Topic: Obyte: Totally new consensus algorithm + private untraceable payments - page 1045. (Read 1234271 times)

Not sure if you guys are already aware about but the Dutch translation is terrible. Don't hope this guy devpol did get paid for his automatically translation work done by a service like google translate. Translation work should be done by a native Dutch speaker.

Anyone can hire hash power and this would be a very short mining period. The only variable is really cost of electricity.

Miners will be taking a risk for the BB
Miners will be investing in it for real
Miners will stop BTC whales becoming BB whales with no risk to their BTC
Miner will stop other ICO owners using BB to crush the BB price to fund their own project
MIners will stop exchange owners being whales to manipulate the markets pumping and dumping on innocent investors.
Miners will stop ALT coin dilution in general.

The alternatives are the inverse of what miners will prevent.


Mining farms will have no advantage at all over anyone else except in the form perhaps of electricity savings and a small factor of buying their hardware over leasing. That was anyones choice to start with. They are not taking the whales share with no investment or risk.


If you are going to do an airdrop this is not the way. This is the worst way to conduct an air drop possible for this coin and all alts.

Okay at the least you are trying to engage in meaningful discussion. So I will discuss and debate this with you in public on civil terms.

And what might that be? Is having people with massive GPU farms or ASICS joining your coin right at the start fair?
Have it instamined like Darkcoin/Dash?
Fair POW distribution is as hard to achieve as any - if not harder

The key is a fair release protocol for POW.

1. announced ahead of time
2. anti instamine meansures - rapid diff adjust and low coin reward for early blocks
3. anyone can hire or lease rigs or buy coins dumped by miners. The only real variable is electricity cost. GPU farms have invested money into hardware that could be used to simply buy the mined coins etc etc. You can lease gpu power or buy your own. The only real advantage is cost of electricity if the anti instamine measures are in place.

How does this compare to the fact BTC whales simply take it all by risking or spending nothing further. It is ridiculous to say that instantly just creating whales via this method is comparable to having everyone fight on a fair playing field except for electricity cost. Over such a short POW phase this factor is not really as large as it seems either.




Like in Bitbay ICO? Fake volume, fake promise, fake everything ICO? Where was the risk in that?

Exactly my point. Bitcoin whales (except those running the scam and actually the only whale there was really the exchange owner of bter since I would not have called bob previous to the scam a btc whale) had to risk their BTC to become whales in bitbay. Bitbay is a prime example of why you need fair or acceptable ICO protocols with escrows and multisigs holding the funding and released only for milestones met.

A fairly advertised and carefully run ICO is much better for alt coin investors and the project itself if it is not run by scammers. These points I have already explain in my previous posts and you can feel free to refute them as you like as long as you give reasonable logical evidence that we can all examine in public.


I think it is highly unfair of you to come in here and shit from up high on tony like he is the worlds worst scammer.
At least he is experimenting with this distribution method and trying to do something unusual - inspired by Metcalfe's law.


Again you have omitted most of my important points and have diverted to something I have never said which is both strange and telling. Please show me where I have indicated tonych is himself to benefit from this form of intial distribution more than if he were to keep even 20% with full ledger of costs as I suggest? This accusation again does not hold any water. I do not believe he owns 20% of BTC or even 20% of BTC that will link their wallets. Therefore me saying personally him keeping 20% for development with ledger would be okay does not imply I think him a scammer for keeping 1% and whatever BTC worth he will accrue.

This form of distribution is damaging to all alt holders including you who will even get to claim your small BTC worth. It is the wet dream of BTC whales who would love to see alts crushed.

@seccour: thx for your answer. do you mean i have to do an IN-Ledger transaction or how does it function to send back my coins to my validate BTC adress?

And what might that be? Is having people with massive GPU farms or ASICS joining your coin right at the start fair?
Have it instamined like Darkcoin/Dash?
Fair POW distribution is as hard to achieve as any - if not harder.


Like in Bitbay ICO? Fake volume, fake promise, fake everything ICO? Where was the risk in that?

I think it is highly unfair of you to come in here and shit from up high on tony like he is the worlds worst scammer.
At least he is experimenting with this distribution method and trying to do something unusual - inspired by Metcalfe's law.

It is worth a shot, so far it seems like everything is on the table. Join or not, it is your decision to make and, as you say, there is no risk in it

POW is not suitable for the average user and will give advantage to the guys with big mining rigs. And the power costs in my country is magnitudes higher than in a lot of other countries (which prevented me to have a mining rig in the first place).

IMHO there is no 'fair distribution', I hope we can just achieve a wide distribution, that would already be a success.

This argument does not hold water.

Produce a POW coin with fair launch protocol and then token swap on exchange later.

Even in the ICOs the whales have to risk BTC for the new tokens. In this way the Whales risk nothing and still get to be whales in the new alt ..so it is even worse than an ICO. Also it starves this project of btc and give opposing project that BTC whilst giving them incentive to crush this project whilst liquidating BB into BTC to feed their project. How many levels can this be a bad idea on?

POW with fair launch protocol trumps ICO's on here by mile and ICO's trump this method of initial distribution.

Dude, Usually you post good stuff but in this case I prefer that you take each of my points and present a logical and factual counter argument instead of calling it baloney. In fact nothing in your retort has any bearing on what I posted. Tonych's angle is not even covered in my post. It is as if you have no counter arguements to what I have put so have chosen to call it baloney and divert to something not even directly related.

