the only winners of this coin is the first round participants
The same for Bitcoin and the others good project in crypto, am I right? You have obviously missed that first round but that sadly happens. If you believe this is a good project than invest in it, buy some gbyte otherwise there's no need to complain 
Topic: Obyte: Totally new consensus algorithm + private untraceable payments - page 876. (Read 1234271 times)
February 15, 2017, 01:39:33 PM
February 15, 2017, 10:18:55 AM
Regarding to the 12 witnesses, this number (12) is chosen on some calculations? More witnesses, let's say 24, it's not more secure?
Read the whitepaper, its explained there.I readed. But perhaps I not fully understand this system. Not yet.
Same here. Any ELI5 version of witness howto?
February 15, 2017, 09:52:54 AM
the only winners of this coin is the first round participants
Any round participants are winners. Its free money.
Instead of comparing yourself to the first round participants, whey don't you compare yourself to an 8 year-old in some third world hell hole who goes to work everyday sorting through garbage.
Feel better now?
February 15, 2017, 09:18:22 AM
the only main winners of this coin is the first round participants
FIFY.You could say the same about any successful project.
In the end everyone who participated first always got the most out of it.
But they took the most risk as well, in this case just the time to take part or buy some BTC to take part.
I think there's a bit more to it ...
Let's assume a first rounder who linked 10 BTC, they got a bit more than 14 GB, let's make it 15 GB, in the 2nd round they got 1.5 GB + 625 MB, let's round this down to 2 GB so in the end they have 10 BTC + 17 GB.
Let's assume someone who came in before the second round when the price was stabilizing around 0.05 (and that's quite late cuz there used to be GB to grab at 0.008), let's make it 0.06, so 10 BTC would've bought a bit more than 166 GB (let's stick with this one), after that there has been plenty of opportunities to sell at 0.08 or higher, let's say they wanted to recover their initial investment, so they would've sold 125 GB (at 0.08), recovered 10 BTC and kept 41 GB => Better than a 10 BTC first rounder.
Of course this involves way more risk, a strong belief in the growth potential, hodling a bit (some days ^^) and some luck (yet the ones who bought at 0.008-0.01 and sold at 0.1-0.2 were probably the luckiest
).What I want to say is that opportunity is still here, and first rounders are not necessarily those who will make the most out of it ... (maybe whale first rounders)
February 15, 2017, 08:34:40 AM
the only main winners of this coin is the first round participants
FIFY.You could say the same about any successful project.
In the end everyone who participated first always got the most out of it.
But they took the most risk as well, in this case just the time to take part or buy some BTC to take part.
February 15, 2017, 07:09:08 AM
the only main winners of this coin is the first round participants
FIFY. February 15, 2017, 07:00:44 AM
the only winners of this coin is the first round participants
February 15, 2017, 06:52:44 AM
Regarding to the 12 witnesses, this number (12) is chosen on some calculations? More witnesses, let's say 24, it's not more secure?
Read the whitepaper, its explained there.Quote
We require that the number of witnesses is exactly 12. This number 12 was selected because:
• it is sufficiently large to protect against the occasional failures of a few witnesses (they might prove dishonest, or be hacked, or go offline for a long time, or lose their private keys and go offline forever);
• it is sufficiently small that humans can keep track of all the witnesses to know who is who and change the list when necessary;
• the one allowed mutation is sufficiently small compared with the 11 unchanged witnesses.
or you just want somebody to do your homework?• it is sufficiently large to protect against the occasional failures of a few witnesses (they might prove dishonest, or be hacked, or go offline for a long time, or lose their private keys and go offline forever);
• it is sufficiently small that humans can keep track of all the witnesses to know who is who and change the list when necessary;
• the one allowed mutation is sufficiently small compared with the 11 unchanged witnesses.
February 15, 2017, 05:43:17 AM
as long as byteball is as decentral and trustless
as a mysql database replicated between 12 pc which all belong to the same person who maintain it
as long tonych have urgend need to improve that achilles point of his solution
trustless and decentral is a must have cornerstone for a blockchain technology (and yes for a DAG technology too)
in actual state its a nice chat tool that allow u send around numbers which are confirmed (witnessed) by central 1 person controled authority
i hope it develop into a cryptocurrency in one of the next releases
as a mysql database replicated between 12 pc which all belong to the same person who maintain it
as long tonych have urgend need to improve that achilles point of his solution
trustless and decentral is a must have cornerstone for a blockchain technology (and yes for a DAG technology too)
in actual state its a nice chat tool that allow u send around numbers which are confirmed (witnessed) by central 1 person controled authority
i hope it develop into a cryptocurrency in one of the next releases
February 15, 2017, 05:36:59 AM
As long as the majority (7 out of 12) of witnesses are online and behave honestly, the network is healthy.
