Topic: [EMUNIE] We are not dead, just busy building megacool stuff *teasers inside* - page 2. (Read 10996 times)

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I understand there seems to be a "reserve/stabilization pool" method to keep the price stable. I am not interested in this feature here.

What I am asking is how new coins are mined/distributed post-IPO. Maybe I am missing something that has already been said, or this is a link that explains this simply?

From my understanding, there will be a premine on top of what is purchased by IPO investors. That will be used to alter supply based on demand, but distributing to existing holders, like a POS coin, and will ultimately be released over time as demand increases.

Not sure I understand that first sentence, is some missing? :S

As an investment, you'll make an ROI, but it wont be in the 1000's of % like many alts/pump & dumps as the market is difficult to manipulate (except for a caveat below).  As the value should stay relatively stable, an ROI comes from the increased supply due to demand from adoption.   The value of 1 eMu might still be $0.10 in terms of USD, as it was when it was purchased, but due to demand the supply has had to increase 10 fold....depending on your eMu balance (or as in this discussion, investment) you would receive a portion of that new supply.

Additionally its a fine balance in terms of an IPO.....

The more people that invest in an IPO, the less people remaining to drive demand so those investors receive a positive ROI further down the line.  Alternatively, if there isn't enough and demand skyrockets, then the system will suffer a degree of volatility as it wont have enough reserves (which is the main initial reason for an IPO) to smooth the storm.  It will remain volatile until enough time has passed for the newly created supply eMu to equalize with demand, and for that new supply to be circulating in the system.

A broad distribution has always been a very high requirement due to the closed loop nature of the economics system.  The more people there are and the more eMu is spread around, the better the system can compensate any initial demand post launch while it build a trend history.

However, the production is set by the initial distribution, whose production cost is set by the IPO?

Just trying to measure if it's a worthwhile investment or just a good free tool (like Paypal).

Hey guys, sorry for being quiet, got a busy week next week with demos and conferences so its full steam ahead getting the latest stuff finished.

I've got quite a lot of semi-technical documentation that are in various stages of "finish".  Some of that I need next week at my various meetings showcasing what eMunie can do, so this weekend is going to be spent finishing off what I need.  As I'm going to be spending quite some time on trains and in airport lounges over the next week I intend to spend that time on the remainder.

I want to have various documentation finished up before even thinking further on any kind of IPO.  As well as the open beta that will be available, getting as much documentation, both simple and more advanced prepared, will allow people to make informed choices on whether they want to use eMunie when released and participate in any form of IPO/distribution model that may be on offer.

I'm cagey on the IPO purely because I haven't made a 100% decision on if its the best way to move forward as a distribution model and if so, how any IPO would operate.


You are correct, the goal is a stable currency, so it's ability to function as a reliable store of value, act as a unit of account, and a means of payment is not compromised by volatility.

Simply, the internal DEX monitors the demand at any given moment via the various buy and sell orders.  The system is able to buy & sell eMu from the DEX of its own accord, by using its own funding reserves to smooth out the bumps.  If the demand trend is higher than the system can manage from its own reserves, more eMu will be created and distributed via the system rules (balance interest, various reward streams for people running nodes, etc etc) with the expectation that a portion of those new eMu will make it into circulation.

Likewise if the demand trend is lower than the available supply, eMu will be removed from the system by burning portions of the fees collected that are associated with the various activities.  The remainder of those collected fees are then also distributed according to system rules to the various node operators.

This stabilization is not infallible, and with enough upwards or downwards pressure, the price will move, that can not be prevented with this system.  Also, the plan is not to forcibly hold the value at a set point, but to simply smooth out the bumps which should provide a more predictable and gradual movement of any up or down value trends.

There is no defined supply. More coins are minted when there is more demand for them. The idea is to build a stable currency. Hence the upside can be limited, it's not a crypto for speculation. Someone should correct me if I am wrong, but that's the impression I got reading on eMunie.

Yeah, very difficult to measure the potential of this coin. What's the upside?

Me, too!

Please give us something like a hand-out!

I'm also interested to know...

watch from minute 26 ha .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwLviP7KaAc&feature=player_detailpage#t=1573

i'm referring to the bundles of nuclei.

Is there a detailed writeup on distribution scheme anywhere?

seriously is this fucking Emoji?

the emoticons its too much i cant read anything you say.

ye yeah it's all broken whatever...

Just curious on a few things, total amount of coins, IPO starting price, ETA of IPO,Thank you.

Glad to confirm your fantasies 

No, but your response confirms my belief that you are in desperate need of another oar as you repeatedly paddle around in unproductive circles.

Do you need sarcasm tablet? 

"Iffy thinks i have one, ask him"

"doesn't float your boat" is an expression to mean "doesn't satisfy you?".  Much like Беда́ никогда́ не прихо́дит одна́. (a.k.a. When it rains, it pours).  For you it's probably best translated as Каждому по своему (to each his own).

I never said that that sync problems were the same. On the contrary, i said straightly what you said - new features had new sync problems. Where is FUD here if you confirm this? 

How many new features will be in new beta and how many new "occasion caused issues in the transaction syncing" will be? 

I'm saying just the same. Again, is it FUD? 

This is lie. 
 Look better, you can find it on eMu forum 
Iffy thinks i have one, ask him 

*sigh*

Ok lets look at this....

Many many many months ago, transactions had sync problems...because well, transactions were still being refined.  After a number of betas, transaction sync issues were no more.

Then a new feature was added, ENS.  ENS has its own sync channel but is referenced by the transactions model (to ensure you paid for the ENS).  ENS is new code, so it is going to have problems....some of which were syncing.  Syncing problems in the new ENS code on occasion caused issues in the transaction syncing...eventually they were all fixed.

But (and this is important Starik, so read it twice!) sync problems in new ENS code are NOT sync problems in transaction code.  If you think that its possible that any new code does not have bugs, well, you must live on Mars.  Furthermore decentralized systems spend a lot of time in synchronization with the network.  The more features you have, the more syncing channels you need, and the more possible bugs.

Also, isn't testing for these problems what Beta Testing is about???  If there were no bugs, syncing or otherwise, it wouldn't be called Beta, it would be called V1.0

-----

Alas, I don't know why I am even bothering to reply to you, every single post anywhere regarding pretty much anything (not just eMunie), you are negative and attempt to twist things to stir up FUD.  I do not ever recall a single positive or even constructive comment about eMunie...you just bash.  I don't need bashers that offer no solutions and that is why I tend to ignore you.

Not sure why you mention about having boats.....Mars has no water.

I think it is you who is supposed to give proof in this situation 
So now there is no such proof for everyone - you confirm my statement. 
"More nodes" and two more degrees of nodes are some different things, isn't it? 
I believe not people, but facts. And facts are: almost every new feature added to eMu caused sync proplems in previous betas. And we heard the same claims that "new version will fix it", "the tests in closed circle went good", but new problems arize again and again.

Why do on earth you ever began to talk about me? What i have to do, what not, am i greedy, have i a boat, what i should say?   

Prove the recent testing and development have not resolved the sync issues as you claim please.

The proof you are requesting will be made available to you and everyone else in just a few weeks.

The ability to scale can easily be tested by adding more nodes to the network. Whilst testing we started with a base number of nodes. As the tests scaled up (we added more nodes) the capability of the network was indeed very close to linear.

Again you do not have to believe me, the proof will be made available to you and everyone else in just a few weeks.

Personal attacks? Not from me. If you mistook any of my previous statements as a personal attack I believe you're somewhat over sensitive.

That's it? The time period doesn't float your boat and your greedy? So you're still having to find something negative to say instead of something like "Isn't that a crypto first" or "Damn that takes some balls" or even "Not bad, but if it was me I would have (enter constructive criticism here eg:- made a longer time frame and higher bounties)".