I am not saying Tonych is a scammer or is taking more than his fair share. I do not mention his personal gain or otherwise. I don't care if the dev keeps 20% so long as there is ledger for expenses and wages.
This method of distribution is not good for alt holders at all.
This kind of distribution is worse for alts than ICO's.

Tony deserves a stake in his own coin, this is fair and reasonable for ongoing development.

No, he did not:

You could be right. Exchanges did exactly the same with the free Ardor they got. To archive this good communication with the exchanges is key.

There will be whales whatever you do. So don't fight them because it's useless but use them and put them on your side.

Because the Ledger have send your coin to a new "change" address, so you have to send your coin back to the address you have validate.

90% of the coins are going to whales. you really want that distribution?

airdrops are complicated. you need a large databank with unique registrations.

the only airdrop working is giving every adress the same amount of coins.

you could announce the registration 12 hours before the airdrop with a google document service (so your network is not breaking down) which takes a certain amount of time to fill out and an ip number lock up per every registration.


you have to prevent big whales taking over the coindistribution, otherwise it will be a broken coin. everyone will say, this coin is to avoid because of distribution to big whales. almost every shitcoins distribution is going to big whales and no one is trading them because of that.

the other question is, if you want to give 90% of your coins to whales, so they make BB bigger. But moralistic is that not.

@all:

downloaded the livenet wallet and made the transaction of 0.000765 BTC as shown from my Ledger Nano S wallet. The bot and the blockr.io explorer say that my account is 0 BTC although there is more than 1.2 BTC in it There are more than 70 confirmations. Is there a problem with wallets changing their wallet adresses after an transaction?? Would it be possible to make a transaction from my exchange account (Poloniex e.g.) or just "normal" wallets? Thanks for your help

Even if someone dump so what ? Their byteballs will be redistributed to the buyers and the distribution will be fair. And it's not a one time snapshot so it will bring attention to the next one anyway.

EDIT : And actually right now 20 BTC make the difference.

I agree, with one exception: it won't be "Pump'n'Dump coin", for years and years it will be unique "Dump only coin".

Surely it is the author's decision, but there is one concern: with such "near the ground price" there will be no incentive for witnesses to run their nodes.

I would see no problem if the ICO whales did not dump the coins on the market shortly after launch.
The question is, how greedy are they? It would be interesting to see a statement of their intentions regarding the byteball project. Do they really believe that?

How come all the people now starting to wake up to what a disaster this kind of distribution model is?

Nobody will invest in it at any point above a tiny satoshi value since it is simply open to huge manipulation from large ICOs and exchanges and BTC whales.

Who would ever intend to have such an unfair distributional model to start with. That is open so such manipulation with some many large holders having a vested interest in seeing it crushed.

I will link my wallets but will dump the moment it hits exchange.

Whilst jl777 is dumping his bags along with the other icos and driving the price of BB into the ground whilst extracting BTC for his own project (that most here probably didnt invest in at that is in direct competition with this coin and other alts people here hold )and whilst the exchanges are manipulating the markets with their huge bags and whilst BTC whales are pumping and dumping you all over and over it will never be safe to invest in above a tiny satoshi value.

Wait until those that didn't get in on the initial distribution of this. It will be the pariah of all pariah coins.

Strange I see a few people starting to wake up now when this has all been mentioned since the very start.

Those dreaming that adding their 20 BTC wallets to this will have any BB worth anything are dreaming. It will be the most manipulated coin released. Also it is in the interest of other large ICOs to crush the value whilst pumping and dumping for max BTC extraction. Imagine unregulated exchanges holding huge chunks of a coin from the start.

BB will attract not attract investors and will branded a pariah by those with mostly alts and no BTC.

I'm going to be linking my BTC wallets but I will dump immediately since of course that is the only sensible thing to do. Distribution like this doomed to be forked and given a sensible distribution.

This is insane, you may as well say all the development fund you should be having go to BB is going only to other competitors ICOS and they reward this project with crushing the price.

Even now there is time to pull back and do a sensible distributional model.

Create a POW coin with a 2 month mining phase that will be converted to BB at exchanges. Have a small CS too if you need some dev funding.

This is the WORST distributional model Ive ever seen. Even ripple is better at least the majority whale holders have an interest in seeing ripple rise in value and don't want to destroy small investors by pumping and dumping them over and over and driving future investment away.

These type of distributional models actually don't just serve to make the rich richer with no risk to them they crush the small alt holders in a HUGE way. This kind of coin dilutes your alt holdings whilst handing that over to the BTC whales. If other coins are allowed to follow this model you will see that BTC whales that do not want alts to exist will control the entire ALT market place too for no cost or risk to their BTC.

Time to wake up to those that thought they were getting something for free here. You are not getting anything for free, by allowing these types of distribution you are simply allowing BTC whales to now take huge swathes of the ALT market place for free. Any alts you have spent time accumulation value in will be diluted badly. They keep their BTC and take over huge % of the altcoins whilst your alts are diluted .,...even worse when you dump other alts to BTC to buy into this?? reducing further your alts market value and increasing BTC value. Win win win for the BTC whales and you alt coiners lose lose lose.

They have BTC, so they will get byteball. And if they accept it after the distribution they will win fees since people are going to sell and buy their byteball. It's a win-win for them to do it.