Why do you think it's a scam Barabbas? just summarize for us.
-bm
Topic: | Nxt | Blockchain Platform | Proof of Stake | Official - page 462. (Read 941285 times)
What makes this a total scam is not just the outrageous distribution problems but the obvious -and inevitable- manipulation of the market. I mean these guys could be saints and still not being able to NOT manipulate the markets with the amounts they hold by, first, being unfairly rewarded via forging and second and way more importantly, by the inevitable effect of their selling. These are new minted millonaires. They NEED to sell in order to buy homes, cars and all the perks of being new millonaires. Simply by selling small (orderly, is the word) portions of their collective holdings, will keep the price unrealistically lower -thus hurting later investors, traders, and the coin itself-. therefore MANIPULATING it. And that is if you assume they are simply new rich, not greedy, actually saintly people without any further, let alone perverse, intentions, in which case the manipulation could have grotesque effects.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Yet you ignore that 0.1% of wallets own 50% of all Bitcoins in circulation? They could all "decide together" to dump all $3bil, too. But they wont. Big holders of NXT will not either. It's not baffling, you're suffering from cognitive dissonance.
And no, the top holders are not the devs.
Btw, it's known that Sataoshi holders over 1 Million Bitcoins, which is ~15% of Bitcoins in circulation, does this concern you as well?
Pandaisftw
Oh and it is so incredibly funny when someone pretends to know how many NXT the founder or the developers have... really. how do you know, because they have stated so on a forum, anonymously? Let me quote a full post that reflects my thoughts exactly, under the linked, totally misleading, infographics:
"do you work in NSA or do have some prove that these 76 or 71 people were different human beings and not only 1 or 2 developers?
you don't even have IP addresses of that userids so what make you believe that you can rely on relatively anonymous posts on bicointalk where anyone can have so many identities which he is able to use??
So how can you know how many altcoins/NXT BCnext have??"
How can you prove that 90% of the bitcoin hash power isn't owned by the NSA? Oh, you mean that anonymous miners told you they own a rig? Have you actually talked to 90% of miners to manually add up their hash power? I don't think so.
Your arguments are ridiculous.
I have spoken to some of these holders, and yes, they are real people just like you and me.
Pandaisftw
Actually, your answer is totally ridiculous and argumentative.
1.- Minimal as it is, BTC is a global phenomenon on which several -and growing- real life business are based. It has staying power proven through years of all kinds of attacks and manipulations and a clear path as to what it is, it represents and who the face of it is (The Bitcoin Foundation, with names and addresses, physical ones, as well and TAX IDs attached to it... none of which applies to NXT). Additionally, hundreds of independent organisms and enterprises do control who is mining and how much are they mining. So your point comparing NXT to BTC is utterly ridiculous, ok?
2.- You (who are you, by the way?) may have spoken to "some of these holders" or "Yoda" for all I care. It is argumentative and doesn't add any transparency to the conversation. Either put up or, kindly, shut up.
Sorry, no debates here when you begin with fud. Only harsh treatment from Nxt.
This guy has all the markings of a troll with an agenda. Don't bother explaining anything to him. One look at his past posts in other threads show he is a provocateur and cannot be reasoned with.
He is a pest to be dealt with accordingly. At least Elmo brought a little comedy into the mix.
But I am just starting out... I have investigated only 3 coins. 3 outright scams. NEXT being the most recent....
you can follow me to DARK next. I'll most certainly will post my findings. After that, Master... on the outside chance you may want to really find out what's going on.
Now, here, we all do.
