Topic: [ANN] [XTC] TileCoin| IoT (Internet of Things) bitcoin blockchain - ĐApp - page 55. (Read 286457 times)
November 21, 2014, 06:39:49 AM
How it could be scam if the dev is working hard for 2 month after IPO ending. LOL. Waiting for the wallet
November 21, 2014, 06:27:46 AM
TileCoin makes people so angry. That's fascinating.
It is fudders that make me angry, not TileCoin itself. November 21, 2014, 06:25:38 AM
TileCoin makes people so angry. That's fascinating.
November 21, 2014, 06:25:09 AM
Hi altcoinUK,
I posted a rough draft of the 3D printed "prototype" enclosure from our "Industrial Designer". This may look like an amateur attempt for what should be a professional enclosure for the IoT devices. This is not the case. This validates dimensions and usability/weather proofing techniques that need to be thought of at the very beginning.
When producing a final product, many stages of validation occur to reduce the final cost of output for a particular product that is manufactured.
It is absolutely necessary to produce a "prototype" prior to actually committing to manufacturing of the physical enclosure. Reduces risk and iterations that incur NRE (Non-Recurring Engineering) cost.
On another specific note, we have a pcb that validates each IoT device on a mesh network using hardware that has cryptographically signed information.
Here is the "rough" draft board design.
What this does, is provide a more difficult way of attacking a mesh network versus attacking multiple sensors within the network with a chip signing mechanism.
You had asked about the time aspect of validation. If based on btc, there is a 10 minute delay...
When the Smart Contracts and Micro transactions functionalities are combined, this enables very fast data verification and validation with minimal bitcoin blockchain bloat.
If you have received quotes from other people in regards to time, I do not think they have asked you what type of IoT device that would exist in the mesh network to be able to respond accurately to your question.
In the case of our chip, it takes between 10-20 milliseconds to produce a signature that can be authenticated. Depending on the number of devices and their specific roles within the mesh network, this can vary considerably. We are working on datasheets that will accurately identify potential bottlenecks that pertain to the different type of devices and their roles in a mesh network for the IoT.
I hope this helps.
Regards,
ASIC-8Tile
I posted a rough draft of the 3D printed "prototype" enclosure from our "Industrial Designer". This may look like an amateur attempt for what should be a professional enclosure for the IoT devices. This is not the case. This validates dimensions and usability/weather proofing techniques that need to be thought of at the very beginning.
When producing a final product, many stages of validation occur to reduce the final cost of output for a particular product that is manufactured.
It is absolutely necessary to produce a "prototype" prior to actually committing to manufacturing of the physical enclosure. Reduces risk and iterations that incur NRE (Non-Recurring Engineering) cost.
On another specific note, we have a pcb that validates each IoT device on a mesh network using hardware that has cryptographically signed information.
Here is the "rough" draft board design.
What this does, is provide a more difficult way of attacking a mesh network versus attacking multiple sensors within the network with a chip signing mechanism.
You had asked about the time aspect of validation. If based on btc, there is a 10 minute delay...
When the Smart Contracts and Micro transactions functionalities are combined, this enables very fast data verification and validation with minimal bitcoin blockchain bloat.
If you have received quotes from other people in regards to time, I do not think they have asked you what type of IoT device that would exist in the mesh network to be able to respond accurately to your question.
In the case of our chip, it takes between 10-20 milliseconds to produce a signature that can be authenticated. Depending on the number of devices and their specific roles within the mesh network, this can vary considerably. We are working on datasheets that will accurately identify potential bottlenecks that pertain to the different type of devices and their roles in a mesh network for the IoT.
I hope this helps.
Regards,
ASIC-8Tile
Thanks for replying and sorry for not noticing your post earlier. As I said, I have been interested in your tech from day one, just the level of innovation put me off. However, I can see you work hard and that's one of the most important ingredients of success, and your professional attitude makes me more and more interested in your project.
As for this board, if I see correctly you use Eagle CAD like most hobbyists do. If I invest in your coin and if it required at all, I am happy to get you a few Altium Designer licenses so you will have the proper tool to get the job done.
I assume you will use Atmel security chips to perform the cryptography function - not too many other alternatives for dedicated crypto devices. Here is a friendly advice with the best intention: be very careful with Atmel. I invested last year in a start-up here in the UK. The boys designed their solution around the previous Atmel Zigbee chip which is based on the ATMega1284, and then Atmel suddenly discontinued the product. Atmel is notorious to do that. So obviously you do what you want, but I would avoid Atmel, especially that their crypto chips are low sellers and they could discontinue them at any time.
Anyway, that issue about Atmel is actually academic because the whole device doesn't make sense (or at least from your description I misunderstood what it does), and to show my good faith, to save you $ 100,000 and from an entirely wrong direction I say this: your approach to handle the mesh network nodes with your custom hardware is completely wrong and unnecessary. What you aim to achieve the industry typically handles with Zigbee modules which make custom designs like yours is completely obsolete. Why do you invent the wheel when the members of Zigbee Allience invested over 1 billion US$ to address low power radio communication and mesh network topology issues? The Zigbee protocol and Zigbee devices are perfectly capable to handle everything what you try to achieve. You see, I just saved your coin from a completely wrong direction and tons of headaches :-))) and I did it in a good faith.
Anyway, thanks for your civil and professional reply, I will read more about what you try to achieve and if everything adds up I will be happy to throw some money into this as well, just like I am interested in all IoT, M2M, smart contract, AI, etc. novel ideas.
You got your cheap coins and now you want it to go back up.
Thanks for the fudder proof ammo anyway, it will get handy next time i see you fud anywhere.
November 21, 2014, 05:25:32 AM
I doubt very much that your IQ, and your purpose
Your doubts have absolutely no relevance to the fact that the Counterparty developer has just confirmed that this is a scam, and to opposite what was claimed it has nothing to do with Counterparty, and therefore it has no decentralized application engine whatsoever. It's a scam. Period.
I haven't confirmed anything. I simply stated that I didn't like how we were engaged on looking at this project. Is the project a "scam"? I don't know, and that's not our call to make, or be involved with making. I will say that it *seems* that the project has some written code and technology, which is more than 95% of the projects in the alt coin space.
IF we had any involvement, it would simply be to look at the technical design as far as it integrates with Counterparty, and give purely technical advice. That's all. We have done this for numerous projects building on Counterparty and it's never been a big deal, but it seems that some individuals in this community have a problem properly understanding what that means, and what it doesn't mean.
I am not specifically familiar with Tilecoin or their technology, and so cannot comment further. But given the reaction and misinterpretation of this forum to any kind of minimal tech review (interpreting the lack of it Tilecoin being a "scam", and the presence of it as the Counterparty developers putting their reputation on the line for Tilecoin) I am very hesitant to get Counterparty involved in any way, as it will be mis-construed.
You son of bit*h, now you are happy, fk your mother and sister, don't contact Xnova again, you bit*h.
xnova,I hardly blame you for not answering me through pm,but why do you transcript my pm to this chinese guy?now we can see this guy is part of tilescam.where is ur dignity and respect?
November 21, 2014, 04:50:56 AM
I doubt very much that your IQ, and your purpose
Your doubts have absolutely no relevance to the fact that the Counterparty developer has just confirmed that this is a scam, and to opposite what was claimed it has nothing to do with Counterparty, and therefore it has no decentralized application engine whatsoever. It's a scam. Period.
I haven't confirmed anything. I simply stated that I didn't like how we were engaged on looking at this project. Is the project a "scam"? I don't know, and that's not our call to make, or be involved with making. I will say that it *seems* that the project has some written code and technology, which is more than 95% of the projects in the alt coin space.
IF we had any involvement, it would simply be to look at the technical design as far as it integrates with Counterparty, and give purely technical advice. That's all. We have done this for numerous projects building on Counterparty and it's never been a big deal, but it seems that some individuals in this community have a problem properly understanding what that means, and what it doesn't mean.
I am not specifically familiar with Tilecoin or their technology, and so cannot comment further. But given the reaction and misinterpretation of this forum to any kind of minimal tech review (interpreting the lack of it Tilecoin being a "scam", and the presence of it as the Counterparty developers putting their reputation on the line for Tilecoin) I am very hesitant to get Counterparty involved in any way, as it will be mis-construed.
You son of bit*h, now you are happy, fk your mother and sister, don't contact Xnova again, you bit*h.
xnova,I hardly blame you for not answering me through pm,but why do you transcript my pm to this chinese guy?now we can see this guy is part of tilescam.where is ur dignity and respect?
November 21, 2014, 02:56:38 AM
I doubt very much that your IQ, and your purpose
Your doubts have absolutely no relevance to the fact that the Counterparty developer has just confirmed that this is a scam, and to opposite what was claimed it has nothing to do with Counterparty, and therefore it has no decentralized application engine whatsoever. It's a scam. Period.
I haven't confirmed anything. I simply stated that I didn't like how we were engaged on looking at this project. Is the project a "scam"? I don't know, and that's not our call to make, or be involved with making. I will say that it *seems* that the project has some written code and technology, which is more than 95% of the projects in the alt coin space.
IF we had any involvement, it would simply be to look at the technical design as far as it integrates with Counterparty, and give purely technical advice. That's all. We have done this for numerous projects building on Counterparty and it's never been a big deal, but it seems that some individuals in this community have a problem properly understanding what that means, and what it doesn't mean.
I am not specifically familiar with Tilecoin or their technology, and so cannot comment further. But given the reaction and misinterpretation of this forum to any kind of minimal tech review (interpreting the lack of it Tilecoin being a "scam", and the presence of it as the Counterparty developers putting their reputation on the line for Tilecoin) I am very hesitant to get Counterparty involved in any way, as it will be mis-construed.
You son of bit*h, now you are happy, fk your mother and sister, don't contact Xnova again, you bit*h.
xnova,I hardly blame you for not answering me through pm,but why do you transcript my pm to this chinese guy?now we can see this guy is part of tilescam.where is ur dignity and respect?
November 21, 2014, 02:37:20 AM
dear dev,
we must konw such info as below:you must give one answer---it is your responsibility ,and ours right!
what will you plan to launch xtc wallet?
??
it had been delay two ,we wont hope it happen two more.
the wallet is so important that heaveily influent people's confident,so we all think the dev shouldnt make it delay
we must konw such info as below:you must give one answer---it is your responsibility ,and ours right!
what will you plan to launch xtc wallet?
??it had been delay two ,we wont hope it happen two more.
the wallet is so important that heaveily influent people's confident,so we all think the dev shouldnt make it delay
November 21, 2014, 02:34:51 AM
@All, be patient, guys!!!
November 20, 2014, 11:20:45 PM
Do not worry,just wait.........
November 20, 2014, 10:34:06 PM
Hi altcoinUK,
I posted a rough draft of the 3D printed "prototype" enclosure from our "Industrial Designer". This may look like an amateur attempt for what should be a professional enclosure for the IoT devices. This is not the case. This validates dimensions and usability/weather proofing techniques that need to be thought of at the very beginning.
When producing a final product, many stages of validation occur to reduce the final cost of output for a particular product that is manufactured.
It is absolutely necessary to produce a "prototype" prior to actually committing to manufacturing of the physical enclosure. Reduces risk and iterations that incur NRE (Non-Recurring Engineering) cost.
On another specific note, we have a pcb that validates each IoT device on a mesh network using hardware that has cryptographically signed information.
Here is the "rough" draft board design.
What this does, is provide a more difficult way of attacking a mesh network versus attacking multiple sensors within the network with a chip signing mechanism.
You had asked about the time aspect of validation. If based on btc, there is a 10 minute delay...
When the Smart Contracts and Micro transactions functionalities are combined, this enables very fast data verification and validation with minimal bitcoin blockchain bloat.
If you have received quotes from other people in regards to time, I do not think they have asked you what type of IoT device that would exist in the mesh network to be able to respond accurately to your question.
In the case of our chip, it takes between 10-20 milliseconds to produce a signature that can be authenticated. Depending on the number of devices and their specific roles within the mesh network, this can vary considerably. We are working on datasheets that will accurately identify potential bottlenecks that pertain to the different type of devices and their roles in a mesh network for the IoT.
I hope this helps.
Regards,
ASIC-8Tile
I posted a rough draft of the 3D printed "prototype" enclosure from our "Industrial Designer". This may look like an amateur attempt for what should be a professional enclosure for the IoT devices. This is not the case. This validates dimensions and usability/weather proofing techniques that need to be thought of at the very beginning.
When producing a final product, many stages of validation occur to reduce the final cost of output for a particular product that is manufactured.
It is absolutely necessary to produce a "prototype" prior to actually committing to manufacturing of the physical enclosure. Reduces risk and iterations that incur NRE (Non-Recurring Engineering) cost.
