Topic: Obyte: Totally new consensus algorithm + private untraceable payments - page 28. (Read 1234271 times)

When they remove credible developer projects then it's obviously for other reasons. There is no minimum volume requirement if the project is still solid.
https://bittrex.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360022158031-Why-Bittrex-Removes-Certain-Coins-or-Tokens

Bittrex has delisted (lot from Bittrex US) many coins just based on regulation reasons (unable to prove that coin is not security), rest are probably delisted because they are broken or developers have abandoned it officially or by not maintaining it anymore.

Obyte wallet (deposit/withdraw) on Bittrex goes automatic maintenance mode every time when nobody (including witnesses) post for long time. Every cryptocurrency project leader is in communication with Bittrex and these issues have been solved fast. Last time when Obyte network had bigger issues was this summer (nodes had issues couple hours and last summer (nodes were down 2 days).

Since Obyte is one of the few innovative projects using DAG, it's not security and it actually works and gets improved all the time - there is no reason to delist it for Bittrex.

Obyte is also not just maintained, but it's still improved with lot of new tech. For example, there is Autonomous Agents being tested on testnet and developer contest on it just ended.



Doesn't make no sense to hold hundreds of GB on centralized exchanges. 100GB might not be worth much at the moment, but it seems nuts to keep that much on exchange.

You are incorect here. As I saw, you repeatedly use BB for Byteball (I guess so). In fact, the coin was rebranded to Obyte, so if you want to mention it in abbreviation, you should use OB. rather than BB. It is my few contribution from my best knowledge on Obyte's chronological growths so far.

You can not fault giving huge swathes of your minting to competing projects because you have perspectives I do not share.

There was no premine for the developer (not huge anyway) but there certainly was a huge automatic assignment of coins to competing project leaders holding btc freshly taken from the hands of dreamers and chancers.

If Tony had blocked those known addresses as I had suggested at the outset then perhaps it would not have been driven into the ground for years on end.

Gluttonous premines are something I have done more to stand against than any other member on this entire forum. I would suggest you research my post history before disputing this. However, a gluttonous premine in the hands of a developer that will remain with the project and use that premine for long term development is still a step up from handing huge swathes directly to competing projects.

Of course a transparent and wide initial distribution is the what most would consider the ideal. I originally believed it was the only way it should be. However, too wide and too distributed with no single group or individual having enough incentive to push the project forward has been demonstrated to be just as counter productive. A large premine that is transparent with a full ledger is not entirely unacceptable within sensible range.

I am not really open to engaging in this particular aspect of BB distribution unless you can provide a specific example of my prior assessment of this distribution or a suggestion for an alternative tweak to the distribution I had previously suggested that you can clearly debunk as being net negative with regard the non stop crushing of this project in terms of market price.

If you can not fault giving huge swathes of your minting to competing projects that is fine with me.I will remain unique in my perspective that the very notion of willingly doing this is ludicrous.

If the development is strong enough and their remains a clear use case for BB then eventually things should balance up to a point where it is not being dumped into the ground to finance other projects (hopefully that stage is near exhausted) or having such huge whales that they can manipulate the markets at will and have no real loyalty or desire to see BB do well.

Not as dishonest as a premine/instamine, perhaps even noble (in a strange way) but certainly not sensible.

Still holding a lot  and was still accumulating (until cryptopia took a few hundred GB worth away) so obviously not saying it was dishonest or corrupt.  Glad to see it had not been abandoned.

Still haven't changed the record, then?  All the altcoins out there which had shamefully gluttonous premines at launch and yet you want to complain about one of the few coins that didn't?  I believe this to be one of the most open and inclusive distributions I've seen.  Can't fault it at all.  Then again, it's not surprising you don't agree with your "unique" perspectives on just about everything.   

Thank you Loyce. Yes, whilst I agree this would be the safest option, now that I am free to start putting some more time into crypto again, it is nice to keep some on the exchange for churning and hopefully increasing the old BB holdings a little.

I was just wondering how much contact TonyCH has with bittrex bill. It seems they will remove even highly credible developers projects if they deem them lacking in community activity or they are not in close contact with them regardless of the minimum volume requirement they state.

I am catching up with a lot of the token swaps, coin swaps, exchange delistings, exchange closures, dev team mergers etc. This period has been extreme and incredibly damaging for even those alts that have strong development teams and sensible/valuable use cases. Many of the centralised exchanges are taking on a ton of garbage tokens with no actual development at all, and nothing but the unrealistic dreams of marketeers and others that would fail to secure any interest or funding outside of crypto.  They are giving to the boot to real projects with solid use cases and near on complete road maps.

Anyway, still hoping for some success for BB even though there was always going to a be a very tough time due to the strange decision regarding the initial distribution phase.

@cryptohunter: Hey, you're back!
Just install your own wallet, keeping coins on an exchange doesn't help for adoption.

How secure is BB on bittrex? I just realised I have had a shit ton of this snaked away by cryptopia.

Is Bittrex going to give this the boot soon? or is TonyCH still in regular contact and keeping them appraised to the work and updates he is putting in?

Centralised exchanges have been crushing some pretty good projects lately via their antics.

Good to see the thread is still active to a degree but the community seems to have shrunk to almost nothing. That is worrying.

Which smart-contract? Was it Steem attestation, where half of the reward was given right away and half was locked up in smart-contract? This smart-contract doesn't have any periods, it was just one time thing, you got reward for doing it once and half of it was just locked, so you wouldn't dump everything at once.

All the smart-contracts that you have should be visible on Home screen. Other than Steem attestation, smart-vouchers referral system for Real Name Attestation is using also 1 year time-locked smart-contracts when you want to withdraw your referral rewards.

Nonsense, DAI for example is very over-collateralized, so even more volatile altcoin could have even crazier conditions for collateral and liquidation. I think you don't understand the reason why there is the over-collateralization and automatic liquidation when collateral price drops.
There is nothing that would stop somebody to create a stablecoin with autonomous agents. You make it sound like developers build stuff just for themselves to profit and they could not make it profitable in any other way than using it themselves.
You are also assuming that everyone would instantly exchange all their funds to that stablecoin, so there would suddenly be too much bytes to be liquidated. And even if would get liquidated, some lucky one would get lot of cheap bytes and GBYTE would just find a new lower market price.

I am not saying that somebody should do a yet another stablecoin (don't see the need), I am just saying that it can be done even if it is not instant success. Your approach seems to be for everything that nothing cannot be done. Not sure why you are still here, weird fetish.

bro, even if someone wanted to create stablecoin on obyte, they would not do this because of problems with liquidity. Stablecoin must have a liquid collateral, otherwise the whole system will collapse after the first dump. Before writing stupid answers, understand how the collateral system works, what is liquidation and how its triggered

I remember I've recently got some rewards from the former bytecoin smart contract. Do you know if the airdrop smart contract holds future rewards for a next period, like the next year or so? Or is there any way I can check that in my wallet?

oef never read about this coin but still so many pages on this forum haha

i wouldn't be so critical of Tether and Libra. Right now USDT is the only fuel of stagnating crypto markets. And Libra is the only potential fuel for the future bull market.

Maybe the cryptospace doesn't need any more stablecoins, many exchanges already have multiple. Especially, no need for more stablecoins, where you need to trust someone (Tether, Libra) or which require lot of collateral (Maker DAI).
There has been much more interesting ideas on developers contest than yet another stablecoin.

nobody builds a stable coin there

Those who don't listen to whiners FUD, but actually build something because they can see the potential and they have learnt how Obyte really works.
Already 6 rounds of developer contest done with new features on TESTNET, 1 more to go, but you still spreading pathetic FUD.
https://medium.com/obyte/sixth-round-of-obyte-autonomous-agents-developer-contest-6aa89bedd712

course who builds a house on a crappy foundation

That's same nonsense as saying that can't trade GBYTE because there is no liquidity. If you don't put your bytes to order book and just talk that there is no liquidity, of course, then there is no liquidity. Less complaining and more doing.

I haven't yet had problems buying/selling GBYTE, I just put the order up near market price and within 12 it usually gets filled. If somebody decided to crash the price meanwhile, I adjust the price to market price and it gets filled in next 12 hours. So far, never taken more that 24 hours, price volatile enough to fill any order near market price.

Same with bytes as stablecoin collateral, can't sell the collateral if nobody makes a stablecoin that requires bytes for collateral.

bytes is illiquid asset. You can't use it as collateral, because if you need to liquidate it, you will crash the market and cause liquidation of the rest collateral. Your stable currency will crash like a house of cards

If people need is fiat-backed stablecoin then I think these people have missunderstood one of the main points of any cryptocurrencies.
None of the fiat-backed cryptocurrencies are decentralized, you basically trust some company that they will give you back the fiat currency of your bags worth. There are many coins like that, basically every exchange creates one now, go load up your bags.

Anybody can make stablecoin collateralized with bytes on Obyte, make a grant proposal if you have a team to build it, autonomous agents will enable you to make them decentralized way, but native token pegged to USD just doesn't make sense.