Topic: [BBR] Boolberry: Privacy and Security - Guaranteed Since 2014 - page 239. (Read 1210779 times)

I don't agree. If the technology were not already mostly there, then this would be a major problem.

But this is not some brand new blue sky project where the core technology doesn't even exist yet. BBR does not massive investment in development with a large team. It needs solid maintenance (which CZ can certainly do), cleaning up some rough edges, and a few more pieces to fall into place (which CZ can also do), and it needs a community to recognize it as a good project and start to build around it (third party services and such).


Agree.

20 BTC of the 100+ BTC total wall was mine. Had the fundraiser gone forward I was considering another 20 BTC purchase of BBR (I already own 98,000 BBR for full disclosure). However, when CZ told me that he backed out of the agreement, I pulled my walls as I figured they would be dumped into. I do not know who had the other 80+ BTC walls or whatever and I do not know who sold. I do at least know one person who got lucky enough to buy at .00025. He was happy about that.

EDIT: Let me add, I am very disappointed that I can't help with a larger marketing and PR campaign at the moment. I am also sad that BBR can't afford to bring on more developers to help CZ (as he also wants from my conversations with him) right now.

I feel that had the fundraiser gone through, BBR's community would have probably grown 3-5x over the next few weeks. It really was a fantastic idea, one of the best I've seen since joining the crypto world.

Personally I feel that by itself, as a one man developer show on a shoe string budget, BBRs prospects are a long shot at best. Only because MASS EXPOSURE and UTILITY are the only things (besides hype) that give any alt coin a fighting chance in the future.

However, I believe Supernet could be that mass exposure and utility that tips the scales for BBR. I also believe the fundraiser, if CZ changes his mind, could bring $100,000s over the next 6-12 months and be a game changer too. But thats not going to happen today.

I do hope more people will get involved with 3rd party development with BBR. The more this coin is being used and developed for real world applications, the better its chance of survival.

Windjc, those buy walls that were pulled - were they your buy walls?

I'd love to know what you think I've done. As I mentioned, I havent sold a single BBR. If by pump you mean that I made a few posts about a fundraiser that was confirmed by CZ at the time as happening, then yes I am guilty of that. Then CZ changed his mind and posted that he did so.

Then bid walls were pulled and some people sold. I was not one of them. So if by pump and dump, you mean that I personally lost value without making a dime of profit after putting dozen of hours in preparation for a fundraiser and subsequent large marketing campaing, then sure I did that. Gladly.

I am proud to still post here, although my talents can't really be used to their full extent at the moment.

I hope CZ changes his mind in the future regarding raising funds, but I will support BBR in anyway I can until then. However, I am going to spend my time where it is more efficient and effective to do so, whether that is with BBR, SuperNet, Nxt or BTC, since those are the crypto currencies/crypto projects that I personally believe in the most.

But next time you come at me with insinuations, why don't you come stronger and back them up with real facts? That might give you more credibility.

Not sure what you are saying. Cryptonote didn't pay us to review their whitepaper, we did it because we thought it needed to be done, and released it to the community. Likewise with our reviews of their code.

We've also released our own documents (which I quote as "whitepapers" because that term is thrown around so much in the cryptocoin world as be nearly meaningless) and anyone who wants to review them is free to do so.


Fair enough. I can speak only for myself, and occasional for the Monero core team but never for all Monero supporters.

One thought though. The more you perpetuate the model of the coins as being in mortal conflict, the more what you describe will continue and even increase. It is possible to fan the flames, even if unintentionally. I fail to see how that can help BBR.

Hey guys, GUI wallet and simplewallet is crashing, i'm using win 7 64bit 

My opinion on the bbr/supernet hullabaloo:

1) I find the ego immediately followed by false humility off putting. In case it's not clear what I'm referring to, that would be this quote from the Supernet ANN and http://www.jl777.org/supernet/ page:
immediately followed on both pages by this quote:
If you're referring to yourself in the third person while naming effects after yourself, you're probably not just a "simple" anything, imo.

2) If jl777 is just "a simple C programmer", then why is he undertaking one of the more complex and ambitious projects that requires extensive knowledge of various c++ codebases among other things?

3) I'm not sure where the confidence people have in jl777 to complete the project(s) comes from. As far as I can tell he hasn't delivered anything except for coins/tokens for sale on exchanges. Teleport is not functional, and I don't think any aspect of Supernet is functional. His repositories on github are very lightly forked/starred. Where is the technology he has developed that make people think he can/will pull this off?

4) I don't think I understand Supernet any better than I did before reading the previous several pages. It seems extremely complex, and I think any kind of complex system is  prone to have more points of failure.


(Apparently Einstein probably didn't actually ever say that, but whatevs, the point remains the same.)

I'm not even sure if BBR is still supposed to be a part of the supernetwork, tbh. Could someone clarify that? Also, why would you let a GUI designer pick an encryption algorithm, btw, re: the quote below?

I don't like the pay-per-review model. That whole thing should be done in community spirit. It would have a lot more meaning to "our own whitepapers".


I don't know what to say, but I will admit that is a good point.


It is not a waste. You don't represent the entire factions on either side nor does anyone. The mentality everywhere has been to eliminate BBR (you would know this if you spent time in the right places). I don't trust a majority of the vocal people on any side.

Thank you for not posting like a dick for a change.  

I've said before and I still believe that over time he can be judged by the reputation he establishes and the integrity he demonstrates by his visible actions. (That was not at all the case when "crypto_zoidberg" was a 1-post Newbie that nobody had ever heard of). That process takes time and consistent action, and is ongoing.

I still commend crypto_zoidberg from walking away from money (apparently a significant amount?) he believed had the wrong strings attacked, even without any real idea of what would happen next. That takes balls.

I am not condoning windjc (or any dumper's actions). Reptile has to support XMR. He is ass deep with his BTCs and is taking good care of the BTCs he earned from other wannabe mooners.

I also agree with some of your other points about CZ but shadiness is stretching it. Not a post or two ago, honesty and integrity were the chosen adjectives about CZ 

why the price of BBR is down?

I have only one connection to synchronize wallet.How to add nodes?

First off that's wrong. There is a lot of hard work we've done, some of that is still in progress (database and GUI), some of it is deployed. There are several of our own "whitepapers" in addition to the review of the cryptonote whitepaper (also please don't assume by my silence that I'm agreeing or disagreeing with your speculation about who did the review, because I'm not).

Nevertheless, it doesn't have to make sense to you and what I'm suggesting is that when reality doesn't agree with what makes sense, reconsider your assumptions or model.

IMO a lot of attention is wasted by BBR supporters going after XMR with name calling and sig snipes, when in fact helping XMR would also help BBR because BBR would be pulled up behind XMR (and still be positioned to overtake if XMR stumbles). Both coins can easily improve greatly in terms of underlying technology, and also easily increase 100x in value. I think everyone would be happy with that.

@Slapper: how can you be so harsh with rpietila when BBR had windjc who was here for pump and dumps purpose and left as soon as CZ put a stop to his schemes? how else do you explain the lack of price support and the big dump right before the announcement?

its really funny how the doxa on the bbr thread is "rpietila is the one hurting xmr" whereas he's been supporting from the beginning and shows no sign of giving up.

here you have windjc, resorting to shameful tactics. its beyond me how the man can still post in this thread and feel no shame

also, if BBR is that low, its nobody's fault but CZ. He could have set the whole thing straight from the get go. He didnt. He could still do it today. He doesnt. You guys seem not to understand that whales are looking to invest in a project which shows transparency and openness. all the shadiness around BBR is not really attracting. some of us take the risk and gamble, but in the end we're a minority

At least someone is symphatisizing (sic)  And here is your leadership right here. Place fake buy walls, get others to hop on it, make them shill day and night and we have a weener. Conspiracies be damned.

 To James

Thanks for your coding efforts and vision. Just try to ignore doubters, if you build it they will come even if they don't understand all the tech. Not everyone who owns BTC understands every aspect of it.

To CZ

Thanks for your dedication while everyone is venting there frustration at not being an insider.

To Everybody

If you want BBR to succeed maybe we could do a bit of mining and direct the payment to CZ's account listed on OP. I for one will do this, before anyone screams at me please think about whats being going on.

It seems pretty obvious that CZ rejected some whales offer for funding because he wasn't prepared to give them the inside info giving them a trading advantage over everyone else, or there usual Pump'n'Dump BS

So hey lets support an HONEST man.

Jon 

If people do dismiss it because its an asset or a "holding" as I like to think of it, its really mind boggling. Because, unlike a crypto which is almost purely speculative, SuperNet is backed by holdings that are valued close to the price of 1 supernet asset. In fact, some people have bought Supernet BELOW its combined holdings value.

So, in addition to consistently adding more to its portfolio of holdings, thus slow increasing the actually value of a SuperNet asset, it also is a tech that allow for the eco-system of crypto to grow based off the strongest tech coins.

It boggles the mind that people have a hard time with this concept.

But forgetting about the way it's structured as an asset, I find the concept pretty simple but it seems people don't see it that way. What it means for crypto users should be pretty simple(that's the whole point). Giving people a simple GUI where they can access multiple currencies and services. Like a portal for crypto. Innovation in crypto seems to move at an incremental pace, so having a single point of access for users that can have upgrades added over time as new currencies come a long that offer new tech seems like a pretty good idea to me. Dividing the user base among different cryptos that all offer their own features doesn't make as much sense as providing a platform where each piece that gets added becomes another part of the puzzle.

I think people get too caught up on the whole asset part of it. People seem to intentionally ignore it because of that, or pull up some sort of wall where they automatically dismiss the whole project(not directed at you, but people in general on this forum). I don't really understand why, but it seems no one understands the base concept. Or maybe they do and they're just specifically misunderstanding wither the asset structure of superNET, or the technical part. Which is fine, especially the technical part as some of those pieces still need to be finished.

Perhaps the documentation should be split in to three separate parts: the user interface, the asset, and the technical documentation. For now all most people need to understand is what it's supposed to mean for the user. Once they understand that they can research the asset part if they want. And more technical people can do their thing with the technical documentation.

2014-10-07 22:14:39   Sell   0.0005411   3 BBR   0.0016233
2014-10-07 22:14:35   Sell   0.0005411   1.5 BBR   0.00081165

Sorry to see you go.