What makes this a total scam is not just the outrageous distribution problems but the obvious -and inevitable- manipulation of the market. I mean these guys could be saints and still not being able to NOT manipulate the markets with the amounts they hold by, first, being unfairly rewarded via forging and second and way more importantly, by the inevitable effect of their selling. These are new minted millonaires. They NEED to sell in order to buy homes, cars and all the perks of being new millonaires. Simply by selling small (orderly, is the word) portions of their collective holdings, will keep the price unrealistically lower -thus hurting later investors, traders, and the coin itself-. therefore MANIPULATING it. And that is if you assume they are simply new rich, not greedy, actually saintly people without any further, let alone perverse, intentions, in which case the manipulation could have grotesque effects.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Yet you ignore that 0.1% of wallets own 50% of all Bitcoins in circulation? They could all "decide together" to dump all $3bil, too. But they wont. Big holders of NXT will not either. It's not baffling, you're suffering from cognitive dissonance.
And no, the top holders are not the devs.
Btw, it's known that Sataoshi holders over 1 Million Bitcoins, which is ~15% of Bitcoins in circulation, does this concern you as well?
Pandaisftw
Oh and it is so incredibly funny when someone pretends to know how many NXT the founder or the developers have... really. how do you know, because they have stated so on a forum, anonymously? Let me quote a full post that reflects my thoughts exactly, under the linked, totally misleading, infographics:
"do you work in NSA or do have some prove that these 76 or 71 people were different human beings and not only 1 or 2 developers?
you don't even have IP addresses of that userids so what make you believe that you can rely on relatively anonymous posts on bicointalk where anyone can have so many identities which he is able to use??
So how can you know how many altcoins/NXT BCnext have??"
How can you prove that 90% of the bitcoin hash power isn't owned by the NSA? Oh, you mean that anonymous miners told you they own a rig? Have you actually talked to 90% of miners to manually add up their hash power? I don't think so.
Your arguments are ridiculous.
I have spoken to some of these holders, and yes, they are real people just like you and me.
Pandaisftw
Actually, your answer is totally ridiculous and argumentative.
1.- Minimal as it is, BTC is a global phenomenon on which several -and growing- real life business are based. It has staying power proven through years of all kinds of attacks and manipulations and a clear path as to what it is, it represents and who the face of it is (The Bitcoin Foundation, with names and addresses, physical ones, as well and TAX IDs attached to it... none of which applies to NXT). Additionally, hundreds of independent organisms and enterprises do control who is mining and how much are they mining. So your point comparing NXT to BTC is utterly ridiculous, ok?
2.- You (who are you, by the way?) may have spoken to "some of these holders" or "Yoda" for all I care. It is argumentative and doesn't add any transparency to the conversation. Either put up or, kindly, shut up.
Sorry, no debates here when you begin with fud. Only harsh treatment from Nxt.
This guy has all the markings of a troll with an agenda. Don't bother explaining anything to him. One look at his past posts in other threads show he is a provocateur and cannot be reasoned with.
He is a pest to be dealt with accordingly. At least Elmo brought a little comedy into the mix.
What makes this a total scam is not just the outrageous distribution problems but the obvious -and inevitable- manipulation of the market. I mean these guys could be saints and still not being able to NOT manipulate the markets with the amounts they hold by, first, being unfairly rewarded via forging and second and way more importantly, by the inevitable effect of their selling. These are new minted millonaires. They NEED to sell in order to buy homes, cars and all the perks of being new millonaires. Simply by selling small (orderly, is the word) portions of their collective holdings, will keep the price unrealistically lower -thus hurting later investors, traders, and the coin itself-. therefore MANIPULATING it. And that is if you assume they are simply new rich, not greedy, actually saintly people without any further, let alone perverse, intentions, in which case the manipulation could have grotesque effects.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Yet you ignore that 0.1% of wallets own 50% of all Bitcoins in circulation? They could all "decide together" to dump all $3bil, too. But they wont. Big holders of NXT will not either. It's not baffling, you're suffering from cognitive dissonance.
And no, the top holders are not the devs.
Btw, it's known that Sataoshi holders over 1 Million Bitcoins, which is ~15% of Bitcoins in circulation, does this concern you as well?
Pandaisftw
Oh and it is so incredibly funny when someone pretends to know how many NXT the founder or the developers have... really. how do you know, because they have stated so on a forum, anonymously? Let me quote a full post that reflects my thoughts exactly, under the linked, totally misleading, infographics:
"do you work in NSA or do have some prove that these 76 or 71 people were different human beings and not only 1 or 2 developers?
you don't even have IP addresses of that userids so what make you believe that you can rely on relatively anonymous posts on bicointalk where anyone can have so many identities which he is able to use??
So how can you know how many altcoins/NXT BCnext have??"
How can you prove that 90% of the bitcoin hash power isn't owned by the NSA? Oh, you mean that anonymous miners told you they own a rig? Have you actually talked to 90% of miners to manually add up their hash power? I don't think so.
Your arguments are ridiculous.
I have spoken to some of these holders, and yes, they are real people just like you and me.
Pandaisftw
Actually, your answer is totally ridiculous and argumentative.
1.- Minimal as it is, BTC is a global phenomenon on which several -and growing- real life business are based. It has staying power proven through years of all kinds of attacks and manipulations and a clear path as to what it is, it represents and who the face of it is (The Bitcoin Foundation, with names and addresses, physical ones, as well and TAX IDs attached to it... none of which applies to NXT). Additionally, hundreds of independent organisms and enterprises do control who is mining and how much are they mining. So your point comparing NXT to BTC is utterly ridiculous, ok?
2.- You (who are you, by the way?) may have spoken to "some of these holders" or "Yoda" for all I care. It is argumentative and doesn't add any transparency to the conversation. Either put up or, kindly, shut up.
How can you prove that 90% of the bitcoin hash power isn't owned by the NSA? Oh, you mean that anonymous miners told you they own a rig? Have you actually talked to 90% of miners to manually add up their hash power? I don't think so.
Your arguments are ridiculous.
I have spoken to some of these holders, and yes, they are real people just like you and me.
Pandaisftw
also we're still not clear that the ECC curve used in Bitcoin is safe, whereas the NXT curve 25519 was created by David Bernstein, long time activist/cypherpunk figure.
-bm
Looks like someone wants to drive the price down to get some cheap Nxt.
It would be called transparency... but you don't wanna know anything about that would you?
They stated how much they own, you can beleive it or not. But how do you want to be transparent about a system that was set up to protect anonymity. Do you know who owns a certain 10000 BTC address? Do you know who owns a 50 mil NXT address? No!
Do you care? Apparently. Why? I don't know, because you obviously don't own NXT, don't plan on ever doing it.
What makes this a total scam is not just the outrageous distribution problems but the obvious -and inevitable- manipulation of the market. I mean these guys could be saints and still not being able to NOT manipulate the markets with the amounts they hold by, first, being unfairly rewarded via forging and second and way more importantly, by the inevitable effect of their selling. These are new minted millonaires. They NEED to sell in order to buy homes, cars and all the perks of being new millonaires. Simply by selling small (orderly, is the word) portions of their collective holdings, will keep the price unrealistically lower -thus hurting later investors, traders, and the coin itself-. therefore MANIPULATING it. And that is if you assume they are simply new rich, not greedy, actually saintly people without any further, let alone perverse, intentions, in which case the manipulation could have grotesque effects.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Yet you ignore that 0.1% of wallets own 50% of all Bitcoins in circulation? They could all "decide together" to dump all $3bil, too. But they wont. Big holders of NXT will not either. It's not baffling, you're suffering from cognitive dissonance.
And no, the top holders are not the devs.
Btw, it's known that Sataoshi holders over 1 Million Bitcoins, which is ~15% of Bitcoins in circulation, does this concern you as well?
Pandaisftw
Oh and it is so incredibly funny when someone pretends to know how many NXT the founder or the developers have... really. how do you know, because they have stated so on a forum, anonymously? Let me quote a full post that reflects my thoughts exactly, under the linked, totally misleading, infographics:
"do you work in NSA or do have some prove that these 76 or 71 people were different human beings and not only 1 or 2 developers?
you don't even have IP addresses of that userids so what make you believe that you can rely on relatively anonymous posts on bicointalk where anyone can have so many identities which he is able to use??
So how can you know how many altcoins/NXT BCnext have??"
How can you prove that 90% of the bitcoin hash power isn't owned by the NSA? Oh, you mean that anonymous miners told you they own a rig? Have you actually talked to 90% of miners to manually add up their hash power? I don't think so.
Your arguments are ridiculous.
I have spoken to some of these holders, and yes, they are real people just like you and me.
Pandaisftw
Edit: you went from 'top 20 owning 90%' to 'top 10 owning 1/3'. Which is it?
It is the second, of course. Top 20 were owning 100% initially. I did not know how much now. Now I do and it is almost 1/3. Still showing an evident distribution problem... which is THE problem. Don't disperse....
If you know the founders personally like i do, you will realize that they are ordinary guys and getting them to all agree on anything is near impossible. For them to agree to destroy NXT integrity by pulling off some sort of 51% attack is absurd.
Theoretically all sorts of horrible things can happen to anything, in reality, there are common sense things that limit such crazy scenarios. bitcoin is also based on this self-interest model. The more you have, the less likely you are to want to destroy it.
James
But that dear James is wanting to assume that those top 20 holders will not be the perpetrators of the attack... which makes the whole point.
But of course, like Twin here, you are on to your own scams, so please do carry on...
You may write in a calm and friendly way, but you are full of shit.
You think that the top 20 would consider attacking the network and harming it ,but you have not stated a single logically valid argument as to why they would do it. You said that they could take away a persons money. Now, tell me how they would do it? You said, that they could take someones money and just say someone hacked them or stole it. HOW WOULD THEY DO IT? Either you don't understand a 51% attack or you are a troll.
Explain yourself..
For just this once more, I'll entertain you questions. Either you are capable of debate in a polite AND educated manner, or just go on to your scams and leave me alone, ok?
Final answer to the "question": An attack would cause total panic and the price would go to near ZERO. Since the only millonaires in NEXT are the person or persons who control those top wallets -including the ones that have sold most of their coins- the could easily buy back for peanuts all existing coins. And, in actuality, since they perpetrated the attack and have total control of the network, no actual damage, let alone "destruction", would have happened at all.
Oh, but since "they" are all saints and one of them actually doesn't even own one NEXT (the founder), as some would lead you to believe, they are not going to do that, are they? They are such nice people...
This is no logically valid argument. You base your "theory" on the fact that
a) the people would instantly sell all their NXT for peanuts
b) that the people would buy those NXT ever again, after they know what just had happend
Explain a) and b)
What makes this a total scam is not just the outrageous distribution problems but the obvious -and inevitable- manipulation of the market. I mean these guys could be saints and still not being able to NOT manipulate the markets with the amounts they hold by, first, being unfairly rewarded via forging and second and way more importantly, by the inevitable effect of their selling. These are new minted millonaires. They NEED to sell in order to buy homes, cars and all the perks of being new millonaires. Simply by selling small (orderly, is the word) portions of their collective holdings, will keep the price unrealistically lower -thus hurting later investors, traders, and the coin itself-. therefore MANIPULATING it. And that is if you assume they are simply new rich, not greedy, actually saintly people without any further, let alone perverse, intentions, in which case the manipulation could have grotesque effects.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Yet you ignore that 0.1% of wallets own 50% of all Bitcoins in circulation? They could all "decide together" to dump all $3bil, too. But they wont. Big holders of NXT will not either. It's not baffling, you're suffering from cognitive dissonance.
And no, the top holders are not the devs.
Btw, it's known that Sataoshi holders over 1 Million Bitcoins, which is ~15% of Bitcoins in circulation, does this concern you as well?
Pandaisftw
Oh and it is so incredibly funny when someone pretends to know how many NXT the founder or the developers have... really. how do you know, because they have stated so on a forum, anonymously? Let me quote a full post that reflects my thoughts exactly, under the linked, totally misleading, infographics:
"do you work in NSA or do have some prove that these 76 or 71 people were different human beings and not only 1 or 2 developers?
you don't even have IP addresses of that userids so what make you believe that you can rely on relatively anonymous posts on bicointalk where anyone can have so many identities which he is able to use??
So how can you know how many altcoins/NXT BCnext have??"
It would be called transparency... but you don't wanna know anything about that would you?
Edit: you went from 'top 20 owning 90%' to 'top 10 owning 1/3'. Which is it?
It is the second, of course. Top 20 were owning 100% initially. I did not know how much now. Now I do and it is almost 1/3. Still showing an evident distribution problem... which is THE problem. Don't disperse....
If you know the founders personally like i do, you will realize that they are ordinary guys and getting them to all agree on anything is near impossible. For them to agree to destroy NXT integrity by pulling off some sort of 51% attack is absurd.
Theoretically all sorts of horrible things can happen to anything, in reality, there are common sense things that limit such crazy scenarios. bitcoin is also based on this self-interest model. The more you have, the less likely you are to want to destroy it.
James
But that dear James is wanting to assume that those top 20 holders will not be the perpetrators of the attack... which makes the whole point.
But of course, like Twin here, you are on to your own scams, so please do carry on...
You may write in a calm and friendly way, but you are full of shit.
You think that the top 20 would consider attacking the network and harming it ,but you have not stated a single logically valid argument as to why they would do it. You said that they could take away a persons money. Now, tell me how they would do it? You said, that they could take someones money and just say someone hacked them or stole it. HOW WOULD THEY DO IT? Either you don't understand a 51% attack or you are a troll.
Explain yourself..
For just this once more, I'll entertain you questions. Either you are capable of debate in a polite AND educated manner, or just go on to your scams and leave me alone, ok?
Final answer to the "question": An attack would cause total panic and the price would go to near ZERO. Since the only millonaires in NEXT are the person or persons who control those top wallets -including the ones that have sold most of their coins- the could easily buy back for peanuts all existing coins. And, in actuality, since they perpetrated the attack and have total control of the network, no actual damage, let alone "destruction", would have happened at all.
Oh, but since "they" are all saints and one of them actually doesn't even own one NEXT (the founder), as some would lead you to believe, they are not going to do that, are they? They are such nice people...
What makes this a total scam is not just the outrageous distribution problems but the obvious -and inevitable- manipulation of the market. I mean these guys could be saints and still not being able to NOT manipulate the markets with the amounts they hold by, first, being unfairly rewarded via forging and second and way more importantly, by the inevitable effect of their selling. These are new minted millonaires. They NEED to sell in order to buy homes, cars and all the perks of being new millonaires. Simply by selling small (orderly, is the word) portions of their collective holdings, will keep the price unrealistically lower -thus hurting later investors, traders, and the coin itself-. therefore MANIPULATING it. And that is if you assume they are simply new rich, not greedy, actually saintly people without any further, let alone perverse, intentions, in which case the manipulation could have grotesque effects.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Yet you ignore that 0.1% of wallets own 50% of all Bitcoins in circulation? They could all "decide together" to dump all $3bil, too. But they wont. Big holders of NXT will not either. It's not baffling, you're suffering from cognitive dissonance.
And no, the top holders are not the devs.
Btw, it's known that Sataoshi holders over 1 Million Bitcoins, which is ~15% of Bitcoins in circulation, does this concern you as well?
Pandaisftw
Oh and it is so incredibly funny when someone pretends to know how many NXT the founder or the developers have... really. how do you know, because they have stated so on a forum, anonymously? Let me quote a full post that reflects my thoughts exactly, under the linked, totally misleading, infographics:
"do you work in NSA or do have some prove that these 76 or 71 people were different human beings and not only 1 or 2 developers?
you don't even have IP addresses of that userids so what make you believe that you can rely on relatively anonymous posts on bicointalk where anyone can have so many identities which he is able to use??
So how can you know how many altcoins/NXT BCnext have??"
What makes this a total scam is not just the outrageous distribution problems but the obvious -and inevitable- manipulation of the market. I mean these guys could be saints and still not being able to NOT manipulate the markets with the amounts they hold by, first, being unfairly rewarded via forging and second and way more importantly, by the inevitable effect of their selling. These are new minted millonaires. They NEED to sell in order to buy homes, cars and all the perks of being new millonaires. Simply by selling small (orderly, is the word) portions of their collective holdings, will keep the price unrealistically lower -thus hurting later investors, traders, and the coin itself-. therefore MANIPULATING it. And that is if you assume they are simply new rich, not greedy, actually saintly people without any further, let alone perverse, intentions, in which case the manipulation could have grotesque effects.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Yet you ignore that 0.1% of wallets own 50% of all Bitcoins in circulation? They could all "decide together" to dump all $3bil, too. But they wont. Big holders of NXT will not either. It's not baffling, you're suffering from cognitive dissonance.
And no, the top holders are not the devs.
Btw, it's known that Sataoshi holders over 1 Million Bitcoins, which is ~15% of Bitcoins in circulation, does this concern you as well?
Pandaisftw
Oh and it is so incredibly funny when someone pretends to know how many NXT the founder or the developers have... really. how do you know, because they have stated so on a forum, anonymously? Let me quote a full post that reflects my thoughts exactly, under the linked, totally misleading, infographics:
"do you work in NSA or do have some prove that these 76 or 71 people were different human beings and not only 1 or 2 developers?
you don't even have IP addresses of that userids so what make you believe that you can rely on relatively anonymous posts on bicointalk where anyone can have so many identities which he is able to use??
So how can you know how many altcoins/NXT BCnext have??"
Edit: you went from 'top 20 owning 90%' to 'top 10 owning 1/3'. Which is it?
It is the second, of course. Top 20 were owning 100% initially. I did not know how much now. Now I do and it is almost 1/3. Still showing an evident distribution problem... which is THE problem. Don't disperse....
If you know the founders personally like i do, you will realize that they are ordinary guys and getting them to all agree on anything is near impossible. For them to agree to destroy NXT integrity by pulling off some sort of 51% attack is absurd.
Theoretically all sorts of horrible things can happen to anything, in reality, there are common sense things that limit such crazy scenarios. bitcoin is also based on this self-interest model. The more you have, the less likely you are to want to destroy it.
James
But that dear James is wanting to assume that those top 20 holders will not be the perpetrators of the attack... which makes the whole point.
But of course, like Twin here, you are on to your own scams, so please do carry on...
You may write in a calm and friendly way, but you are full of shit.
You think that the top 20 would consider attacking the network and harming it ,but you have not stated a single logically valid argument as to why they would do it. You said that they could take away a persons money. Now, tell me how they would do it? You said, that they could take someones money and just say someone hacked them or stole it. HOW WOULD THEY DO IT? Either you don't understand a 51% attack or you are a troll.
Explain yourself..
What makes this a total scam is not just the outrageous distribution problems but the obvious -and inevitable- manipulation of the market. I mean these guys could be saints and still not being able to NOT manipulate the markets with the amounts they hold by, first, being unfairly rewarded via forging and second and way more importantly, by the inevitable effect of their selling. These are new minted millonaires. They NEED to sell in order to buy homes, cars and all the perks of being new millonaires. Simply by selling small (orderly, is the word) portions of their collective holdings, will keep the price unrealistically lower -thus hurting later investors, traders, and the coin itself-. therefore MANIPULATING it. And that is if you assume they are simply new rich, not greedy, actually saintly people without any further, let alone perverse, intentions, in which case the manipulation could have grotesque effects.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Yet you ignore that 0.1% of wallets own 50% of all Bitcoins in circulation? They could all "decide together" to dump all $3bil, too. But they wont. Big holders of NXT will not either. It's not baffling, you're suffering from cognitive dissonance.
And no, the top holders are not the devs.
Btw, it's known that Sataoshi holders over 1 Million Bitcoins, which is ~15% of Bitcoins in circulation, does this concern you as well?
