Good summation, it lacks when he mentioned he would be working exclusively on spreadcoin full time...As an early adoper, it's beyond the point of frustration or believability. Georgem is taking a more holistic approach rather than building on anything and as a result the price has suffered and confidence has wavered to the point where delisting from the only exchange it's currently on remains a possibility. There are some great minds behind this project though, like coins101- a visionary in this space, who was instrumental in the early success of dash.
It ultimately is a coin of low risk high reward potential. Let's look at its price history. Servicenodes in testnet before mr. Spread's departure .0003. A mere mention of georgem's implementation within reach .00018; Almost an order of magnitude from where we currently stand. Imagine where we will be once, 100 more soons from now, servicenodes are actually released to mainnet.
People involved in crypto are generally myopic. That's a dim game to play. I'd rather georgem not address any of this and keep doing what he's doing. I'll wait.
It ultimately is a coin of low risk high reward potential. Let's look at its price history. Servicenodes in testnet before mr. Spread's departure .0003. A mere mention of georgem's implementation within reach .00018; Almost an order of magnitude from where we currently stand. Imagine where we will be once, 100 more soons from now, servicenodes are actually released to mainnet.
People involved in crypto are generally myopic. That's a dim game to play. I'd rather georgem not address any of this and keep doing what he's doing. I'll wait.
From my perspective, 10m people use Blockchain.info to host a Bitcoin wallet (or they have 10m wallets, whatever your specific point of view), which is a sign something is wrong when you consider there are about 5,500 full Bitcoin nodes.
This is, by its very definition, a market imbalance. Not in terms of technical fear of the network not being able to cope. While there is that. My point of view is that this is a f huge opportunity. It's not a technical imbalance its a market distortion waiting for a solution.
* People don't want to run full nodes. But it's the safest option.
* People do want to run SPV's, in particular through their mobile, but it's the least safe option.
Do you see what I see in that diametrically opposed position?
No?
There are about 1.5bn PC's, but we are approaching 2.5bn smart phones. While PC adoption will plateau, the smart phone will continue to grow towards 5bn users.
So my design for a decentralized (bloody American spell checker on BCT) servicenode network that will create an encrypted link between an SPV and a full node, and then have those full nodes on a super fast rely network, is smack bang in the right space.
In fixing the SPV security model, you fix the Bitcoin lack of full nodes security model. The two positions are no longer diametrically opposed, they are aligned. You've fixed the market distortion, in a decentralized way.
So, I'm waiting to see what will happen before releasing this whitepaper.
The whitepaper is done, I've checked for available technology, it's a great commercial opportunity and it looks like it can address a market distortion enough to generate a business model around it.
Which is why I say, one way or another it will be built.
But lets see what happens next.
This particular option doesn't need proof of node, because there is an element of payment and service provision involved which is a sybil resistant model.
I agree with you but didn't Georgem reject this model on the basis it isn't cryptographically secure? At least I think that is what he said before I quit the team last year...