On another specific note, we have a pcb that validates each IoT device on a mesh network using hardware that has cryptographically signed information.
Here is the "rough" draft board design.
What this does, is provide a more difficult way of attacking a mesh network versus attacking multiple sensors within the network with a chip signing mechanism.
You had asked about the time aspect of validation. If based on btc, there is a 10 minute delay...
When the Smart Contracts and Micro transactions functionalities are combined, this enables very fast data verification and validation with minimal bitcoin blockchain bloat.
If you have received quotes from other people in regards to time, I do not think they have asked you what type of IoT device that would exist in the mesh network to be able to respond accurately to your question.
In the case of our chip, it takes between 10-20 milliseconds to produce a signature that can be authenticated. Depending on the number of devices and their specific roles within the mesh network, this can vary considerably. We are working on datasheets that will accurately identify potential bottlenecks that pertain to the different type of devices and their roles in a mesh network for the IoT.
I hope this helps.
Regards,
ASIC-8Tile
Thanks for replying and sorry for not noticing your post earlier. As I said, I have been interested in your tech from day one, just the level of innovation put me off. However, I can see you work hard and that's one of the most important ingredients of success, and your professional attitude makes me more and more interested in your project.
As for this board, if I see correctly you use Eagle CAD like most hobbyists do. If I invest in your coin and if it required at all, I am happy to get you a few Altium Designer licenses so you will have the proper tool to get the job done.
I assume you will use Atmel security chips to perform the cryptography function - not too many other alternatives for dedicated crypto devices. Here is a friendly advice with the best intention: be very careful with Atmel. I invested last year in a start-up here in the UK. The boys designed their solution around the previous Atmel Zigbee chip which is based on the ATMega1284, and then Atmel suddenly discontinued the product. Atmel is notorious to do that. So obviously you do what you want, but I would avoid Atmel, especially that their crypto chips are low sellers and they could discontinue them at any time.
Anyway, that issue about Atmel is actually academic because the whole device doesn't make sense (or at least from your description I misunderstood what it does), and to show my good faith, to save you $ 100,000 and from an entirely wrong direction I say this: your approach to handle the mesh network nodes with your custom hardware is completely wrong and unnecessary. What you aim to achieve the industry typically handles with Zigbee modules which make custom designs like yours is completely obsolete. Why do you invent the wheel when the members of Zigbee Allience invested over 1 billion US$ to address low power radio communication and mesh network topology issues? The Zigbee protocol and Zigbee devices are perfectly capable to handle everything what you try to achieve. You see, I just saved your coin from a completely wrong direction and tons of headaches :-))) and I did it in a good faith.
Anyway, thanks for your civil and professional reply, I will read more about what you try to achieve and if everything adds up I will be happy to throw some money into this as well, just like I am interested in all IoT, M2M, smart contract, AI, etc. novel ideas.
Shit! We wouldn't buy any of your Gadgetcoin! Please go out from this thread. We really don't want see you again! You're a slimy, pukey piece of shit!
November 20, 2014, 09:54:02 PM
Hi altcoinUK,
I posted a rough draft of the 3D printed "prototype" enclosure from our "Industrial Designer". This may look like an amateur attempt for what should be a professional enclosure for the IoT devices. This is not the case. This validates dimensions and usability/weather proofing techniques that need to be thought of at the very beginning.
When producing a final product, many stages of validation occur to reduce the final cost of output for a particular product that is manufactured.
It is absolutely necessary to produce a "prototype" prior to actually committing to manufacturing of the physical enclosure. Reduces risk and iterations that incur NRE (Non-Recurring Engineering) cost.
On another specific note, we have a pcb that validates each IoT device on a mesh network using hardware that has cryptographically signed information.
Here is the "rough" draft board design.
What this does, is provide a more difficult way of attacking a mesh network versus attacking multiple sensors within the network with a chip signing mechanism.
You had asked about the time aspect of validation. If based on btc, there is a 10 minute delay...
When the Smart Contracts and Micro transactions functionalities are combined, this enables very fast data verification and validation with minimal bitcoin blockchain bloat.
If you have received quotes from other people in regards to time, I do not think they have asked you what type of IoT device that would exist in the mesh network to be able to respond accurately to your question.
In the case of our chip, it takes between 10-20 milliseconds to produce a signature that can be authenticated. Depending on the number of devices and their specific roles within the mesh network, this can vary considerably. We are working on datasheets that will accurately identify potential bottlenecks that pertain to the different type of devices and their roles in a mesh network for the IoT.
I hope this helps.
Regards,
ASIC-8Tile
I posted a rough draft of the 3D printed "prototype" enclosure from our "Industrial Designer". This may look like an amateur attempt for what should be a professional enclosure for the IoT devices. This is not the case. This validates dimensions and usability/weather proofing techniques that need to be thought of at the very beginning.
When producing a final product, many stages of validation occur to reduce the final cost of output for a particular product that is manufactured.
It is absolutely necessary to produce a "prototype" prior to actually committing to manufacturing of the physical enclosure. Reduces risk and iterations that incur NRE (Non-Recurring Engineering) cost.
On another specific note, we have a pcb that validates each IoT device on a mesh network using hardware that has cryptographically signed information.
Here is the "rough" draft board design.
What this does, is provide a more difficult way of attacking a mesh network versus attacking multiple sensors within the network with a chip signing mechanism.
You had asked about the time aspect of validation. If based on btc, there is a 10 minute delay...
When the Smart Contracts and Micro transactions functionalities are combined, this enables very fast data verification and validation with minimal bitcoin blockchain bloat.
If you have received quotes from other people in regards to time, I do not think they have asked you what type of IoT device that would exist in the mesh network to be able to respond accurately to your question.
In the case of our chip, it takes between 10-20 milliseconds to produce a signature that can be authenticated. Depending on the number of devices and their specific roles within the mesh network, this can vary considerably. We are working on datasheets that will accurately identify potential bottlenecks that pertain to the different type of devices and their roles in a mesh network for the IoT.
I hope this helps.
Regards,
ASIC-8Tile
Thanks for replying and sorry for not noticing your post earlier. As I said, I have been interested in your tech from day one, just the level of innovation put me off. However, I can see you work hard and that's one of the most important ingredients of success, and your professional attitude makes me more and more interested in your project.
As for this board, if I see correctly you use Eagle CAD like most hobbyists do. If I invest in your coin and if it required at all, I am happy to get you a few Altium Designer licenses so you will have the proper tool to get the job done.
I assume you will use Atmel security chips to perform the cryptography function - not too many other alternatives for dedicated crypto devices. Here is a friendly advice with the best intention: be very careful with Atmel. I invested last year in a start-up here in the UK. The boys designed their solution around the previous Atmel Zigbee chip which is based on the ATMega1284, and then Atmel suddenly discontinued the product. Atmel is notorious to do that. So obviously you do what you want, but I would avoid Atmel, especially that their crypto chips are low sellers and they could discontinue them at any time.
Anyway, that issue about Atmel is actually academic because the whole device doesn't make sense (or at least from your description I misunderstood what it does), and to show my good faith, to save you $ 100,000 and from an entirely wrong direction I say this: your approach to handle the mesh network nodes with your custom hardware is completely wrong and unnecessary. What you aim to achieve the industry typically handles with Zigbee modules which make custom designs like yours is completely obsolete. Why do you invent the wheel when the members of Zigbee Allience invested over 1 billion US$ to address low power radio communication and mesh network topology issues? The Zigbee protocol and Zigbee devices are perfectly capable to handle everything what you try to achieve. You see, I just saved your coin from a completely wrong direction and tons of headaches :-))) and I did it in a good faith.
Anyway, thanks for your civil and professional reply, I will read more about what you try to achieve and if everything adds up I will be happy to throw some money into this as well, just like I am interested in all IoT, M2M, smart contract, AI, etc. novel ideas.
November 20, 2014, 09:27:01 PM
Although I am very support you, but why every time interpretation don't mention the wallet, which made us very sad, because once a delay you. 
November 20, 2014, 08:49:49 PM
Everybody who supports this coin please be patient.
take it easy!Lock your accout and see it after two months!
it will give you a surprise!:D
take it easy!Lock your accout and see it after two months!
it will give you a surprise!:D
November 20, 2014, 08:40:08 PM
November 20, 2014 - Development Updates
1.) Industrial design enclosure for IoT desktop version.
2.) Receive IoT security pcb boards/chips next week.
Baseline authentication will take 30 milliseconds for 1 IoT device.
3.) Polished enclosure for IoT device - wall mount.
Regards,
ASIC-8Tile
Good news!Thanks for your efforts! 1.) Industrial design enclosure for IoT desktop version.
2.) Receive IoT security pcb boards/chips next week.
Baseline authentication will take 30 milliseconds for 1 IoT device.
3.) Polished enclosure for IoT device - wall mount.
Regards,
ASIC-8Tile
November 20, 2014, 08:30:59 PM
I want to say please fulfill your promise, thank, wallet will be released this week, this is the second time delay. 
November 20, 2014, 12:58:49 PM
i can imagine this system working for a clocking-in & clocking-out style wages for large companies. which would save an incredible amount of money, completely cutting the office workers which handle pays and accounting, no one even needs to add up the hours you worked, its all in the blockchain once you have tagged in/out for the day.
excellent updates, if you want im pretty handy with solidworks i can rasterize and pretty up that industrial enclosure if needed, just for visuals for the thread.
excellent updates, if you want im pretty handy with solidworks i can rasterize and pretty up that industrial enclosure if needed, just for visuals for the thread.
November 20, 2014, 12:44:11 PM
November 20, 2014 - Development Updates
1.) Industrial design enclosure for IoT desktop version.
2.) Receive IoT security pcb boards/chips next week.
Baseline authentication will take 30 milliseconds for 1 IoT device.
3.) Polished enclosure for IoT device - wall mount.
Regards,
ASIC-8Tile
1.) Industrial design enclosure for IoT desktop version.
2.) Receive IoT security pcb boards/chips next week.
Baseline authentication will take 30 milliseconds for 1 IoT device.
3.) Polished enclosure for IoT device - wall mount.
Regards,
ASIC-8Tile
November 20, 2014, 12:27:58 PM
I doubt very much that your IQ, and your purpose
Your doubts have absolutely no relevance to the fact that the Counterparty developer has just confirmed that this is a scam, and to opposite what was claimed it has nothing to do with Counterparty, and therefore it has no decentralized application engine whatsoever. It's a scam. Period.
I haven't confirmed anything. I simply stated that I didn't like how we were engaged on looking at this project. Is the project a "scam"? I don't know, and that's not our call to make, or be involved with making. I will say that it *seems* that the project has some written code and technology, which is more than 95% of the projects in the alt coin space.
IF we had any involvement, it would simply be to look at the technical design as far as it integrates with Counterparty, and give purely technical advice. That's all. We have done this for numerous projects building on Counterparty and it's never been a big deal, but it seems that some individuals in this community have a problem properly understanding what that means, and what it doesn't mean.
I am not specifically familiar with Tilecoin or their technology, and so cannot comment further. But given the reaction and misinterpretation of this forum to any kind of minimal tech review (interpreting the lack of it Tilecoin being a "scam", and the presence of it as the Counterparty developers putting their reputation on the line for Tilecoin) I am very hesitant to get Counterparty involved in any way, as it will be mis-construed.
thanks for clearing that up for us xnova, regardless if you wish to have a look at the technical design of Tilecoin or if you wish not too, we still support Counterparty, proud to be building on it.
November 20, 2014, 11:53:58 AM
I doubt very much that your IQ, and your purpose
Your doubts have absolutely no relevance to the fact that the Counterparty developer has just confirmed that this is a scam, and to opposite what was claimed it has nothing to do with Counterparty, and therefore it has no decentralized application engine whatsoever. It's a scam. Period.
I haven't confirmed anything. I simply stated that I didn't like how we were engaged on looking at this project. Is the project a "scam"? I don't know, and that's not our call to make, or be involved with making. I will say that it *seems* that the project has some written code and technology, which is more than 95% of the projects in the alt coin space.
IF we had any involvement, it would simply be to look at the technical design as far as it integrates with Counterparty, and give purely technical advice. That's all. We have done this for numerous projects building on Counterparty and it's never been a big deal, but it seems that some individuals in this community have a problem properly understanding what that means, and what it doesn't mean.
I am not specifically familiar with Tilecoin or their technology, and so cannot comment further. But given the reaction and misinterpretation of this forum to any kind of minimal tech review (interpreting the lack of it Tilecoin being a "scam", and the presence of it as the Counterparty developers putting their reputation on the line for Tilecoin) I am very hesitant to get Counterparty involved in any way, as it will be mis-construed.
Jump to: