Topic: MULTIWALLET/Trusted-Cryptos group/Multiple Coin Support/MultiShift/Fiat Trading - page 10. (Read 107581 times)

yes i think we need a better logo and we should pay a professional to do it from community funds
   

Cool coin, watching.

I just said I wasn't crazy about the name and offered up some alternatives I thought might fit better while trying to stay inline with the goals of the Coin. Rebranding is ALOT of work so if it were to happen, it would have to be done early on but the name MultiWalletCoin isn't really something that would turn people off anyways, not like it's called RapeCoin or CryptoMeth, my point was that in terms of marketing it might offer a bit more of an advantage.

So let go voting... "I would like to nominate Griffith + https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/multiwallettrusted-cryptos-groupmultiple-coin-supportmultishiftfiat-trading-752808
on https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/2014-proof-of-honor-poh-awards-ended-unoffical-results-available-855130

I am with you... I am done with coins that change names/logos every couple weeks and expect that will help the market... that is pointless nonsense.... keep working on creating a sound coin   innovation innovation innovation ... I also agree with POD or POH it helps with exposure...

THere's a Proof of Honor nomination going on and it could give you some exposure.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/2014-proof-of-honor-poh-awards-ended-unoffical-results-available-855130

The time for changing names has long since passed,
plans, logos and indeed the very ideaoligy itself lends itself to the
the name multiwallet which used to be the old multiwalletcoin.

The very reason we picked this coin was its name and ideas and it
strikes me quite odd that only now after all this time does a call
for a name change come in by 2 individuals.
We don't believe its in the interests of the coin
or that the community at large would be in favour to upend all the plans made
and that are in process with other external parties to now fundamentally
make such a change and set our progress back severley.

We are looking forward and marching to the inevitable change of how
business will be done for the better in cryptocurrency and we duly invite
anyone interested in this ambition to join us, as there is no going back now!
 

True. If the same things (very good work from devs here) were done to lets say BitcoinPlus (XBC). It would have gone through the roof. Told this before, wish you guys luck. Tip contact XBC dev and see if coins can combine force. Then you will see some results from hard work. 

Congratulation to the Twitter competion winner! We sent the prize already :-)

Cheers

Agree do not make this open source keep it locked up really good.  One of the huge issues is security and opening it up to everyone gives everyone the opportunity to poke holes in it.

i can have the wallet store the keys locally the same way google chrome would do it. re-entering wont be needed

The in wallet trading is on the exchanges (Cryptsy, Bittrex, Poloniex...). For security reasons we will NOT enable depossits or withdraws from the wallet. Withdraws need to be done on the Exchange. As allways we advise you to use 2FA.

If you use the in wallet trading, you will need to insert your public and private api key from the exchange you want to trade on. You will need an account on that exchange. These keys will be stored in the program as long as the wallet is opened. If you close the wallet, then you will have to provide them again.

These keys are encrypted conform the rules of the Exchanges and used when API calls are made with the Exchanges.

One of the reasons why we will keep the code will closed is security.

secure? its essentially...in order to use the exchange you need an account on the exchange. (duh). under your account under settings there is an option for an api key. this is an ecrypted key sent over http post protocols that the server will read and interpret in order to preform actions on your account without you logging into the site and doing it on there.

this means that using the api key you can ask the server to sell a coin at a price from the wallet. the request will send. the server will get it. it will see that it is your key, and will preform the action for your account.
you can use someone elses account if you have all there api key info. so this should be kept private. same principle as that you wouldnt want to post your bank login info on the internet.
api key will be stored locally on your computer. not in the wallet. and not on a server. this is most secure.


as far as im aware we dont have any actual security issues with in wallet trading. im not sure where you got that notion from

Actually I'm not too fond of the name either, I mentioned it a few pages back. A creative and easily marketable name helps quite a bit.

Manibillfold? ManifoldCoin? Billfold? BillfoldCoin? Manifold? Coinfold? CaissonCoin?

I guess if I were to change the name I would go with ManifoldCoin as it means many folding coins.

How can you secure the In-Wallet trading??

Please give me more information about the security issues regarding In-Wallet trading
and transaction process of Multiwalletcoin as it is not open source

GG refers to griffith (me) and groupo( MdtSpain). we will be reviewing it today. that is the first step. i will post more once we have.

Thanks for clarifying.  So it is the "GG-Dev Team" that's working on reviewing supercoin's code and if is promising you work on it as a separate coin or will attempt to incorporate features from mwc and other cryptocurrencdoes?

id like to clarify this claim. the WHOLE mutliwallet team wouldnt be immediately involved at the start. it would just be me and mdtspain. this is why i refered to us as GG-Dev team in the other thread instead of multiwallet team.

i also read on one of the posts about the fast sync from PND. that is interesting, and i will look at that. The Multiple-Coin wallet i am working on doesnt quite work the way someone commented. you would actually be able to disconnect from a coins chain if you dont want that wallet to be online without shutting off the whole thing. basically. say your trying to sync BTC LTC and MWC. but you mostly just want MWC. there will be an option to pause syncing on other coins. so that the coins you want to sync first will sync first.

but right now (since im still making it) the fine details for that wallet are kind of sketchy. the most direct link to MWC with that wallet is that it was made by me who is on the MWC team and features it. the multiple coins arent actually going to be built in to the current MWC wallet as it is, hence why i am making a new wallet. there are many reasons behind this. mostly being that Scrypt, SHA256 and x11 coins dont use the same code base and are made differently. but dont worry too much. it will all come together. and MWC holders will get a bonus out of it. most of the picture updates and stuff for the multiple coin wallet will be posted on this thread, but here as well: https://www.startjoin.com/Multi_Wallet

more in depth questions pertaining too... well anything can be PMd to me or posted here. although PM is probably a way to get a faster response.

Dogecoin was a really shitty name too.

reasons?