Topic: Archived Content - page 3. (Read 12169 times)

The problem, as I have mentioned to you, is that there are unanswered questions. When people ask them, you either answer in a vague, blunt manner, or just ignore them completely. Then you go off on a technical tangent regarding the coin. Yet we are all still sitting here, wondering who the dev team is, who has access to the funds,  and wondering why you ignored our questions. So that is why people think there may be some issues.

I'll assume Lionel was paid off. Although I still wonder what his original plan was, if he had devs onboard who simply transferred to you, etc.

I get this is supposed to be a loose collection of crypto enthusiasts working on the coin, but there is loose, and then there is 'so loose that we have no idea who anybody is, or who is in charge'. Even the latter could work (but is hardly ideal), if you weren't taking money for the project.

There needs to be one lead developer regardless, and at least one good coder. Everyone else can be that 'loose collection of devs'. Lannister supposedly is in charge, but he's not the one replying to people here. In fact, does he even read this thread at all? What is his background? Does he have coding skills? Who has access to the donated funds? Will you list how these funds are used, as you use them? Basic stuff.

Oke im in cant resist, tonight i buy some into the ICO and hope to support this project.

Can anyone tell me the block time and block reward ?

For aswell pow as pos please ?

With all the unanswered questions it is sad that we have been reduced to ...  Cagey

I have to go now, but briefly, could you please include a version number on each iteration.

I thought as much, yet, by giving us the barest minimum answer to the question, after ignoring it for so long, you still look cagey.  How did this happen?  Did you, for example, pay him to hand over everything and go away?  Did you get the crowdfunds off him before he left, or did he run off with the money, which you are making good out of your own funds?

This is speculation of course, and wild speculation at that, but by being less-than-forthcoming, you invite such.

I understand that it is frustrating for you to have deal with such issues, when all you want to do is get on and develop.  But I really do wish you would make a full disclosure on this.

It's also not clear who are the "3 developers and theoretical computer scientists and one designer around in this thread" are.  If they've participated in the thread, you should be able to give their user names.  Presumably two of the developers are yourself and Lannister.  Who is the third?  Does Lannister code?  the "theoretiical computer scientist" is presumably me, though I dispute the characterisation.  Who is the designer?

Hmm, good job. It seems awesome.

This message was too old and has been purged

This message was too old and has been purged

To be more specific, I think the scheme outlined in section 2.4 of the whitepaper is still vulnerable to a form of the FAA.  It doesn't affect blockchain security, but it could allow a malicious miner to claim all the rewards (but not the bounties) without doing the (honest) buyers work.  I don't think this dooms the project.  I do think that we will have to address the issue of veifiability in a fundamentally different way.

I have a busy day ahead of me, but I will try to find time this weekend to do a thorough critique of the current iteration of the whitepaper.

This message was too old and has been purged

I hope nothing in that sentence was intended to refer to me.  I'm not any of these things.  As I've repeatedly said, I'm just a guy on the internet.

I don't understand why the question about Lionel's continued involvement (or not) in the project gets continually ignored. It's a reasonable question; it's one I've asked myself; and its been ignored to the point that you are starting to look cagey.

This raises some red flags for me tho, I mean there are other Ico's At the moment who are open about everything.
You know the people behind it and what the plans are, Why wouldn't you do that?
This sounds like I don't want anything to do with this if it goes sideways.
For me It is really important in Ico's who I am going to give my money to and what are they going to do with it, this is way to unclear for me guys sorry.

I am simply going by the original ICO rules (if you remember the old thread for this coin). Supposedly donations weren't supposed to be touched for a while (forget exactly how long). I believe you were the one who even suggested it, then Lionel confirmed.

But again, forget about that. You want all of the money right now, that's fine... not sure if anyone knows who even has access to the funds in the first place.

Please answer the other questions though.

This message was too old and has been purged

There are some very simple things that could be answered here to help with some concerns:

What happened exactly with Lionel? Who was Lionel and is he completely detached from the coin at this point? What was his actual plan?

Who is Lannister? His real name, his background, and who exactly has access to the donated funds?

Is there a ledger somewhere listing how these funds are used?

EK has made statements like without the donated funds the promotional video couldn't be made, or new website couldn't be created ... yet the donated funds weren't supposed to be touched yet (at least that was stated on the old thread). Can't have it both ways, one time saying all funds are safe and not to be touched, and later saying the funds are needed now to create videos/website.

Putting that argument aside, let us know who is on the dev team, what coders are attached and if Lannister is actually in charge of this thing now, it'd probably be nice if he posted once in a rare while. So far, there have been two 'silent lead devs', while EK is the one doing the talking all the time.

The technical aspects of the coin are obviously important, but most of that stuff will go over the head of the average investor. Basic info on the devs involved, how funds are handled, and so on, is basic ICO 101 ... no excuse not to provide this information.

"Elastic - Scam or legit?"

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14158698

You did not solve the The Faster Algorithm Attack (FAA). Your proposed solution is incoherent and it doesn't matter what you propose, it will always be flawed because the problem is insoluble:


Also the attacker can DDoS the system by submitting a verification algorithm that is orders-of-magnitude slower than the attacker's proving algorithm.

This entire concept is insoluble and flawed and any fool who invests in this shit deserves to lose their money.

Will thw whitepaper include a section on limitations ...verifiable computations and homomorphic encryption which are not yet  possible for our purposes?

I agree we dont need escrow. Escrow is counterproducive for this kind of project. But there are frequently raised concerns, which should be addressed however, to stop the ongoing debate and move on. Biggest concern is probably the control of funds, (possible mismanagement, possible abuse, etc.). This could easily be addressed by a wider distribution of Multisig key storage. Total of six keys, four of which are required to send bitcoin, for instance, public applications, open discussion, transparent nomination, anyone already participated in either this one or one of the previous two threads is eligible to candidate. What do you guys think?