Why not 9/12 to get 1:2 leverage?
February 15, 2017, 05:33:11 AM
What is price of Blackbyteball?
You can go to Slack. It is just traded there as far as i know.
I think it is about 1/8 of Bytes.
February 15, 2017, 05:06:46 AM
Regarding to the 12 witnesses, this number (12) is chosen on some calculations? More witnesses, let's say 24, it's not more secure?
Read the whitepaper, its explained there.I readed. But perhaps I not fully understand this system. Not yet.
February 15, 2017, 04:57:08 AM
That's a valid concern and freezal got it right: the network had to start centralized and no one's showed up yet with the needed reputation and credibility. I'm going to use every opportunity to relinquish control over 11 out of 12 witnesses in favor of reputable individuals/organizations/companies that are willing to be part of the network. That would make the network only stronger thanks to both their involvement and the network becoming more decentralized.
Thanks for clarifying that. The other concern that keeps coming to my mind is this: what happens if 2 or more of the 12 witnesses goes down (offline) for various reasons (hardware mulfunction, operator not interested in running it anymore, government seizure etc.). Will this cause any network disruption? If yes, what kind of disruptions would that be?
As long as the majority (7 out of 12) of witnesses are online and behave honestly, the network is healthy.
February 15, 2017, 03:46:10 AM
Regarding to the 12 witnesses, this number (12) is chosen on some calculations? More witnesses, let's say 24, it's not more secure?
Read the whitepaper, its explained there. 
February 15, 2017, 03:04:37 AM
What is price of Blackbyteball?
February 15, 2017, 02:37:04 AM
That's a valid concern and freezal got it right: the network had to start centralized and no one's showed up yet with the needed reputation and credibility. I'm going to use every opportunity to relinquish control over 11 out of 12 witnesses in favor of reputable individuals/organizations/companies that are willing to be part of the network. That would make the network only stronger thanks to both their involvement and the network becoming more decentralized.
You could have an election for 12 witnesses like Komodo did for their 64 notary nodes.
Why bringing politics in when there's no need for it? Human intervention shouldn't be as strong as this. I mean Bitcoin works because there's very little human intervention. There's a lot of politics outside the protocol (big blocks, small blocks, BU not BU) but that doesn't harm the continuation of the network.
I'm confused on this one
February 15, 2017, 01:57:55 AM
Regarding to the 12 witnesses, this number (12) is chosen on some calculations? More witnesses, let's say 24, it's not more secure?
February 15, 2017, 01:56:13 AM
That's a valid concern and freezal got it right: the network had to start centralized and no one's showed up yet with the needed reputation and credibility. I'm going to use every opportunity to relinquish control over 11 out of 12 witnesses in favor of reputable individuals/organizations/companies that are willing to be part of the network. That would make the network only stronger thanks to both their involvement and the network becoming more decentralized.
You could have an election for 12 witnesses like Komodo did for their 64 notary nodes.
February 15, 2017, 01:44:28 AM
portabella is an awesome and knowledgeable person in my opinion from interacting with him in the slack
Actually, you have raised 2 red flags:
1. Con artists look as the most awesome persons.
2. Con artists pretend to be experts.
Just a simple question: Do areas of expertise of SatoNatomato and portabella overlap much?
February 14, 2017, 11:35:26 PM
That's a valid concern and freezal got it right: the network had to start centralized and no one's showed up yet with the needed reputation and credibility. I'm going to use every opportunity to relinquish control over 11 out of 12 witnesses in favor of reputable individuals/organizations/companies that are willing to be part of the network. That would make the network only stronger thanks to both their involvement and the network becoming more decentralized.
Thanks for clarifying that. The other concern that keeps coming to my mind is this: what happens if 2 or more of the 12 witnesses goes down (offline) for various reasons (hardware mulfunction, operator not interested in running it anymore, government seizure etc.). Will this cause any network disruption? If yes, what kind of disruptions would that be?
Jump to: