I was recently informed of
this highly misinformed article and thought I should respond to some of the comments made by the author.
I will be watching this coin in the future, but I am worried that this may mean that the developer gave up on his innovations when the launch did not go as well as he hoped and dumped before deserting.
Let me make something absolutely clear, this coin is not intended to be a pump and dump like 99% of other coins. This project is like my child, it has taken something like 2 years to get the mini-blockchain scheme from a concept into a reality and I would never abandon it. I created the mini-blockchain scheme because I believed that the scalability issue was one of the major factors hindering the long term success of cryptocurrency. I've spent more than 20BTC out of my own pocket to pay for the development of this coin because I truly believe that this scheme will help take cryptocurrency technology to the next level, able to last long into the future and support a high rate of transactions without getting bogged down by a massive blockchain. I was deep in the negative before we even released Cryptonite, and it's extremely unlikely I will ever make all of my money back. I'm not doing this for the money despite what people may think.
One of their technical innovations is the mini-blockchain scheme which allegedly solves the issue of blockchain bloat by “pruning” old transactions from the network after a long enough time. This allows hashes to finish faster and makes everything generally faster and smoother. It isn’t explained well how this works in practice and though they have a Github, they do not have a white paper.
There is a
wiki, a
white paper, and a
video.
They also have “withdrawal limits” that limit the amount of coins a user can send from one address and one block. They claim this prevents double spending and increases confidence in low-confirmation transactions (even zero-confirmation transactions) but there is no such thing as creating confidence in low-confirmation transactions. That defeats the whole point of cryptocurrency: verification through anonymous networking.
Actually there is such a thing as creating confidence in low-confirmation transactions, including 0-conf transactions. If the withdrawal limit prevents an address from being emptied in a short amount of time then you can clearly have much more confidence in transactions coming from a limited address. The wiki explains why and how it works in more detail.
On the other hand, their “about the developers” page might as well not even be there. They only list usernames except for the founder whose name is almost guaranteed to be fake: J.D. Bruce. Why not just say fuck it and go with “John Smith” if you’re going to use a fake name?
Actually that is my real name, well my real initials and my real last name. But even if it wasn't my real name why the hell would it matter? Satoshi is anonymous and Bitcoin is still trusted. Some people like their privacy, deal with it.