@BlockaFett, I think instamines are relevant information and can be identified and defined objectively.
Whatever other nonsense you are blabbering on about in terms of extra coins that didn't happen (or were you referring to the extra coins created in Dash due to the 500 coin per block bug?), please take it out of Gliss's thread, you are being rude.
Topic: CoinMarketCap.com - Market Cap Rankings of All Cryptocurrencies! - page 45. (Read 639542 times)
April 30, 2015, 12:05:57 PM
April 30, 2015, 12:02:50 PM
drk/dash supporters are saying "proudly instamined" so instead of arguing why don't you help us figure out a way to objectively label instamined coins as "significantly instamined" like your coin (dash/drk)?
April 30, 2015, 12:00:18 PM
iCEBREAKER, I predicted that the Dash instapremine tag would be removed for exactly the reason it was: When in doubt he removes it. Gliss wants objective criteria but also fairly simple criteria. For example, he'll list coins as premined if they have a bunch of coins created in their genesis block.
That's why he removed the premine tag on Bytecoin, even though it is, in reality, clearly premined by any reasonable standard. But there is no genesis block you can point to and say "here, THESE coins were premined".
So I suggest we focus on putting together objective, easily verified criteria for instamines (and maybe ninja premines), which has said he will consider.
That's why he removed the premine tag on Bytecoin, even though it is, in reality, clearly premined by any reasonable standard. But there is no genesis block you can point to and say "here, THESE coins were premined".
So I suggest we focus on putting together objective, easily verified criteria for instamines (and maybe ninja premines), which has said he will consider.
There are two definitions of "premine." The more narrow one strictly excludes any coin with no massive genesis block reward.
The Dash fiasco illustrates why that academic definition is of limited value in the real world.
A slightly more broad definition of "premine" would include cases like Dash, where no clear timeline is available but there is no doubt a massive number of coins were created before the public launch.
It's asinine to reward the DashHoles for using the semantic overlap between Dash's pre- and insta- mining phases to avoid the shitcoin filter.
It is an objective fact Dash's actual early emission in no way matches its ostensible block rewards. We've all seen the evidence.
Gliss saw the scam and said so, which was the right thing to do. Reversing that decision because of whining quibbling DashHoles makes CMC complicit in the scam.
April 30, 2015, 11:54:40 AM
iCEBREAKER, I predicted that the Dash instapremine tag would be removed for exactly the reason it was: When in doubt he removes it. Gliss wants objective criteria but also fairly simple criteria. For example, he'll list coins as premined if they have a bunch of coins created in their genesis block.
That's why he removed the premine tag on Bytecoin, even though it is, in reality, clearly premined by any reasonable standard. But there is no genesis block you can point to and say "here, THESE coins were premined".
So I suggest we focus on putting together objective, easily verified criteria for instamines (and maybe ninja premines), which has said he will consider.
That's why he removed the premine tag on Bytecoin, even though it is, in reality, clearly premined by any reasonable standard. But there is no genesis block you can point to and say "here, THESE coins were premined".
So I suggest we focus on putting together objective, easily verified criteria for instamines (and maybe ninja premines), which has said he will consider.
I think you in particular have a slight conflict of interest here Smooth to try to define anything objective when you are a Monero core-team member and you already pushed CMC for the last 10 pages to add a new category called "intamine" that filters out Dash specifically...looks quite bad on Monero that you are persisting, and imagine the FUD storm when you come up with an equation that magically applies to Dash and trying to get consensus...
There is no consensus needed. Gliss will consider it. His site, his decision. Simple enough. If it meets his criteria and he thinks its useful I bet he will adopt it. The so called conflict of interest doesn't matter because Gliss is the decision maker, not me. So you have nothing to be concerned about.
Don't think that Dash is so special either. I bet there are plenty of premined coins that would like to get their tag removed (or not have the tag exist at all). But as long as there is an objective definition that is simple to apply, Gliss seems to think it is useful to identify them, and maybe instamines too.
Dash is special in the sense that one of it's devs isn't here trying to bully independent websites into getting its competitors black listed. There are pages here now pointing out about your dodgy launch with code deliberately inserted to give the Devs more coins than everyone else, but you notice no one from Dash can be bothered to ask CoinMarketCap to do anything about that, and certainly not the devs, because Dash competes on a commercial and technological level not through attacking the competition. You are in total conflict of interest, you are jut in denial too i think.
April 30, 2015, 11:50:28 AM
iCEBREAKER, I predicted that the Dash instapremine tag would be removed for exactly the reason it was: When in doubt he removes it. Gliss wants objective criteria but also fairly simple criteria. For example, he'll list coins as premined if they have a bunch of coins created in their genesis block.
That's why he removed the premine tag on Bytecoin, even though it is, in reality, clearly premined by any reasonable standard. But there is no genesis block you can point to and say "here, THESE coins were premined".
So I suggest we focus on putting together objective, easily verified criteria for instamines (and maybe ninja premines), which has said he will consider.
That's why he removed the premine tag on Bytecoin, even though it is, in reality, clearly premined by any reasonable standard. But there is no genesis block you can point to and say "here, THESE coins were premined".
So I suggest we focus on putting together objective, easily verified criteria for instamines (and maybe ninja premines), which has said he will consider.
I think you in particular have a slight conflict of interest here Smooth to try to define anything objective when you are a Monero core-team member and you already pushed CMC for the last 10 pages to add a new category called "intamine" that filters out Dash specifically...looks quite bad on Monero that you are persisting, and imagine the FUD storm when you come up with an equation that magically applies to Dash and trying to get consensus...
There is no consensus needed. Gliss will consider it. His site, his decision. Simple enough. If it meets his criteria and he thinks its useful I bet he will adopt it. The so called conflict of interest doesn't matter because Gliss is the decision maker, not me. So you have nothing to be concerned about.
Don't think that Dash is so special either. I bet there are plenty of premined coins that would like to get their tag removed (or not have the tag exist at all). But as long as there is an objective definition that is simple to apply, Gliss seems to think it is useful to identify them, and maybe instamines too.
April 30, 2015, 11:41:35 AM
iCEBREAKER, I predicted that the Dash instapremine tag would be removed for exactly the reason it was: When in doubt he removes it. Gliss wants objective criteria but also fairly simple criteria. For example, he'll list coins as premined if they have a bunch of coins created in their genesis block.
That's why he removed the premine tag on Bytecoin, even though it is, in reality, clearly premined by any reasonable standard. But there is no genesis block you can point to and say "here, THESE coins were premined".
So I suggest we focus on putting together objective, easily verified criteria for instamines (and maybe ninja premines), which has said he will consider.
That's why he removed the premine tag on Bytecoin, even though it is, in reality, clearly premined by any reasonable standard. But there is no genesis block you can point to and say "here, THESE coins were premined".
So I suggest we focus on putting together objective, easily verified criteria for instamines (and maybe ninja premines), which has said he will consider.
I think you in particular have a slight conflict of interest here Smooth to try to define anything objective when you are a Monero core-team member and you already pushed CMC for the last 10 pages to add a new category called "intamine" that filters out Dash specifically...looks quite bad on Monero that you are persisting, and imagine the FUD storm when you come up with an equation that magically applies to Dash and trying to get consensus...
April 30, 2015, 11:08:06 AM
iCEBREAKER, I predicted that the Dash instapremine tag would be removed for exactly the reason it was: When in doubt he removes it. Gliss wants objective criteria but also fairly simple criteria. For example, he'll list coins as premined if they have a bunch of coins created in their genesis block.
That's why he removed the premine tag on Bytecoin, even though it is, in reality, clearly premined by any reasonable standard. But there is no genesis block you can point to and say "here, THESE coins were premined".
So I suggest we focus on putting together objective, easily verified criteria for instamines (and maybe ninja premines), which has said he will consider.
That's why he removed the premine tag on Bytecoin, even though it is, in reality, clearly premined by any reasonable standard. But there is no genesis block you can point to and say "here, THESE coins were premined".
So I suggest we focus on putting together objective, easily verified criteria for instamines (and maybe ninja premines), which has said he will consider.
April 30, 2015, 11:02:24 AM
He made his decision- and even if we don't think it's right, lets give it a rest.
He made two decisions. The first, to denote Dash's strategically ambiguous pre/insta mine, was the correct one.
The second decision, to hide Dash's massive pre/insta mine and announce the procedure for avoiding CMC's shitcoin filter, was incorrect.
If the DashHoles can be persuasive, so can we (especially since the facts are on our side).
April 30, 2015, 10:58:20 AM
He made his decision- and even if we don't think it's right, lets give it a rest.
Agree, there is no point in arguing over Dash at this point (nor Bytecoin for that matter).
I do think we should work on this though
Quote
If someone can come up with an objective and easily verifiable criteria for instamine that can be applied to all current and future mineable coins, I'll consider it.
Probably best to think about that offline and post a specific proposal rather than cluttering up the thread with this ongoing discussion.
April 30, 2015, 10:56:24 AM
He made his decision- and even if we don't think it's right, lets give it a rest.
April 30, 2015, 10:54:57 AM
Nice to ear about you Gliss.
To all Monero shills, crying baby. Stop spamming this thread now, if you want to discuss with him go through the official way, or PM him.
We ear you, no need to repeat trillions of times the sames things!
The number of Monerocrying posting here is ridiculous. you are really loosing all credibility.
Stop crying.
Let the market and technology speak! Let focus on the future not the past...
To all Monero shills, crying baby. Stop spamming this thread now, if you want to discuss with him go through the official way, or PM him.
We ear you, no need to repeat trillions of times the sames things!
The number of Monero
Stop crying.
Let the market and technology speak! Let focus on the future not the past...
April 30, 2015, 10:23:35 AM
For now, I feel it's best not to make any immediate changes to the filters. If someone can come up with an objective and easily verifiable criteria for instamine that can be applied to all current and future mineable coins, I'll consider it. Otherwise it's just going to be too much of a hassle to figure out how every new coin should get classified.
The burden is on the coin to demonstrate/prove it was not pre-mined.
Dash cannot do this, for reasons smooth explains very succinctly:
Quote
I can't figure out what Dash was because it didn't have a well-specified public launch time.
How can we tell if it was mined before its public launch if we can't figure out when that public launch was?
How can we tell if it was mined before its public launch if we can't figure out when that public launch was?
We're not talking about "every new coin" here. Let's not defend the particular by retreating into the general.
The issue is whether or not the #3-by-market-cap, supposedly "non-premined" coin can actually be verified as "non-premined" and deserves to be excluded by the shitcoin filter.
You've just shown every new pre-mined coin how to game your system in the future: all they have to do is have an opaque/ambiguous initial public launch schedule and viola, premine filter avoided.
That is a mistake. You should have stood by your original decision, and not let the DashHoles slide by the premine filter using slimy word games.
If you see a scam and don't say anything, you are a scammer.
April 30, 2015, 07:46:35 AM
For now, I feel it's best not to make any immediate changes to the filters. If someone can come up with an objective and easily verifiable criteria for instamine that can be applied to all current and future mineable coins, I'll consider it. Otherwise it's just going to be too much of a hassle to figure out how every new coin should get classified.
April 30, 2015, 05:38:19 AM
I don't think Smooth has any lack of interest in attacking other coins that come off as shady, or scammy, but Dash is a very big one, so it deserves more attention. Then there is the fact that there are often Dash trolls posting lies in the Monero thread....
You are right. I've been extremely critical of all or nearly ICOs, for example. I consider that model to be sufficiently flawed by its nature that all or nearly all such coins can be considered scams by default, regardless of of whether or not any evidence of bad intent is visible. I guess those are marked on CMC as "significantly premined" so that part is good at least.
April 29, 2015, 08:30:07 PM
@smooth
I love a good rant as much as the next guy, but there are limits.
This is the coinmarketcap forum not the Monero or Dash forums.
You guys have made your numerous suggestions,
But let's agree Coinmarketcap is offering a FREE, I repeat FREE service to the public.
As Such they get to define it however they see fit.
If you don't like the way they define things,
1. Mention it and see if they change it.
(you have mentioned it over the past few pages)
If they don't change it , as it is their Right since they are providing the service for FREE.
1. Start your own Free Market reporting service, and quit whining about theirs.
I love a good rant as much as the next guy, but there are limits.
This is the coinmarketcap forum not the Monero or Dash forums.
You guys have made your numerous suggestions,
But let's agree Coinmarketcap is offering a FREE, I repeat FREE service to the public.
As Such they get to define it however they see fit.
If you don't like the way they define things,
1. Mention it and see if they change it.
(you have mentioned it over the past few pages)
If they don't change it , as it is their Right since they are providing the service for FREE.
1. Start your own Free Market reporting service, and quit whining about theirs.
Would it be hard to sync market data with a better looking site that uses devtome's analysis to give investors the best chance of avoiding scams and coins that are surreptitiously top-heavy?
It's weird that cmc lists premines but not instamines, but if they're unwilling to give total reporting, why not let the market decide on if it wants to know all the facts before investing? Maybe call it SturgeonsRazor.com?
April 29, 2015, 07:43:54 PM
Nobody give a shit about your opinion.
There is conflict of interest here, so all what you are saying means nothing. You are loosing your time.
Nobody give a shit of someone opinion where there is conflict of interest.
There is conflict of interest here, so all what you are saying means nothing. You are loosing your time.
Nobody give a shit of someone opinion where there is conflict of interest.
So wait, when the Dash developers asked coinmarketcap to take the "significantly premined" tag off, was that a conflict of interest and something that should be disregarded?
Accurate evidence is accurate evidence, regardless of the source. Unless you can show the evidence to be inaccurate, conflict of evidence is a bullshit objection to evidence you don't like.
How is it a conflict to have something removed that is not accurate? Smooth, you've publicly stated you don't feel premine is equal to instamine. You acknowledge that dark/dash was never premined but yet you are perfectly ok with them assigning this incorrect status. Why?
When I asked you yesterday about the evidence you provided for a "premine", you said there was none. You provided evidence of a instamine cloaked as a premine. If the two are not the same why do you keep playing word games??
You are playing word games in an attempt to push your agenda. This self fulfilling righteous witch hunt to rid crypto of scams and protect investors means nothing when you yourself cannot be honest in your intent. The fact you continue to play these charades further proves you have no honest intent and you are not objective. These actions are what turns your so called honest concerns into pure trolling. Your only goal is to continue to bash dash in a feeble attempt to make monero some how look better.
I can think of several other coins, monero not one of those, right now that could and should be on your list but you only have your sights set on one. If you were truly objective and worried about the safety of investors, why ignore the other coins with issues too?
I think the problem with figuring out how to label Dash as a premine or instamine comes because of what exactly happened. There is no denying the instamine, 2 million coins were mined in 48 hours, doesn't get much more instamined than that. There is the issue of labeling it a premine though, and I think the premine definition still fits because the date set to launch the coin was changed, and not announced publicly till after Evan started his instamine. Changing the set launch date 'on accident' and then starting to instamine surely counts as a premine, no?
Coinmarketcap should probably add a filter for instamined coins too, which in that case I think Dash would fit well to be filtered as a coin that had both an instamine and premine.
I don't think Smooth has any lack of interest in attacking other coins that come off as shady, or scammy, but Dash is a very big one, so it deserves more attention. Then there is the fact that there are often Dash trolls posting lies in the Monero thread....
April 29, 2015, 07:33:18 PM
@smooth
I love a good rant as much as the next guy, but there are limits.
This is the coinmarketcap forum not the Monero or Dash forums.
You guys have made your numerous suggestions,
But let's agree Coinmarketcap is offering a FREE, I repeat FREE service to the public.
As Such they get to define it however they see fit.
If you don't like the way they define things,
1. Mention it and see if they change it.
(you have mentioned it over the past few pages)
If they don't change it , as it is their Right since they are providing the service for FREE.
1. Start your own Free Market reporting service, and quit whining about theirs.
I love a good rant as much as the next guy, but there are limits.
This is the coinmarketcap forum not the Monero or Dash forums.
You guys have made your numerous suggestions,
But let's agree Coinmarketcap is offering a FREE, I repeat FREE service to the public.
As Such they get to define it however they see fit.
If you don't like the way they define things,
1. Mention it and see if they change it.
(you have mentioned it over the past few pages)
If they don't change it , as it is their Right since they are providing the service for FREE.
1. Start your own Free Market reporting service, and quit whining about theirs.
April 29, 2015, 02:39:43 PM
You have to create a scheme where the rewards are very low after the first blocks. Only difficult adjustement issues can't do this.
What about coins like PPC where the rewards are automatically cut as the difficulty rises? There is no manipulation or changing of (the rules of) the parameters, but the mining is still pretty front-loaded in practice.
I don't see how you make an objective distinction between that and say BTC which is pre-programmed to cut in half every four years. Is it just a question of speed, or something else?
I agree, the true problem is changing the rules.
April 29, 2015, 01:07:56 PM
i might as well weigh in here regarding defining an instamine:
I think the object way to do it is to indicate whether the emission curve ever deviates from the mathematical function that can fit 95% of the extant emission curve. I'm sure theres some mafs that can be applied here.
I think the object way to do it is to indicate whether the emission curve ever deviates from the mathematical function that can fit 95% of the extant emission curve. I'm sure theres some mafs that can be applied here.
April 29, 2015, 10:29:32 AM
Because I don't know the official public launch time for Dash. There were several statedIf it was mined before et
When I asked you yesterday about the evidence you provided for a "premine", you said there was none. You provided evidence of a instamine cloaked as a premine. If the two are not the same why do you keep playing word games??
When I asked you yesterday about the evidence you provided for a "premine", you said there was none. You provided evidence of a instamine cloaked as a premine. If the two are not the same why do you keep playing word games??
I already explained that I can't figure out what Dash was because it didn't have a well-specified public launch time.
How can we tell if it was mined before its public launch if we can't figure out when that public launch was?
Anyway, let's move on. Obviously it isn't a clear enough premine to count as such for the purpose of coinmarketcap, which tends to want very specific and objective evidence for such things.
Quote
You are playing word games in an attempt to push your agenda. This self fulfilling righteous witch hunt to rid crypto of scams and protect investors means nothing when you yourself cannot be honest in your intent. The fact you continue to play these charades further proves you have no honest intent and you are not objective. These actions are what turns your so called honest concerns into pure trolling. You're only goal is to continue to bash dash in a feeble attempt to make monero some how look better.
I can think of several other coins, monero not one of those, right now that could and should be on your list but you only have your sights set on one. If you were truly objective and worried about the safety of investors, why ignore the other coins with issues too?
I can think of several other coins, monero not one of those, right now that could and should be on your list but you only have your sights set on one. If you were truly objective and worried about the safety of investors, why ignore the other coins with issues too?
I comment on what I know about, which at this point is obviously going to be coins that are more "visible" from the Monero perspective. If you want to share some of these other coins that are major scams and should be pursued as such, feel free to let me know about them. Obviously I don't have unlimited time but I do promise to at least take an honest look at what you give me. Fair enough?
Jump to: