Topic: Ethereum: 2nd gen cryptocurrency with contract programming, "dagger" hashing - page 20. (Read 84330 times)

Ditto to you and 90% of your posts  
How's Qubic doing?

He doesn't see ur reply and the others don't care...

Proud to be on it 

Yes.

*facepalm* Do you not know how to detect the difference between fact and fiction?
Stop trying to sound knowledgeable, you are failing miserably.

Maybe you failed at life because he clearly said "IMAGINE IF", he was making an analogy using a fictitious backdrop. It was a pretty bad analogy though.

It's more like running a Kickstarter for a $100 product, but the reward for giving them $100 in funding is a 20% off coupon to buy the product at full price. Oh and the product will give you AIDS. Ok it's nothing like that.

Fixed. It's too early to tell if scam or not.

Thank u for ur competent opinion.

another premined scam coin where the devs hold the large supply of coins

what a joke and you guys complain about the fed but imagine if the fed held all dollars and made you buy dollars from them...

And you needed to quadruple post why? It's not about envy, it's about trust. I'll be absolutely happy if the devs became billionairs IF they deserve it. Only a naive fool would say they deserve anything right now without showing anything in action. The devs are asking to be paid on two fronts, one being an IPO which everyone despises and are known to be used by scammers since there is no turning back once you've sent the cash, and two with a huge supply of currency that they can dump after a year. If Ether is poised to be the next big thing, why do they need an IPO? Especially one that uses an untraceable BTC purchase. If they had such an ingenious system, why wouldn't the IPO be done with USD or EUR. That way we are at least protected if it is a scam?

If I were a dev and I knew that my product was going to be amazing, I'd be satisfied with the millions I would make with my currency. If I were a dev and I felt that the project would fail, or that it had no value, or that I was planning to release it then go on vacation to the Bahamas, then I would do a BTC IPO so that I can at least secure some money at the expense of everyone that trusted me. This may or may not be the case here, which is why I said there is NO way to absolutely sure. No one is being given the benefit of the doubt. So the only logical step would be to cancel the IPO entirely or until the product is launched. eMunie did this, and I have to give Fuserleer huge props for doing so. I'd be contradicting myself if I were against them, but for this.

Not to mention that people don't understand how the coding system seems to be implemented. Ethereum is claiming to be Turing complete. Turing complete means that Ethereum contracts will likely be absolutely loaded with common and proprietary viruses, keyloggers, malware, adware, and a slew of other bad things. I am willing to bet my bank account that in a few short months people will be crying about how they got all their wallets/currency stolen, or their computers are now running slow, or how they blue screen every few minutes after a reboot.

If you want an example of how Turing complete works, load up a peer to peer sharing program and download a bunch of .MOV files and run them. I GUARANTEE that you will get a virus. That's because Quicktime movie files are Turing complete. This is why mkv, mpeg, mpg and avi, while not impervious, are much much safer to download. If you want to invest, mine, and run contracts at the risk of losing everything then go ahead. We will never know for sure how secure Ether is going to be until post release, so asking for money without proof of security is another red flag.

I thought eMunie looked bad during its pre IPO but Ethereum takes it to a new level. There are still over two months left till launch, so they have PLENTY of time to address these issues.

I just had another thought (or way to look at my eth investment decision personally):

If my assumption (argued 3 posts above) that IPO price will be "exactly right" holds, it doesn't matter from my individual perspective wether I invest in the IPO phase or buy ETH on the market right after it ends. The only difference this makes is where my invested BTC go. In the former case they go to the ethereum development fund, in the latter they go to a genesis investor.

So if some people here are envious toward the founders getting control over too much money, they can just buy ETH on the market after the ipo instead of investing during the ipo phase.

I'm guessing I'll do a little bit of everything regarding investing into ethereum:

• invest in ipo phase
• buy on market after ipo phase
• mine

side-note: This is not your average alt-coin and everything I looked at and thought about regarding ethereum so far is well thought-through. This thing is filled with innovation and I think it can provide an exceedingly fertile ground for further innovation and positive change in our world.

This contains many factual errors:

• He's not doing this alone.
• He's not getting the initial investors BTC
• Everyone can take a long long look at ethereum and observe it in action before investing

also:

• his age is irrelevant
• your childish display of misguided envy is sickening

As far as I know, the BTC will be put into a pool and used to fund development and other things. Yes, it will fund a salary for the current crew. If you don't think that's ok, don't invest.

That 19 year old kid has done a shitload of good for cryptocurrency already and he deserves to live a wealthy and free life, even if he'd stop his support right now, just for what he has done so far.

As for seeing the entire system in action: You can download the sources now, run a testnet node and see the system in action. There will be plenty of time to do so before people have to make their investment decision.

I think you're thinking about this the wrong way (or interpreting the 1.2 trillion in a wrong way). It doesn't matter if the IPO price is 1 BTC or 0.0001 BTC or one satoshi. The IPO price per unit does not matter at all and the "projected supply of 1.2 trillion" you are using to estimate wether or not that price is too high or too low implicitly contains that initial price: If the price was 1 BTC / ether initially the "1.2 trillion 'cap'" would be 120 Million instead.

It doesn't make sense at all to argue about the initial price. The only variable that could be "too high" or "too low" is the amount of BTC investors invest initially. Since this variable is determined by the collective opinion of the the same people that will henceforth trade ETH, it will be chosen "exactly right".

This is the main difference (in my mind) compared to the NXT issuance model. With NXT the amount of coins was fixed and the price got implicitly decided by the amount of BTC people put in. With ETH the price is fixed, but the amount that will be issued is not. (also NXT ipo was too short and invisible and maybe was even closed early, that's why price shot up afterwards. Had they waited long enough with high exposure to and broad discussion by the public, price would've been "exactly right" after ipo)

I'm not sure which assumptions are used to arrive at 1.2 trillion. Let's make another calculation:

Investors put in 25,000 BTC, so x = 25,000 / 0.0001 = 250 Million ether. Henceforth 0.5x = 125 Million ether will be mined each year, so after ~50 years, we're looking at 6.25 Billion ether. We're looking at 12.5 Billion ether in the long run (~100+ years) assuming 1% annual loss due to carelessness, death, etc...

What does matter is the amount of BTC investors put in initially. This sets an initial "market cap of ether expressed in BTC" with an arbitrarily chosen initial price of 0.0001 BTC/ether. This market cap reflects what "the market" thinks about ethereum value at that point in time.

After that I'm guessing mining and trading will start. Assuming that it's possible to invest exactly up to the point when mining/trading starts, the price of 0.0001 BTC/ether should be exactly what the market thinks the price should be at that time. After that point (assuming a well-functioning exchange) it should adjust according to peoples changes in valuation of ethereum.

There shouldn't be any "shooting up" or "crashing down" of BTC/ETH.

tell me if I'm wrong.

There is a team, he is not alone, right?

In the context of the entire post, it is very relevant. With him being so young it means this project can't have been in development for long, especially not long enough to warrant becoming an overnight millionaire without giving anyone an opportunity to see his work in action. Not even Satoshi achieved this. And to top it all off, this guy is still a kid. How many 19 year olds get the chance to become overnight millionaires? Not many, so why the extra greed?

This is irrelevant.

I'm looking at how the IPO is presented and handled. Is the information on price, quantity, distribution, schedule, capitalization limits, and future dilution clearly presented so an investor can make an informed decision? Does the issuer stick to the terms originally presented? If not, does the issuer give plenty of advanced notice of the planned change and allow investors and potential investors to adapt accordingly? Does the issuer try to give one impression by giving a deadline or capitalization limit while actually making funding close arbitrary and at his discretion with a phrase to the effect "issuer may choose to end the pre-sale early"?

eMunie may go on and eventually honor the original commitment to allow all investors to buy at the same price and quantities as beta testers. Fuseleer did say, however that that a pre-sale may offer currency in limited quantities sometime in the future. This is a major departure from previous plans and indicates a desire to limit further dilution of existing investment. This does not support the stated reason of cancelling the pre-sale due to forum trolls.

I'm not concerned with the actual price, quantity, duration, proportions awarded to different classes of stakeholders, or eventual total amount in circulation, as to what is fair. This is up to the individual project. Different people have different ideas of what is fair, with about 7 billion different versions of "fair" on the planet altogether. All I ask is that everyone have equal access to the information and the issuer follows through with his plan or gives plenty of notice and reasons for any change.

From what I know of Ethereum, this is their intent, and to allow for participation for all types of stakeholders.

How is it FUD? Everything in my post is a fact and pulled from the information you and the whitepaper have provided. If you claim my post is FUD, then you are a pumper and hypocrite. I have no affiliations to anyone and have not invested a single penny into an IPO. That is unlikely to change.

"no bitcoins raised outside of a payroll that is pegged to a fair market rate by independent accounting."

This means absolutely nothing. This "payroll" could be 100 BTC/day for all we know. There will be no way to make sure this end of the bargain gets held up until after the BTC have been sent.

I'm not against Ethereum or you (yet), I'm against the IPO. Not because I don't trust your company, but simply because there is absolutely NO way to be 100% certain without a fathom of a doubt that what is being claimed will be true before it is too late. There is nothing you can say, no matter how convincing it may sound that will give anyone 100% certainty. You know I'm right about this.

If you believed in your product then you would be happy with the huge portion of Ether you would own after the lock ended. And people would be happy that they have something to look forward to that doesn't involve someone running away with their money.

You can see it for yourself on these forums. People hate pre-mine and are very vocal about it. But people hate IPO's even more. If we had to choose the lesser of two evils we would choose the pre-mine.

But to have not only both, but extreme quantities of both is too far. To make matters worse when people bring it up as a point of contention, the devs call them FUD spreaders, as if we were supposed to bow down and give you our 100% unconditional trust. That's already crossing the line and frankly unprofessional. Would you invest in unprofessional devs? I wouldn't.

Even in the stock world, IPO's have a high scam/low ROI rate. The one thing I loved about crypto was how it WASN'T like the stock market. So please forgive me if I am skeptical. How naive and gullible do you think I am? I'd be happy to argue over this by PM instead.