Topic: [ANN][ICO]CREDITS - New Blockchain for financial industry [HARDCAP REACHED!] - page 112. (Read 37727 times)

RonMark, I don't understand what are you doing here. I have read your previous posts and they are all about that this project is a scam, it's impossible and other shit, but you don't leave this thread and continue posting your shit here, more and more, and I can assume that you is just a shit-bot and nothing more. When I don't like any project I just passing by it, or leave one constructive comment, but you are doing something another, your goal is to spread the panic and bad mood here. I already saw many such bots, and I'm sure that you is one of them.

There are much more RED FLAGS.

Yesterday for example i saw a video of the CEO. He is not really confident about the team.

go to here please:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zubbi0q9lkk

Go to 53:10

He doesnt have any confidence in himself, or his team.

Hey there. What’s the soft cap of your platform?

Good afternoon. What part of the tokens issue will be put on the ICO?

"STRATEGIC GOALS
We are confident that the financial sector is moving towards
decentralization. The role of CREDITS cryptocurrency and
decentralized services will grow exponentially:
• Achieving 1 million users of services that will be created
on the platform over the next 3 years.
• The rising value of CREDITS cryptocurrency; with a
desired outcome of 1,000x gain over 3 years"

Seriously? Do you really think it's okay to say how much you think/hope that people will be able to earn by participating in the ICO? Serious projects don't have to do that. Ethereum has increased by 1000x but the developers didn't have to say anything about desired token price in the future to get people to invest. This is a huge red flag to me. So much so that I'm not sure if I will buy any credits. It probably also makes credits a security and I don't think that crypto exchanges are allowed to list securities.

Hey there. What’s the soft cap of your platform?

I have a technical question to ask, if anyone knows an answer.  A team member would be nice, if any exists on here, but I doubt that's the case. So I'm left with the most thoughtful thread I could find on the subject, which appears to be this one.

First off, I'm a fan of Credits, but not because of the hype. I'm fan, because "Federation Credits" was the literal prophetic vision of Gene Roddenberry, the creator of Star Trek. This was the money used in the series, but it only rarely came into the script, because he wanted to portray a world where money wasn't very important, and God bless him for that.  

Nevertheless, as Cyrano Jones so aptly stated, if not for the pursuit of money, what would happen to man's search for knowledge?

https://youtu.be/k8inXKEwDGs

I've been studying the off-chain projects, which are attempting to solve transaction speed and scalability problems, using off-chain transactions to accomplish the billions of transactions per second that will one day be required of all these decentralized platforms; or the BIG one that eventually wins the game. So many actions don't need to be on the blockchain, and even more can be scaled back, and then sent through in larger bundles. In other words, you may not need as much speed, with more scalable planning.

What is the plan of Credits to perform off-chain transactions, similar to what the lightning network is to Bitcoin, or Trinity is to Neo?

I'm not a tech person, so please put your explanation into relatively simple words to explain the plan, because I know enough now, to know that not everything can be performed on-chain, at least not immediately, such as when a small task or action is performed on the platform. Take computer gaming for example, or even micro transactions. Why put these on the chain, when you can take them off, until enough actions are built up, or a daily accumulation is desired on-chain?

Saying over and over that you're able to provide high speed, and I assume "on-chain" transactions, in fact may be a technical blunder built more on "hype" than reality. Especially given what I'm hearing from other smart people in the space, who are working very hard to make a platform that is truly scalable.

How about a little less hype, and a little more reality, given that your truest limitations will be the Internet speeds that are available, anyway. That's the whole floundering problem of DeepBrain Chain, for example. They won't be able to accomplish what they want, due to low Internet speeds, and this has been essentially proven by people who care enough to simply look at the size of the files they say they want to work with.

I have no problem with a pump and dump deal. No problem at all, but it would be nice to genuinely believe in a platform that REALLY can take on the challenges of Internet Speed as the primary limiting factor. It's BS to suggest that all these transactions can take place on-chain, when your Internet speeds won't allow it in the first place.

REALITY CHECK FOLKS ...

Making a plan isnt a problem, the problem is to attract investment. What’s the platform’s progress in this case?

Personally, i havent seen the competitor companies which would provide such worked out and detailed action plan.

Very well, but what of the competitors launch their products in the same industry a bit earlier than Credits?

Because there’re no analogues of this product while the demand for the solutions like this exists.