decimal satoshi levels.

For a coin its total supply is 247.000.000, one would think QRK is overvalued (whereas, not) comparing to the couple-of-million-total-supply coins, "rare coins" if you like to call them.

Cryptohunter, take into account that weather is lovely and people are on holidays. I know this is the case for many xore Quarkers. I am writing this from a hotel bed after a friends wedding party .

We contscted Max after these discussions and will get him in touch with the community soon. I am positive about this happen pretty soon so let's wait for his perspective on things.