Pandaisftw
Edit: you went from 'top 20 owning 90%' to 'top 10 owning 1/3'. Which is it?
It is the second, of course. Top 20 were owning 100% initially. I did not know how much now. Now I do and it is almost 1/3. Still showing an evident distribution problem... which is THE problem. Don't disperse....
If you know the founders personally like i do, you will realize that they are ordinary guys and getting them to all agree on anything is near impossible. For them to agree to destroy NXT integrity by pulling off some sort of 51% attack is absurd.
Theoretically all sorts of horrible things can happen to anything, in reality, there are common sense things that limit such crazy scenarios. bitcoin is also based on this self-interest model. The more you have, the less likely you are to want to destroy it.
James
But that dear James is wanting to assume that those top 20 holders will not be the perpetrators of the attack... which makes the whole point.
But of course, like Twin here, you are on to your own scams, so please do carry on...
Edit: you went from 'top 20 owning 90%' to 'top 10 owning 1/3'. Which is it?
It is the second, of course. Top 20 were owning 100% initially. I did not know how much now. Now I do and it is almost 1/3. Still showing an evident distribution problem... which is THE problem. Don't disperse....
This misinformation has gone on long enough:
1) There were over 70 initial stakeholders (you can confirm this in the genesis block). No, each one did not receive 50mil NXT. You need to do some fact checking before embarrassing yourself.
2) NXT distribution is a point only the uninformed or FUDsters bring up. It's already better than bitcoin's:
http://bitcoinrichlist.com/charts/bitcoin-distribution-by-address?atblock=300000
0.1% of Bitcoin address own 50% of all Bitcoins, roughly $3bil USD. You're comfortable with the top 0.1% holding ~50% of all coins (they could dump that $3bil it at any time, remember?). As for the mining power, remember just a few short months ago one of the pools almost reached 50% of the total Bitcoin hashrate? In fact, if there wasn't a huge outcry, and the pool implemented measures to kick miners off, they certainly would have passed it.
Here's a pretty old chart:
http://nxtcoin.blogspot.com/2014/01/nxt-distribution-infographics.html
And since then, distribution has only gotten better.
Also, to debase some of your arguments, anyone could have invested in the IPO (~2 months long) or bought NXT when it was less than a single cent. If you missed it... well that's no one's fault but your own. Otherwise, everyone would be calling Bitcoin a scam because they missed the boat on that too (I certainly missed Bitcoin when it was <$1 USD, that doesn't make it a scam). So no, the devs don't control any significant portion of the coins (the founder, BCNext had no share at all). Blows your mind, doesn't it?
Pandaisftw
Well thank you for being at least informative. So not just 20 (like I had read in a source usually well in formed) but 70. Hardly changes the equation in a significant manner: I'll conceived initial distribution no matter what which never professes to be wide no matter how you choose to look at it.
Yes there were opportunities to buy in at ridiculously low prices but we are talking days, few, no YEARS as the case of bitcoin is... which I answer above extensibly.
As for the example of hashrate that you make, it was GHASH.IO the pool in question and it never reached above 38%, so no real "danger" (although an attack can actually be perpetrated with 38%, just less likely to succeed, so miners saw the danger and acted accordingly... not that same pool is way under 30%). I don't think a 51% is LIKELY on NEXT but it certainly is possible given the concentration of the forging power which is evident just taking a light look at the top holding wallets.
What makes this a total scam is not just the outrageous distribution problems but the obvious -and inevitable- manipulation of the market. I mean these guys could be saints and still not being able to NOT manipulate the markets with the amounts they hold by, first, being unfairly rewarded via forging and second and way more importantly, by the inevitable effect of their selling. These are new minted millonaires. They NEED to sell in order to buy homes, cars and all the perks of being new millonaires. Simply by selling small (orderly, is the word) portions of their collective holdings, will keep the price unrealistically lower -thus hurting later investors, traders, and the coin itself-. therefore MANIPULATING it. And that is if you assume they are simply new rich, not greedy, actually saintly people without any further, let alone perverse, intentions, in which case the manipulation could have grotesque effects.
Insufficient distribution, which is the problem here, in fact doesn't allow the market to actually reflect, as it should, offer and demand, because the massive (albeit "orderly") selling does not allow the demand for the coin to bring the price to realistic levels. In other words, where tens if not hundreds of people want to buy, only one or a few NEED to sell. I am, in fact, extremely surprised this coin has reached the valuation it has considering this circumstance alone. The restrain of the top holders in selling is baffling, actually. And, in my view, impossible to keep.
It does blow my mind, in fact, if the founder doesn't own any coins. I don't believe you in that one either. Nor when you state that the devs "don't control any significant portion of the coins". But since there's no way to prove it either way, I guess we will have to just leave it at that.
Edit: you went from 'top 20 owning 90%' to 'top 10 owning 1/3'. Which is it?
It is the second, of course. Top 20 were owning 100% initially. I did not know how much now. Now I do and it is almost 1/3. Still showing an evident distribution problem... which is THE problem. Don't disperse....
If you know the founders personally like i do, you will realize that they are ordinary guys and getting them to all agree on anything is near impossible. For them to agree to destroy NXT integrity by pulling off some sort of 51% attack is absurd.
Theoretically all sorts of horrible things can happen to anything, in reality, there are common sense things that limit such crazy scenarios. bitcoin is also based on this self-interest model. The more you have, the less likely you are to want to destroy it.
James
Edit: you went from 'top 20 owning 90%' to 'top 10 owning 1/3'. Which is it?
It is the second, of course. Top 20 were owning 100% initially. I did not know how much now. Now I do and it is almost 1/3. Still showing an evident distribution problem... which is THE problem. Don't disperse....
This misinformation has gone on long enough:
1) There were over 70 initial stakeholders (you can confirm this in the genesis block). No, each one did not receive 50mil NXT. You need to do some fact checking before embarrassing yourself.
2) NXT distribution is a point only the uninformed or FUDsters bring up. It's already better than bitcoin's:
http://bitcoinrichlist.com/charts/bitcoin-distribution-by-address?atblock=300000
0.1% of Bitcoin address own 50% of all Bitcoins, roughly $3bil USD. You're comfortable with the top 0.1% holding ~50% of all coins (they could dump that $3bil it at any time, remember?). As for the mining power, remember just a few short months ago one of the pools almost reached 50% of the total Bitcoin hashrate? In fact, if there wasn't a huge outcry, and the pool implemented measures to kick miners off, they certainly would have passed it.
Here's a pretty old chart:
http://nxtcoin.blogspot.com/2014/01/nxt-distribution-infographics.html
And since then, distribution has only gotten better.
Also, to debase some of your arguments, anyone could have invested in the IPO (~2 months long) or bought NXT when it was less than a single cent. If you missed it... well that's no one's fault but your own. Otherwise, everyone would be calling Bitcoin a scam because they missed the boat on that too (I certainly missed Bitcoin when it was <$1 USD, that doesn't make it a scam). So no, the devs don't control any significant portion of the coins (the founder, BCNext had no share at all). Blows your mind, doesn't it?
Pandaisftw
Wow, the FUD is thick in here today. This means we're doing something right.
Distribution is fine as it is and progressing. You don't like it, carry on. We are very experienced in handling trolls that are too lazy to read up on Nxt, assume everything and say anything to continue the argument.
Nxt will continue it's glorious march and write new history in the world of crypto. We Are Nxt!!!!!
Distribution is fine as it is and progressing. You don't like it, carry on. We are very experienced in handling trolls that are too lazy to read up on Nxt, assume everything and say anything to continue the argument.
Nxt will continue it's glorious march and write new history in the world of crypto. We Are Nxt!!!!!
Hey if you are happy, I'm (disappointed), but happy.
Very easy: in and out. Hopefully playing with the crooks...
Jump to: