It looks like we are experiencing a bit of a shakeout right now, I'd contribute it to a few main factors:
1) Crypto development teams are not fulfilling their promises and obligations to stakeholders, especially those involved with ICO's. Investors are finally wising up to speculative shit coins that offer no real value, although there are still enough holdouts to keep these scam artists in business.
2) Jitters caused by Ethereum's nosedive on GDAX. Even though the losses of these investors are apparently being covered by the exchange, they will still probably strongly reconsider their other positions in altcoins.
https://dcebrief.com/ethereum-flash-crash-causes-price-to-plummet-nearly-100-in-seconds/
3) A massive bubble driven by rampant speculation. The cryptocurrency industry has grown in value by nearly 23x in the past 2 years, which is far from sustainable and counter intuitive to the goal of promoting financial inclusion. If only a select few reap the rewards of early adoption, a currency can never gain mass acceptance, because it will always be out of reach to those with inadequate financial means. When a cryptocurrency has front heavy issuance, in that most of the currency is rewarded to early adopters, they will benefit with near entirety while late adopters do nothing more than act as pawns that drive value. If a currency with a hard cap on total supply has issued 90% of the supply in their first few years of operation with the intention of driving speculative value to enrich earlier investors, it's a ponzi scheme, plain and simple.
This being said, I think that a shakeout is healthy for the market and DNotes will weather it better than average because an emphasis has never been placed on driving value through hype. Ergo we will retain sufficient liquidity and can support the price for much cheaper at these lower levels than our competitors can.
Topic: DNotes 2.0 - Staking, CRISP Interest, DNotes Pay - page 325. (Read 148866 times)
A Tool for Analyzing Cryptocurrency Investment
This informative article by Timothy Goggin:
https://dcebrief.com/op-ed-mitigate-your-risk-how-to-invest-for-success/
has had me thinking about how to weigh-up the options for investing in cryptocurrency. Not all of the alt-coin out there can succeed, because as people begin to use them in daily use, they will benefit most from the ones that are easily traded. But the value of the successful ones is likely to be thousands of times higher than their current value. So when the sky is the limit, you only need a small part of that to do really well.
By that I mean you don't need to buy a whole coin even, to do well out of a runaway success. So I've been thinking about how hard it would be to create a small portfolio for $100 by buying just $10 worth of the ten most likely to succeed cryptocurrencies. If nine went nowhere, and one only gained ten times it's value, your safe. But if just one of them takes off and gains 100–1000 times it's value, you'll have done better than any other investment opportunity I can think of. Unless Chase is right about those coffee futures
So with these thoughts running around my head, I used Google Sheets to recreate a tool that I have used often in business when comparing purchasing options or analysing tenders. I call it a balanced score card because it is self balancing. It is not enough to rate all of the aspects of a choice, because some aspects are more important than others. If you rated the safety, and preferred colour, of rock-climbing ropes, and chose the one with the highest score, you might die at the end of a very pretty rope. And because some things are much more important than others, the tool I created allows you to give a criteria weight. Any weight you want. So you might have weighted most things 4 or 5, then come across something much more important and give it a 900. You can do that and it all balances out.
Because of this, the tool also helps you understand and justify choices you've already made. If you rate all of the criteria and an option you don't like sits at the top, just fiddle the weightings until your preferred option is at the top. This process reveals what importance you had to put on criteria to make yours win.
Once I created this tool in Google Sheets, I added criteria based on Timothy Goggin's excellent advice. And added a few coins to use as examples. I have then shared it as "Comment Only" so that you can make a copy of it and play with it for insights into your own investment choices.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1o3JEnDsu_ImWphJsu4o0BpmBew7LXXehsPbA2GplN9o/edit?usp=sharing
Please have a play with it, and ask me anything you like about it. I copied and pasted some data into it from:
http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/dnotes/
But it will have changed a little since then.
This informative article by Timothy Goggin:
https://dcebrief.com/op-ed-mitigate-your-risk-how-to-invest-for-success/
has had me thinking about how to weigh-up the options for investing in cryptocurrency. Not all of the alt-coin out there can succeed, because as people begin to use them in daily use, they will benefit most from the ones that are easily traded. But the value of the successful ones is likely to be thousands of times higher than their current value. So when the sky is the limit, you only need a small part of that to do really well.
By that I mean you don't need to buy a whole coin even, to do well out of a runaway success. So I've been thinking about how hard it would be to create a small portfolio for $100 by buying just $10 worth of the ten most likely to succeed cryptocurrencies. If nine went nowhere, and one only gained ten times it's value, your safe. But if just one of them takes off and gains 100–1000 times it's value, you'll have done better than any other investment opportunity I can think of. Unless Chase is right about those coffee futures
So with these thoughts running around my head, I used Google Sheets to recreate a tool that I have used often in business when comparing purchasing options or analysing tenders. I call it a balanced score card because it is self balancing. It is not enough to rate all of the aspects of a choice, because some aspects are more important than others. If you rated the safety, and preferred colour, of rock-climbing ropes, and chose the one with the highest score, you might die at the end of a very pretty rope. And because some things are much more important than others, the tool I created allows you to give a criteria weight. Any weight you want. So you might have weighted most things 4 or 5, then come across something much more important and give it a 900. You can do that and it all balances out.
Because of this, the tool also helps you understand and justify choices you've already made. If you rate all of the criteria and an option you don't like sits at the top, just fiddle the weightings until your preferred option is at the top. This process reveals what importance you had to put on criteria to make yours win.
Once I created this tool in Google Sheets, I added criteria based on Timothy Goggin's excellent advice. And added a few coins to use as examples. I have then shared it as "Comment Only" so that you can make a copy of it and play with it for insights into your own investment choices.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1o3JEnDsu_ImWphJsu4o0BpmBew7LXXehsPbA2GplN9o/edit?usp=sharing
Please have a play with it, and ask me anything you like about it. I copied and pasted some data into it from:
http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/dnotes/
But it will have changed a little since then.
Tim, this is a brilliant idea. Especially if we can have 1) a released version for the sake of the community, and 2) if we could put it into a wizard format with all the key criteria so that people can just decide on any given day what they like the look of investing in. Thank you for the mention of my article - it was written in the hopes it really gives people a proper rubric from which to make long-term investments in crypto from.
A Tool for Analyzing Cryptocurrency Investment
This informative article by Timothy Goggin:
https://dcebrief.com/op-ed-mitigate-your-risk-how-to-invest-for-success/
has had me thinking about how to weigh-up the options for investing in cryptocurrency. Not all of the alt-coin out there can succeed, because as people begin to use them in daily use, they will benefit most from the ones that are easily traded. But the value of the successful ones is likely to be thousands of times higher than their current value. So when the sky is the limit, you only need a small part of that to do really well.
By that I mean you don't need to buy a whole coin even, to do well out of a runaway success. So I've been thinking about how hard it would be to create a small portfolio for $100 by buying just $10 worth of the ten most likely to succeed cryptocurrencies. If nine went nowhere, and one only gained ten times it's value, your safe. But if just one of them takes off and gains 100–1000 times it's value, you'll have done better than any other investment opportunity I can think of. Unless Chase is right about those coffee futures
So with these thoughts running around my head, I used Google Sheets to recreate a tool that I have used often in business when comparing purchasing options or analysing tenders. I call it a balanced score card because it is self balancing. It is not enough to rate all of the aspects of a choice, because some aspects are more important than others. If you rated the safety, and preferred colour, of rock-climbing ropes, and chose the one with the highest score, you might die at the end of a very pretty rope. And because some things are much more important than others, the tool I created allows you to give a criteria weight. Any weight you want. So you might have weighted most things 4 or 5, then come across something much more important and give it a 900. You can do that and it all balances out.
Because of this, the tool also helps you understand and justify choices you've already made. If you rate all of the criteria and an option you don't like sits at the top, just fiddle the weightings until your preferred option is at the top. This process reveals what importance you had to put on criteria to make yours win.
Once I created this tool in Google Sheets, I added criteria based on Timothy Goggin's excellent advice. And added a few coins to use as examples. I have then shared it as "Comment Only" so that you can make a copy of it and play with it for insights into your own investment choices.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1o3JEnDsu_ImWphJsu4o0BpmBew7LXXehsPbA2GplN9o/edit?usp=sharing
Please have a play with it, and ask me anything you like about it. I copied and pasted some data into it from:
http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/dnotes/
But it will have changed a little since then.
This informative article by Timothy Goggin:
https://dcebrief.com/op-ed-mitigate-your-risk-how-to-invest-for-success/
has had me thinking about how to weigh-up the options for investing in cryptocurrency. Not all of the alt-coin out there can succeed, because as people begin to use them in daily use, they will benefit most from the ones that are easily traded. But the value of the successful ones is likely to be thousands of times higher than their current value. So when the sky is the limit, you only need a small part of that to do really well.
By that I mean you don't need to buy a whole coin even, to do well out of a runaway success. So I've been thinking about how hard it would be to create a small portfolio for $100 by buying just $10 worth of the ten most likely to succeed cryptocurrencies. If nine went nowhere, and one only gained ten times it's value, your safe. But if just one of them takes off and gains 100–1000 times it's value, you'll have done better than any other investment opportunity I can think of. Unless Chase is right about those coffee futures
So with these thoughts running around my head, I used Google Sheets to recreate a tool that I have used often in business when comparing purchasing options or analysing tenders. I call it a balanced score card because it is self balancing. It is not enough to rate all of the aspects of a choice, because some aspects are more important than others. If you rated the safety, and preferred colour, of rock-climbing ropes, and chose the one with the highest score, you might die at the end of a very pretty rope. And because some things are much more important than others, the tool I created allows you to give a criteria weight. Any weight you want. So you might have weighted most things 4 or 5, then come across something much more important and give it a 900. You can do that and it all balances out.
Because of this, the tool also helps you understand and justify choices you've already made. If you rate all of the criteria and an option you don't like sits at the top, just fiddle the weightings until your preferred option is at the top. This process reveals what importance you had to put on criteria to make yours win.
Once I created this tool in Google Sheets, I added criteria based on Timothy Goggin's excellent advice. And added a few coins to use as examples. I have then shared it as "Comment Only" so that you can make a copy of it and play with it for insights into your own investment choices.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1o3JEnDsu_ImWphJsu4o0BpmBew7LXXehsPbA2GplN9o/edit?usp=sharing
Please have a play with it, and ask me anything you like about it. I copied and pasted some data into it from:
http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/dnotes/
But it will have changed a little since then.
This is awesome Tim! I have to admit, I did laugh at "Userbase mentality", even though it is a critical component of the big picture.
The current cryptocurrency herd may need definitions of intrinsic, quality, and useful...
A Tool for Analyzing Cryptocurrency Investment
This informative article by Timothy Goggin:
https://dcebrief.com/op-ed-mitigate-your-risk-how-to-invest-for-success/
has had me thinking about how to weigh-up the options for investing in cryptocurrency. Not all of the alt-coin out there can succeed, because as people begin to use them in daily use, they will benefit most from the ones that are easily traded. But the value of the successful ones is likely to be thousands of times higher than their current value. So when the sky is the limit, you only need a small part of that to do really well.
By that I mean you don't need to buy a whole coin even, to do well out of a runaway success. So I've been thinking about how hard it would be to create a small portfolio for $100 by buying just $10 worth of the ten most likely to succeed cryptocurrencies. If nine went nowhere, and one only gained ten times it's value, your safe. But if just one of them takes off and gains 100–1000 times it's value, you'll have done better than any other investment opportunity I can think of. Unless Chase is right about those coffee futures
So with these thoughts running around my head, I used Google Sheets to recreate a tool that I have used often in business when comparing purchasing options or analysing tenders. I call it a balanced score card because it is self balancing. It is not enough to rate all of the aspects of a choice, because some aspects are more important than others. If you rated the safety, and preferred colour, of rock-climbing ropes, and chose the one with the highest score, you might die at the end of a very pretty rope. And because some things are much more important than others, the tool I created allows you to give a criteria weight. Any weight you want. So you might have weighted most things 4 or 5, then come across something much more important and give it a 900. You can do that and it all balances out.
Because of this, the tool also helps you understand and justify choices you've already made. If you rate all of the criteria and an option you don't like sits at the top, just fiddle the weightings until your preferred option is at the top. This process reveals what importance you had to put on criteria to make yours win.
Once I created this tool in Google Sheets, I added criteria based on Timothy Goggin's excellent advice. And added a few coins to use as examples. I have then shared it as "Comment Only" so that you can make a copy of it and play with it for insights into your own investment choices.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1o3JEnDsu_ImWphJsu4o0BpmBew7LXXehsPbA2GplN9o/edit?usp=sharing
Please have a play with it, and ask me anything you like about it. I copied and pasted some data into it from:
http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/dnotes/
But it will have changed a little since then.
This informative article by Timothy Goggin:
https://dcebrief.com/op-ed-mitigate-your-risk-how-to-invest-for-success/
has had me thinking about how to weigh-up the options for investing in cryptocurrency. Not all of the alt-coin out there can succeed, because as people begin to use them in daily use, they will benefit most from the ones that are easily traded. But the value of the successful ones is likely to be thousands of times higher than their current value. So when the sky is the limit, you only need a small part of that to do really well.
By that I mean you don't need to buy a whole coin even, to do well out of a runaway success. So I've been thinking about how hard it would be to create a small portfolio for $100 by buying just $10 worth of the ten most likely to succeed cryptocurrencies. If nine went nowhere, and one only gained ten times it's value, your safe. But if just one of them takes off and gains 100–1000 times it's value, you'll have done better than any other investment opportunity I can think of. Unless Chase is right about those coffee futures
So with these thoughts running around my head, I used Google Sheets to recreate a tool that I have used often in business when comparing purchasing options or analysing tenders. I call it a balanced score card because it is self balancing. It is not enough to rate all of the aspects of a choice, because some aspects are more important than others. If you rated the safety, and preferred colour, of rock-climbing ropes, and chose the one with the highest score, you might die at the end of a very pretty rope. And because some things are much more important than others, the tool I created allows you to give a criteria weight. Any weight you want. So you might have weighted most things 4 or 5, then come across something much more important and give it a 900. You can do that and it all balances out.
Because of this, the tool also helps you understand and justify choices you've already made. If you rate all of the criteria and an option you don't like sits at the top, just fiddle the weightings until your preferred option is at the top. This process reveals what importance you had to put on criteria to make yours win.
Once I created this tool in Google Sheets, I added criteria based on Timothy Goggin's excellent advice. And added a few coins to use as examples. I have then shared it as "Comment Only" so that you can make a copy of it and play with it for insights into your own investment choices.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1o3JEnDsu_ImWphJsu4o0BpmBew7LXXehsPbA2GplN9o/edit?usp=sharing
Please have a play with it, and ask me anything you like about it. I copied and pasted some data into it from:
http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/dnotes/
But it will have changed a little since then.
The Four Pillars of Business Success - Introduction by Alan Yong
https://youtu.be/5JdWJ8IxCmU
To sign up for membership pre-registration please visit this link:
https://fourpillarsofbusinesssuccess.com/subscription/
You people have certainly kept busy. I got a much better sense of the direction of your book, and the energy behind it, from this video, than I have from anything else I'd read so far. And that includes the great looking book trailer that I discovered afterwards.
So I signed up to be a part of the entrepreneur group, and got my confirmation email before the 'welcome' website had finished loading. This whole thing looks like another strong move by the DNotes team. I'll bet the timing has been carefully chosen as well.
GDAX to Reimburse Traders for Losses During Flash Crash
https://dcebrief.com/gdax-to-reimburse-traders-for-losses-during-flash-crash/
https://dcebrief.com/gdax-to-reimburse-traders-for-losses-during-flash-crash/
Being a New Zealand national, I decided to tune in briefly for the second to last race of the America's Cup. Now I personally don't care at all about sailing, or if New Zealand wins (since our government should never be subsidizing sports teams in my view), but I did see some interesting feats of achievement and innovation - David can certainly defeat Goliath.
My main observation was that funding is no-way near as important to result as strategy, innovation, and team cohesion.
Team New Zealand are a minor funded outfit that struggles to acquire the necessary sponsors (Emirates is primary) to put together a competitive team compared to the other sailing syndicates that are all funded by billionaires i.e. Larry Ellison and his Team USA / Oracle. Oracle are funded with anywhere between three and five times the funding of Team NZ. Team USA are the defending champions, so they get create the race rules and conditions, and they are made incredibly in their favor and in other cases, make the life of Team NZ very difficult.
So out-muscled and with the game rigged against them? Team New Zealand have won 7 races, to Oracle's 1 (6-1 on score because NZ started with a race handicap). One more win, and the America's cup comes back to New Zealand. The race Team New Zealand lost, they capsized before they even reached the start line.
Work smarter, not harder. Strategy is king. Always have the right team
Team New Zealand have simply been the better team thus far. They innovated better and took a different path in implementing a bicycling grinding system to control the sails, compared to their rivals who do it with their arms. Oracle copied the concept to a degree so that it also had bicycle grinders which allow for 40% more power and efficiency. But this didn't help the defending champions. Team New Zealand astutely realized that upon changing the the way their boat worked to bicycle grinders, that their key personnel requirements also changed. So instead of having the best sailors filling positions on their boat, they got several Olympic cyclists and rowing champions to join their boat crew. These people never tire, and can quickly be taught how to operate on the boat under the skippers command. This new class of crewman was more effective to winning than having the most experienced sailors on the team.
Communicate, and practice
My next observation was the lack of fluidity in transitions on the part of Oracle. They seemed haphazard at best, like they were rattled, and not working in a complementary manner to one another. It was as if their team would all move from one side of the boat to the other without a smooth flow, with many lost seconds of individual team members not being in the correct position. By contrast, when Team New Zealand made the decision to 'tack', the entire squad would finish what they were doing, and seamlessly move to the other side of the boat in unison, without any appearance of difficulty or members looking like they weren't where they should be.
Watching, I couldn't help but see the parallels to this industry - Nobody could tell at the beginning how far ahead the real leaders are; everybody else is doing what-the-hell-ever - investors are buying into coins that have no product of service attached that are absent any sense of direction; there are a lot of brilliant minds working in the space, but they don't always have the right skills mix in their team to achieve what they say they want to accomplish; being the underdog is a great position to reveal strength from.
Now, keep in mind everyone, DNotes has a New Zealander of its own on the team
My main observation was that funding is no-way near as important to result as strategy, innovation, and team cohesion.
Team New Zealand are a minor funded outfit that struggles to acquire the necessary sponsors (Emirates is primary) to put together a competitive team compared to the other sailing syndicates that are all funded by billionaires i.e. Larry Ellison and his Team USA / Oracle. Oracle are funded with anywhere between three and five times the funding of Team NZ. Team USA are the defending champions, so they get create the race rules and conditions, and they are made incredibly in their favor and in other cases, make the life of Team NZ very difficult.
So out-muscled and with the game rigged against them? Team New Zealand have won 7 races, to Oracle's 1 (6-1 on score because NZ started with a race handicap). One more win, and the America's cup comes back to New Zealand. The race Team New Zealand lost, they capsized before they even reached the start line.
Work smarter, not harder. Strategy is king. Always have the right team
Team New Zealand have simply been the better team thus far. They innovated better and took a different path in implementing a bicycling grinding system to control the sails, compared to their rivals who do it with their arms. Oracle copied the concept to a degree so that it also had bicycle grinders which allow for 40% more power and efficiency. But this didn't help the defending champions. Team New Zealand astutely realized that upon changing the the way their boat worked to bicycle grinders, that their key personnel requirements also changed. So instead of having the best sailors filling positions on their boat, they got several Olympic cyclists and rowing champions to join their boat crew. These people never tire, and can quickly be taught how to operate on the boat under the skippers command. This new class of crewman was more effective to winning than having the most experienced sailors on the team.
Communicate, and practice
My next observation was the lack of fluidity in transitions on the part of Oracle. They seemed haphazard at best, like they were rattled, and not working in a complementary manner to one another. It was as if their team would all move from one side of the boat to the other without a smooth flow, with many lost seconds of individual team members not being in the correct position. By contrast, when Team New Zealand made the decision to 'tack', the entire squad would finish what they were doing, and seamlessly move to the other side of the boat in unison, without any appearance of difficulty or members looking like they weren't where they should be.
Watching, I couldn't help but see the parallels to this industry - Nobody could tell at the beginning how far ahead the real leaders are; everybody else is doing what-the-hell-ever - investors are buying into coins that have no product of service attached that are absent any sense of direction; there are a lot of brilliant minds working in the space, but they don't always have the right skills mix in their team to achieve what they say they want to accomplish; being the underdog is a great position to reveal strength from.
Now, keep in mind everyone, DNotes has a New Zealander of its own on the team
It is like we are being turned into the pod people or something. I fully appreciate what the dev has put together, but we don't want a bridge between decentralized and centralized. The entire concept and idea of Bitcoin is to be completely decentralized.
Hi taxmanmt5, and welcome to the DNotes forum.
1. We are not a copycat of bitcoin or any other alt.
2. If every currency replicates the same concept and idea as bitcoin, that would make them the pod people...
Welcome taxmanmt5, we do believe some aspects should remain completely decentralized. Such as the creation of new currency and the decentralized security and consensus. While having the option to use it any way that you see fit. Some will want complete control of their own wallet and how they use their DNotes, which is completely within the scope of DNotes model. Others will only use it when it is just as easy to use as the money they use today (and even easier). We consider having centralized bridges to the decentralized world only to be a additional benefit to the currency.
The other aspect of this discussion is the company and how it impacts decentralization and the market. When the company is fully functional, and there are significant revenue streams coming in, the company has value, and helping to create fundamental and intrinsic value for the currency... Then that will help to create a "floor" price for DNotes, as well as lift its value.
In essence, all we are doing is adding to the value proposition and benefits of the currency. We are not taking away from the decentralization.
It is like we are being turned into the pod people or something. I fully appreciate what the dev has put together, but we don't want a bridge between decentralized and centralized. The entire concept and idea of Bitcoin is to be completely decentralized.
Hi taxmanmt5, and welcome to our forum.
Our currency token and network is completely decentralized. Our business model, and separate company is of a more centralized model that utilizes strong leadership to make our decentralized token useful and accepted as mainstream in the real world. The centralized aspect of the company means it operates and integrates with the real business world, and then diverts some of the profits into furthering the decentralized token's growth. People can utilize the DNotes ecosystem from within the confines of the internet, or opt to engage with our growth-centric company in the modern business world. Both outcomes result in growth in the fundamental value of the decentralized DNotes token, and hence "Bridging the Centralized and Decentralized World's". This integration with the existing world is necessary for any token to enter mainstream use. Without a strong leadership model, no token will enter use for mainstream payments. DNotes Global's leadership achieves this, while leaving the currency itself completely decentralized.
It is Win / Win no matter which way you look at it. I hope this helps.
The key takeaway for me in Alan's CEOCFO magazine interview, and the press release associated with it, is that it will get people to begin asking the right questions.
So few people understand what is going on, or what is relevant in the industry BECAUSE so few people are asking proactive questions in our media that help people to better understand their own actions - i.e. investment choices. Even when people do ask these right questions (or who have the answers), they are not given a platform.
For example: why is there no conversation within the industry regarding intrinsic value? Even if you have an application building network and a tokenized 'gas' for its use, that hardly drives an 'intrinsic value'. It just means you can use it as money to pay for a network, in the same way that I can spend my Bitcoin's at many online retailers - there is no value behind such applications for supporting a token's -- or currency's -- price.
Alan's interview primes readers to ask these questions. Our approach is different, and it is one that seems completely lost on an industry containing many of the greatest minds. Many people investing in the crypto-realm are great at recognizing a 'cool technology', yet have absolutely no idea about what intrinsic value is, and absolutely no idea that value creation (i.e. shared profit or value creation) is what drives this.
Fiat money -- or modern money -- has zero intrinsic value, as both a piece of paper (burning?), and as a token (infinitely printed representation of debt that we trade with one another). Cryptocurrencies generally are held up by speculative hype and dreams of making a fortune in the future. Should these dreams be considered an overestimate, no development network can save its token from falling to zero.
Some may wonder if an ICO for equity is intrinsic value? -- ABSOLUTELY NOT!
There are ICO's everywhere that are backed by nothing. People are seeking 100s of millions with nothing but a white paper or another 'me too'. Currently Ethereum is the most used token in this regard for raising ICO funding, of which all are soon dumped at the exchanges for BTC and USD which isn't great for Ether's price. This dumping makes all Ether investors proxy financiers of other people's garbage-grade investments from their community. Investments in businesses that don't even have any customers... But at least the ICO people hand over a newly issued token worth nothing (early discount price proves it!) in exchange for handing over a token with an actual tradeable 'price' that they get to spend. ICOs are crowdfunding without promise of future profits.
So what intrinsic value again? I mean it's not to say a tradeable coin won't go up in value (like say Ether in their ICO), but really... none if it is intrinsic value.
But a rapidly growing and profit generating business? Would you invest in that? What if a currency was also a share in the company and company profits were directed back into the currency network? This is called compound growth model, or positive-feedback loop that enhances and amplifies the success of any component of an ecosystem.
We are currently taking an active approach to make sure these questions are asked. Great to see our approach, the better approach, being dispensed in the mainstream media.
So few people understand what is going on, or what is relevant in the industry BECAUSE so few people are asking proactive questions in our media that help people to better understand their own actions - i.e. investment choices. Even when people do ask these right questions (or who have the answers), they are not given a platform.
For example: why is there no conversation within the industry regarding intrinsic value? Even if you have an application building network and a tokenized 'gas' for its use, that hardly drives an 'intrinsic value'. It just means you can use it as money to pay for a network, in the same way that I can spend my Bitcoin's at many online retailers - there is no value behind such applications for supporting a token's -- or currency's -- price.
Alan's interview primes readers to ask these questions. Our approach is different, and it is one that seems completely lost on an industry containing many of the greatest minds. Many people investing in the crypto-realm are great at recognizing a 'cool technology', yet have absolutely no idea about what intrinsic value is, and absolutely no idea that value creation (i.e. shared profit or value creation) is what drives this.
Fiat money -- or modern money -- has zero intrinsic value, as both a piece of paper (burning?), and as a token (infinitely printed representation of debt that we trade with one another). Cryptocurrencies generally are held up by speculative hype and dreams of making a fortune in the future. Should these dreams be considered an overestimate, no development network can save its token from falling to zero.
Some may wonder if an ICO for equity is intrinsic value? -- ABSOLUTELY NOT!
There are ICO's everywhere that are backed by nothing. People are seeking 100s of millions with nothing but a white paper or another 'me too'. Currently Ethereum is the most used token in this regard for raising ICO funding, of which all are soon dumped at the exchanges for BTC and USD which isn't great for Ether's price. This dumping makes all Ether investors proxy financiers of other people's garbage-grade investments from their community. Investments in businesses that don't even have any customers... But at least the ICO people hand over a newly issued token worth nothing (early discount price proves it!) in exchange for handing over a token with an actual tradeable 'price' that they get to spend. ICOs are crowdfunding without promise of future profits.
So what intrinsic value again? I mean it's not to say a tradeable coin won't go up in value (like say Ether in their ICO), but really... none if it is intrinsic value.
But a rapidly growing and profit generating business? Would you invest in that? What if a currency was also a share in the company and company profits were directed back into the currency network? This is called compound growth model, or positive-feedback loop that enhances and amplifies the success of any component of an ecosystem.
We are currently taking an active approach to make sure these questions are asked. Great to see our approach, the better approach, being dispensed in the mainstream media.
When Einstein made his famous observation "Compound interest is the eighth wonder of the world. He who understands it, earns it ... he who doesn't ... pays it.” he forgot to add intrinsic value. Without an understanding of this concept people will never truly understand what "money" is. Schools don't bother to teach underlying concepts and roots of belief anymore. Its like they give you the icing without the cake. there is a whole generation of young people now who have no clue how the dollar gets it's power to buy real goods or even where that authority really comes from. Quite a shame...
Thanks, RJF. It is the cumulative positive impact of everything that DNotes is doing that makes us different, separating us from an increasingly crowded and confused industry. Making things simple and convenient for all our long-term stakeholders to participate and be fairly rewarded will make DNotes 2.0 uniquely different than others. This is made possible because of DNotesValut and other projects that are a part of our total solution. Yes, “compound interest” is “magical” over the long-term. Together with anticipated appreciation, a small CRISP retirement account with a disciplined regular monthly contribution could be worth an eye-popping amount 20 years from now.
It is like we are being turned into the pod people or something. I fully appreciate what the dev has put together, but we don't want a bridge between decentralized and centralized. The entire concept and idea of Bitcoin is to be completely decentralized.
Hi taxmanmt5, and welcome to the DNotes forum.
1. We are not a copycat of bitcoin or any other alt.
2. If every currency replicates the same concept and idea as bitcoin, that would make them the pod people...
It is like we are being turned into the pod people or something. I fully appreciate what the dev has put together, but we don't want a bridge between decentralized and centralized. The entire concept and idea of Bitcoin is to be completely decentralized.
The key takeaway for me in Alan's CEOCFO magazine interview, and the press release associated with it, is that it will get people to begin asking the right questions.
So few people understand what is going on, or what is relevant in the industry BECAUSE so few people are asking proactive questions in our media that help people to better understand their own actions - i.e. investment choices. Even when people do ask these right questions (or who have the answers), they are not given a platform.
For example: why is there no conversation within the industry regarding intrinsic value? Even if you have an application building network and a tokenized 'gas' for its use, that hardly drives an 'intrinsic value'. It just means you can use it as money to pay for a network, in the same way that I can spend my Bitcoin's at many online retailers - there is no value behind such applications for supporting a token's -- or currency's -- price.
Alan's interview primes readers to ask these questions. Our approach is different, and it is one that seems completely lost on an industry containing many of the greatest minds. Many people investing in the crypto-realm are great at recognizing a 'cool technology', yet have absolutely no idea about what intrinsic value is, and absolutely no idea that value creation (i.e. shared profit or value creation) is what drives this.
Fiat money -- or modern money -- has zero intrinsic value, as both a piece of paper (burning?), and as a token (infinitely printed representation of debt that we trade with one another). Cryptocurrencies generally are held up by speculative hype and dreams of making a fortune in the future. Should these dreams be considered an overestimate, no development network can save its token from falling to zero.
Some may wonder if an ICO for equity is intrinsic value? -- ABSOLUTELY NOT!
There are ICO's everywhere that are backed by nothing. People are seeking 100s of millions with nothing but a white paper or another 'me too'. Currently Ethereum is the most used token in this regard for raising ICO funding, of which all are soon dumped at the exchanges for BTC and USD which isn't great for Ether's price. This dumping makes all Ether investors proxy financiers of other people's garbage-grade investments from their community. Investments in businesses that don't even have any customers... But at least the ICO people hand over a newly issued token worth nothing (early discount price proves it!) in exchange for handing over a token with an actual tradeable 'price' that they get to spend. ICOs are crowdfunding without promise of future profits.
So what intrinsic value again? I mean it's not to say a tradeable coin won't go up in value (like say Ether in their ICO), but really... none if it is intrinsic value.
But a rapidly growing and profit generating business? Would you invest in that? What if a currency was also a share in the company and company profits were directed back into the currency network? This is called compound growth model, or positive-feedback loop that enhances and amplifies the success of any component of an ecosystem.
We are currently taking an active approach to make sure these questions are asked. Great to see our approach, the better approach, being dispensed in the mainstream media.
So few people understand what is going on, or what is relevant in the industry BECAUSE so few people are asking proactive questions in our media that help people to better understand their own actions - i.e. investment choices. Even when people do ask these right questions (or who have the answers), they are not given a platform.
For example: why is there no conversation within the industry regarding intrinsic value? Even if you have an application building network and a tokenized 'gas' for its use, that hardly drives an 'intrinsic value'. It just means you can use it as money to pay for a network, in the same way that I can spend my Bitcoin's at many online retailers - there is no value behind such applications for supporting a token's -- or currency's -- price.
Alan's interview primes readers to ask these questions. Our approach is different, and it is one that seems completely lost on an industry containing many of the greatest minds. Many people investing in the crypto-realm are great at recognizing a 'cool technology', yet have absolutely no idea about what intrinsic value is, and absolutely no idea that value creation (i.e. shared profit or value creation) is what drives this.
Fiat money -- or modern money -- has zero intrinsic value, as both a piece of paper (burning?), and as a token (infinitely printed representation of debt that we trade with one another). Cryptocurrencies generally are held up by speculative hype and dreams of making a fortune in the future. Should these dreams be considered an overestimate, no development network can save its token from falling to zero.
Some may wonder if an ICO for equity is intrinsic value? -- ABSOLUTELY NOT!
There are ICO's everywhere that are backed by nothing. People are seeking 100s of millions with nothing but a white paper or another 'me too'. Currently Ethereum is the most used token in this regard for raising ICO funding, of which all are soon dumped at the exchanges for BTC and USD which isn't great for Ether's price. This dumping makes all Ether investors proxy financiers of other people's garbage-grade investments from their community. Investments in businesses that don't even have any customers... But at least the ICO people hand over a newly issued token worth nothing (early discount price proves it!) in exchange for handing over a token with an actual tradeable 'price' that they get to spend. ICOs are crowdfunding without promise of future profits.
So what intrinsic value again? I mean it's not to say a tradeable coin won't go up in value (like say Ether in their ICO), but really... none if it is intrinsic value.
But a rapidly growing and profit generating business? Would you invest in that? What if a currency was also a share in the company and company profits were directed back into the currency network? This is called compound growth model, or positive-feedback loop that enhances and amplifies the success of any component of an ecosystem.
We are currently taking an active approach to make sure these questions are asked. Great to see our approach, the better approach, being dispensed in the mainstream media.
When Einstein made his famous observation "Compound interest is the eighth wonder of the world. He who understands it, earns it ... he who doesn't ... pays it.” he forgot to add intrinsic value. Without an understanding of this concept people will never truly understand what "money" is. Schools don't bother to teach underlying concepts and roots of belief anymore. Its like they give you the icing without the cake. there is a whole generation of young people now who have no clue how the dollar gets it's power to buy real goods or even where that authority really comes from. Quite a shame...
My how the mainstream media has changed... Using bitcoin as a benchmark in a commodity rally prediction, must certainly be a first. I haven't done the exact math on this, but I figure this would make coffee futures around $3 million per pound, since bitcoin has generally been rallying since 2010.
Where to look for the next bitcoin-like rally — if the sun shines right
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/these-commodities-could-be-the-next-bitcoin-if-the-sun-shines-right-2017-06-23
I love a good cup of coffee but, I most certainly wouldn't go over 2 million a pound!
Chinese City Launches Blockchain-Based Public Services Program
https://dcebrief.com/chinese-city-launches-blockchain-based-public-services-program/
https://dcebrief.com/chinese-city-launches-blockchain-based-public-services-program/
Lol, aren't the people behind Bancor the same outfit behind the failed (scam) Appcoin? oh goodie, let's just give them another $150m ether to dump!? Really ether community!?
The problem within this industry is that so many people have come across money almost completely by accident, absent any skill in investing. As a result, so many have lots of Ethereum and Bitcoin etc laying about, of which most of the value / wealth has been speculatively created. These investors don't contribute to the development of any crypto either - they don't have any 'business' skills. This is why the most rational investments for long-term success -- like DNotes -- still remain non-obvious to them, they have NO IDEA what they are doing, or even an interest in due diligence.
DNotes development network will review projects for investment on our crowdfunding platform. Only the highest grade investments will be allowed on the platform. This not only offers security to people who invest in the programs on the network, but also protects the value of DNotes currency from sell pressure when the VC round is over. Not the case on anybody else's development networks, where any cowboy can come along and get 150m with trash-grade code, a failed idea for a whitepaper, and a completely failed cryptocurrency that didn't even get off the floor behind them. This is similar to the DAO hack - 150m has just been given to yet another grossly-negligent / scam party. If you create something of zero-value (like bancor) that doesn't do what it states it will do, based on flawed ideas in the first place, and sell that snake oil for money, it is theft. May I once again congratulate the overly-excited and naive crypto community for giving Bancor so much money because they fell for fantasy terms like "asynchronous price discovery"?
Garbage-grade investments that can not demonstrate real value and profitability would never make it onto DNote's NextGenVC platform. Surely our business model approach for added security, consumer protection, and building intrinsic / fundamental value is beginning to make even more sense?
The problem within this industry is that so many people have come across money almost completely by accident, absent any skill in investing. As a result, so many have lots of Ethereum and Bitcoin etc laying about, of which most of the value / wealth has been speculatively created. These investors don't contribute to the development of any crypto either - they don't have any 'business' skills. This is why the most rational investments for long-term success -- like DNotes -- still remain non-obvious to them, they have NO IDEA what they are doing, or even an interest in due diligence.
DNotes development network will review projects for investment on our crowdfunding platform. Only the highest grade investments will be allowed on the platform. This not only offers security to people who invest in the programs on the network, but also protects the value of DNotes currency from sell pressure when the VC round is over. Not the case on anybody else's development networks, where any cowboy can come along and get 150m with trash-grade code, a failed idea for a whitepaper, and a completely failed cryptocurrency that didn't even get off the floor behind them. This is similar to the DAO hack - 150m has just been given to yet another grossly-negligent / scam party. If you create something of zero-value (like bancor) that doesn't do what it states it will do, based on flawed ideas in the first place, and sell that snake oil for money, it is theft. May I once again congratulate the overly-excited and naive crypto community for giving Bancor so much money because they fell for fantasy terms like "asynchronous price discovery"?
Garbage-grade investments that can not demonstrate real value and profitability would never make it onto DNote's NextGenVC platform. Surely our business model approach for added security, consumer protection, and building intrinsic / fundamental value is beginning to make even more sense?
Well said.
Hi HORT, it's great to see you here again. I hope everything is going okay.
"DNotes development network will review projects for investment on our crowdfunding platform. Only the highest grade investments will be allowed on the platform. This not only offers security to people who invest in the programs on the network, but also protects the value of DNotes currency from sell pressure when the VC round is over."
You saw it first at DNotes... Fiduciary duty in cryptocurrency! The sound you hear is the sound of jaws dropping across the industry.
Great post Tim. The Four Pillars of Business Success - Introduction by Alan Yong
https://youtu.be/mZUDm4x3dWk
To sign up for membership pre-registration please visit this link:
https://fourpillarsofbusinesssuccess.com/subscription/
I can't believe membership is free until the end of 2019! That will be very helpful to struggling businesses trying to get back on their feet. Even if the site content is still being worked on, they will still have access to a wealth of knowledge at no cost for the next 2 1/2 years.
I have personally met many struggling business owners who gave up everything they got just to keep their doors opened - hoping that if they stay in business long enough they will somehow get a lucky break. That seldom happened. I can't be happier if I turned out to be their lucky break. I intent to produce a series of hard-fitting videos along with a good number of articles that are quite eye-opening. By signing up at the website members will be notified when something new is added. I have already spent hundreds of hours in preparation for an official launch. Many people can benefit from this project. Be sure to visit our website and sign up: https://fourpillarsofbusinesssuccess.com/subscription/
Lol, aren't the people behind Bancor the same outfit behind the failed (scam) Appcoin? oh goodie, let's just give them another $150m ether to dump!? Really ether community!?
The problem within this industry is that so many people have come across money almost completely by accident, absent any skill in investing. As a result, so many have lots of Ethereum and Bitcoin etc laying about, of which most of the value / wealth has been speculatively created. These investors don't contribute to the development of any crypto either - they don't have any 'business' skills. This is why the most rational investments for long-term success -- like DNotes -- still remain non-obvious to them, they have NO IDEA what they are doing, or even an interest in due diligence.
DNotes development network will review projects for investment on our crowdfunding platform. Only the highest grade investments will be allowed on the platform. This not only offers security to people who invest in the programs on the network, but also protects the value of DNotes currency from sell pressure when the VC round is over. Not the case on anybody else's development networks, where any cowboy can come along and get 150m with trash-grade code, a failed idea for a whitepaper, and a completely failed cryptocurrency that didn't even get off the floor behind them. This is similar to the DAO hack - 150m has just been given to yet another grossly-negligent / scam party. If you create something of zero-value (like bancor) that doesn't do what it states it will do, based on flawed ideas in the first place, and sell that snake oil for money, it is theft. May I once again congratulate the overly-excited and naive crypto community for giving Bancor so much money because they fell for fantasy terms like "asynchronous price discovery"?
Garbage-grade investments that can not demonstrate real value and profitability would never make it onto DNote's NextGenVC platform. Surely our business model approach for added security, consumer protection, and building intrinsic / fundamental value is beginning to make even more sense?
The problem within this industry is that so many people have come across money almost completely by accident, absent any skill in investing. As a result, so many have lots of Ethereum and Bitcoin etc laying about, of which most of the value / wealth has been speculatively created. These investors don't contribute to the development of any crypto either - they don't have any 'business' skills. This is why the most rational investments for long-term success -- like DNotes -- still remain non-obvious to them, they have NO IDEA what they are doing, or even an interest in due diligence.
DNotes development network will review projects for investment on our crowdfunding platform. Only the highest grade investments will be allowed on the platform. This not only offers security to people who invest in the programs on the network, but also protects the value of DNotes currency from sell pressure when the VC round is over. Not the case on anybody else's development networks, where any cowboy can come along and get 150m with trash-grade code, a failed idea for a whitepaper, and a completely failed cryptocurrency that didn't even get off the floor behind them. This is similar to the DAO hack - 150m has just been given to yet another grossly-negligent / scam party. If you create something of zero-value (like bancor) that doesn't do what it states it will do, based on flawed ideas in the first place, and sell that snake oil for money, it is theft. May I once again congratulate the overly-excited and naive crypto community for giving Bancor so much money because they fell for fantasy terms like "asynchronous price discovery"?
Garbage-grade investments that can not demonstrate real value and profitability would never make it onto DNote's NextGenVC platform. Surely our business model approach for added security, consumer protection, and building intrinsic / fundamental value is beginning to make even more sense?
The Four Pillars of Business Success - Introduction by Alan Yong
https://youtu.be/mZUDm4x3dWk
To sign up for membership pre-registration please visit this link:
https://fourpillarsofbusinesssuccess.com/subscription/
I can't believe membership is free until the end of 2019! That will be very helpful to struggling businesses trying to get back on their feet. Even if the site content is still being worked on, they will still have access to a wealth of knowledge at no cost for the next 2 1/2 years.
Wow! Interesting.
Cornell Professor: $150 Million Bancor is Flawed
By:Joseph Young on 24/06/2017
In a blog post, Cornell professor Emin Gun Sirer explained how Bancor, the most successful ICO in the history of the cryptocurrency market that raised $150 million in a matter of hours, is flawed in 29 different ways from its core vision to its technical aspects.
Sirer’s blog post comes after the criticisms of some of the industry’s most prominent security and bitcoin experts such as Andreas Antonopoulos and Augur co-founder Joey Krug. In early June, Antonopoulos and Krug both expressed their concerns over the massive amount of investment raised by the Bancor development team for untested code and project.
Krug, in particular, went as far to describe Bancor as a project concept which was proved to be inefficient in one of Augur’s previous beta tests.
“Dear god the free market just gave $150M to something we found out didn’t work in practice in the Augur beta,” said Krug.
Bancor initially gained popularity amongst investors within the cryptocurrency community after the endorsement of billionaire investor Tim Draper. The development team behind Bancor aimed to create a standardized platform that would grant an increased level of liquidity for ICO tokens and altcoins. The team described Bancor as the “standard for a new generation of smart tokens.”
On June 12, Draper officially announced his involvement in the Bancor network as an investor, stating:
“We’d like for this to be a Smart Token, so it can benefit from continuous liquidity from day 1. We look forward to a long collaboration with the Bancor team on this project, and are excited for what BNT has in store.”
Conceptually, the Bancor network serves as an intermediary between smart tokens or ICO tokens and direct traders. Instead of traders getting access to and purchasing ICO tokens in a direct peer to peer manner, Bancor sets a standard and a platform which in concept is supposed to provide increased liquidity for traders and ICO operators.
However, Sirer explained that the utilization of the network as a standard for ICO tokens is “like stepping into a kid’s swimming pool, placed in an ocean,” which is a fair assessment of the project’s fundamental concept. More importantly, before delving into the controversial technical components of Bancor, Sirer noted that there already exists a currency peg between ICO tokens and traders which is Ethereum’s Ether.
Like Bancor, the vast majority of ICOs are launched on top of the Ethereum protocol, which means that their tokens are fully compatible with Ethereum’s native token Ether. Hence, the necessity of Bancor tokens comes into question when there already exists a currency peg or an interoperable native token in Ether.
“There already exists a common currency through which we can trade. It’s called ether, and we can use it no matter which token pairs we want to trade, because those very tokens are, by definition, implemented on top of Ethereum and were purchased with ether in the first place,” said Sirer.
However, a more important criticism offered by both Sirer and Antonopoulos is how the Bancor development team raised $150 million for 40 lines of untested code.
“It’s only 40 lines of code. Now, there is nothing wrong with raising $3.5M per line of code, if indeed there is a certain technical advantage that those lines of code possess,” said Sirer.
Furthermore, Sirer revealed that the reimplemented math of Bancor had no direct test to cover critical functions executed by the Bancor codebase. He also described Bancor’s codebase as a “mess,” explaining that the Bancor codebase has a distinct javascript quality.
“Well-written code looks like a work of art. It doesn’t matter if it’s C or Go or Ruby or Prolog; in fact, it looks especially like a work of art if it’s well-written C code. But it does matter if it’s Javascript, because well-written Javascript code is like the mythical Yeti: often discussed, with snippets of evidence for its existence, but no one has seen it in its full, corporeal form. This has been the hallmark of badly written smart contracts: they have messy code paths, don’t follow best practices, and happen to work by the skin of their teeth,” criticized Sirer.
Bitcoin pioneer and COO of popular cryptocurrency wallet platform Jaxx Charlie Shrem also commented on the weak security measures of Bancor and whether if it is in need of a blockchain-based network to accomplish its tasks.
Charlie Shrem
✔@CharlieShrem
So the BANCOR can freeze accounts, create new tokens and block transfers. Why do they need a Blockchain again? https://twitter.com/MarcoDeMeireles/status/878218699219517442 …
10:39 AM - 23 Jun 2017
Source: https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/cornell-professor-150-million-bancor-flawed/
Cornell Professor: $150 Million Bancor is Flawed
By:Joseph Young on 24/06/2017
In a blog post, Cornell professor Emin Gun Sirer explained how Bancor, the most successful ICO in the history of the cryptocurrency market that raised $150 million in a matter of hours, is flawed in 29 different ways from its core vision to its technical aspects.
Sirer’s blog post comes after the criticisms of some of the industry’s most prominent security and bitcoin experts such as Andreas Antonopoulos and Augur co-founder Joey Krug. In early June, Antonopoulos and Krug both expressed their concerns over the massive amount of investment raised by the Bancor development team for untested code and project.
Krug, in particular, went as far to describe Bancor as a project concept which was proved to be inefficient in one of Augur’s previous beta tests.
“Dear god the free market just gave $150M to something we found out didn’t work in practice in the Augur beta,” said Krug.
Bancor initially gained popularity amongst investors within the cryptocurrency community after the endorsement of billionaire investor Tim Draper. The development team behind Bancor aimed to create a standardized platform that would grant an increased level of liquidity for ICO tokens and altcoins. The team described Bancor as the “standard for a new generation of smart tokens.”
On June 12, Draper officially announced his involvement in the Bancor network as an investor, stating:
“We’d like for this to be a Smart Token, so it can benefit from continuous liquidity from day 1. We look forward to a long collaboration with the Bancor team on this project, and are excited for what BNT has in store.”
Conceptually, the Bancor network serves as an intermediary between smart tokens or ICO tokens and direct traders. Instead of traders getting access to and purchasing ICO tokens in a direct peer to peer manner, Bancor sets a standard and a platform which in concept is supposed to provide increased liquidity for traders and ICO operators.
However, Sirer explained that the utilization of the network as a standard for ICO tokens is “like stepping into a kid’s swimming pool, placed in an ocean,” which is a fair assessment of the project’s fundamental concept. More importantly, before delving into the controversial technical components of Bancor, Sirer noted that there already exists a currency peg between ICO tokens and traders which is Ethereum’s Ether.
Like Bancor, the vast majority of ICOs are launched on top of the Ethereum protocol, which means that their tokens are fully compatible with Ethereum’s native token Ether. Hence, the necessity of Bancor tokens comes into question when there already exists a currency peg or an interoperable native token in Ether.
“There already exists a common currency through which we can trade. It’s called ether, and we can use it no matter which token pairs we want to trade, because those very tokens are, by definition, implemented on top of Ethereum and were purchased with ether in the first place,” said Sirer.
However, a more important criticism offered by both Sirer and Antonopoulos is how the Bancor development team raised $150 million for 40 lines of untested code.
“It’s only 40 lines of code. Now, there is nothing wrong with raising $3.5M per line of code, if indeed there is a certain technical advantage that those lines of code possess,” said Sirer.
Furthermore, Sirer revealed that the reimplemented math of Bancor had no direct test to cover critical functions executed by the Bancor codebase. He also described Bancor’s codebase as a “mess,” explaining that the Bancor codebase has a distinct javascript quality.
“Well-written code looks like a work of art. It doesn’t matter if it’s C or Go or Ruby or Prolog; in fact, it looks especially like a work of art if it’s well-written C code. But it does matter if it’s Javascript, because well-written Javascript code is like the mythical Yeti: often discussed, with snippets of evidence for its existence, but no one has seen it in its full, corporeal form. This has been the hallmark of badly written smart contracts: they have messy code paths, don’t follow best practices, and happen to work by the skin of their teeth,” criticized Sirer.
Bitcoin pioneer and COO of popular cryptocurrency wallet platform Jaxx Charlie Shrem also commented on the weak security measures of Bancor and whether if it is in need of a blockchain-based network to accomplish its tasks.
Charlie Shrem
✔@CharlieShrem
So the BANCOR can freeze accounts, create new tokens and block transfers. Why do they need a Blockchain again? https://twitter.com/MarcoDeMeireles/status/878218699219517442 …
10:39 AM - 23 Jun 2017
Source: https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/cornell-professor-150-million-bancor-flawed/
Jump to: