Topic: [IOTA] IOTA Speculation - page 109. (Read 171564 times)

Anyone still selling?

Official News!!!

@DAVID

on Tuesday we will announce our launch date, then on Wednesday the website, GUI and blog will be launched officially. Spread the word, we'll need as much testing as possible in the last 2 final weeks leading up to launch. From my discussions with the exchanges we can expect the exchanges implementing IOTA within the first week after launch

Alright, it's becoming obvious that a lot of people conflate the mess of TheDAO and the community's response with what we are discussing right here. For the last time: WE'RE NOT LIVE YET, thus we are not decentralized yet, whatever I do has no impact whatsoever on IOTA's decentralized nature once it actually goes live, comparing the two is beyond stupid. Ethereum went live and exited beta on March 14th with 'Homestead' release per their own definition, this is why their situation is controversial. To even attempt to make this equivalent to this relatively small decision that is nowhere similar at all just indicates that you need to visit your mental health professional and get a refill of prescriptions.

But even if we forget this obvious aspect of the situation, it seems a lot of people still don't understand the vision of IOTA. It's not to make the world decentralized, the decentralized aspect is only needed because of the ecosystem. Personally I see very little use for crypto in transactions between humans and much more prefer a direct democracy with state issued digital currencies which are auditable by every citizen, but in IoT you need a 'plug and play' ecosystem, which require trust. You can't make a consortium with all the thousands of different companies that will be involved in IoT off and on, thus it needs to be decentralized, but it's not some principle we hold dearly just for the sake of being decentralized. Several things are 100x better in their centralized incarnation.

while to an extent I would agree with you all if you don't help out those that bought from him (which includes me) I also believe that some efforts should be made to enable buyers to get their tokens from the freeze. I bought 85k old IOTA (small pieces at different occasions) and got 25k out of that in my IOTA account when CH and CfB worked something out to do enable that. Seeing the 25k being done made me trust him to buy the remaining 60k from him..which of course was my error--if we have come to this juncture.

I know another friend that bought from him and that didn't get an initial amount as he bought after that updated genesis address list was done. If you guys don't help, he stands to have 0 IOTAs. Most of CH's buyers were pledging to donations based off the hope that the remaining deals will be followed through given the addition of some to the genesis list. I donated out of my 25k and and intended to donate more when I get the rest. While I know iotatoken and CfB are really not responsible for actions of these buyers, I would still hope that they can assist in some way that you guys can help right this possible wrong done. IOTA hasn't launched yet and while it strives to be decentralised, while under development maybe you all can help us buyers out. If not for whatever reason you want to stand by then I guess there anything I can say to persuade you all to help fix this.

Sorry for not recalculating old iota to new notation

Didn't saw it yet ^^

I do not like conflicts and to behave in a way which annoy people, but the killer feature of Bitcoin is DECENTRALIZATION.

So I hope there will be no lock for CH address, even so it hurts some buyers, sorry, but to be DECENTRALIZED is more important.

This reminds me about moral problems of Clark Kent from "Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice"...

We are not even able to prove who buy what. And even if we can, CH was also able to sell the private key directly. We don't know if he still in possession of the account or not. So inaction is the best solution.

It's buyers faults for literally giving their money to this guy. CfB and you were not the escrow in these deal, so you don't have to use your power to save people that didn't respect common sense by not giving money to an untrustworthy guy.

And one of the core features of IOTA is also decentralization. Even if you don't like the "childish libetarian fanaticism of 'decentralizing the universe'"

+1000

No, you must not have understood what I wrote earlier; IOTA hasn't launched yet, it's not decentralized yet, it's being developed by a centralized legally registered company. Until official launch (when it de facto goes decentralized), this has nothing to say.


This indicates that you also don't have a good grasp of what the 'idea of IOTA is'. The vision of IOTA is the emerging machine economy in 'Internet of Things' I.E. 'Economy of Things' is the idea that fuels IOTA, not some childish libertarian fanaticism of 'decentralizing the universe'. We didn't make IOTA to create some fringe shadow world, we create it to solve the problems of IoT interoperability between machines. The core features of IOTA is scalability and zero fees, which allow for the first time ever true nano-transactions, which is needed in the machine economy where most transactions will consist of cent equivalents.

Any person that get put off IOTA *if* we were to essentially cancel CH's purchase from our private company before IOTA is even launched is by definition clueless about IOTA and I would be happy to filter them out.

I don't see how "helping" may even tarnish the reputation of IOTA (I am sorry if I could not understand well your point).

If centralisation was an issue, then I could easily see "helping (centralised intervention)" as "dangerous". But (if I understood it correctly) as iota is not expected to be decentralised, if there is the (technical) possibility of helping, this solution would actually be very good, not only for IOTA's image, but for the community as a whole.

edit: of course, we would expect the buyers to, at least, prove (without doubts) their right, before taking any iota from the seller.

me too, i am happy we can help buyer
see youuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu!! 

Why? We're only beta testing, it was always said that during beta test transaction had a chance to be rolled back. Ethereum is live, not beta testing.

Just to say quickly for buyer and seller , dont worry for my escrow!! i come back when i have litle time!! 

We must take into consideration that helping to people got scammed by CH will put a blot on IOTA community forever analogically like quasi unfair distribution in Nxt or hardfork in ETH/DAO. Competitor of IOTA probably will blame IOTA also in 5/10 years.

Helping somebody in their failures we could destroy the idea of the IOTA for ever and the company's reputation has created it. This may be the beginning of the end for the ideas of IOTA. Look at the fight on Ethereum/DAO now and you will understand what could happening.

Buying at CH was risky and buyers were aware of the risk. It's not fair to transfer this fail to the IOTA community.

The final decision will make of course CEO.

I don't really like the idea of "teaching lessons to wrong people".

People will or will not learn on their own. We can obviously try to give "good advises". And people may or may not want to listen to these warnings.

But I believe that no one here is supposed to be willing to "teach" or to punish anyone here.

That does not seem to be the role of anyone of us here.

(to help, if possible, is expectable, though)

maybe a middle solution would be to freeze CH account, and pay scammed people with a "tax" of x% going to the fundation?
This way: 1 people are not enterly scammed, 2 learn the lesson and 3 fundation goes up
We can see this like the "escrow" service provided at the begining by Cfb, but now with a x% charge.

CH was an obvious scammer from the beggining. I cant' understand how people made trades with this guy...

http://www.sec.gov/complaint/tipscomplaint.shtml#

Yea not to mention how much Child_Harold was harassing me and CfB almost daily in his drunken stupours. When someone is harassing the creators of the tech and then offer to trade without escrow you should be very skeptical.