Topic: Obyte: Totally new consensus algorithm + private untraceable payments - page 91. (Read 1234271 times)

So, super confusing now, which does make sense then? Distributing large amounts to few people at once (Bitcoin moon drops) or distributing small amounts to lot of people over long period (attestation and referral rewards for various attestation bots)?

Whales are completely useless for the development of a currency. They have the opposite effect.

The distribution was and is a disaster.

https://explorer.byteball.org/#XCQ3LC6BSRGLPKC6LDQBTHZBKHLGIS5B?asset=bytes  62242 gbyte.
https://blog.lisk.io/financial-report-2016-7e68cdd13b12

seriously, do you see how to get a link to see their wallet or one of them from Max Kordek, I know about the LISK project, I think it is also good news when many big people hold BYTEBALL too

There is nothing that's stops anybody using Byteball now. You could have said something like that when there was no iOS app, but this is not the case anymore. Usability is an ongoing process, which needs to be worked on all the time, that's why there needs to be a fund for development and that's what Byteball Fountation has done. There used to be one dev, now there is more.

This is your wet dream and not where mass-adoption will come, but nobody stops you from building stuff on that part of the Byteball features, so go ahead, start as many shady marketplaces as you want.

Not exactly, all new distributions lock half of the reward to smart-contract, so they can't sell everything at once, which they were able to do with moondrops. If they loose them then it means that there is even smaller circulation and what you own is worth more.

Adoption can only be achieved by a product that can also be used.
The first step would have been to ensure the usability of the product.

In the consequence then a meaningful distribution, which orients itself exactly at this use. Distribution therefore only to those who take part in economic processes, purchase and sale of goods and services against bites. Of course in a market segment which was created for Cryptos: the unregulated market.

The current distribution does not distribute anything. The receivers of the free Bites exchange these with next opportunity again in Fiat (or forget/loose them).
Who will be the buyer of these bites, with continuously falling prices of course? Exactly! The hardcore sectarians. There everything accumulates... until they also lose faith.

"Byteball Bytes price equal to 45.582 USD at 2018-11-05, but your current investment may be devalued in the future. "
https://walletinvestor.com/forecast/byteball-bytes-prediction

And that will slow the adoption down even more because instead of getting some bytes for free, users need to go get the bytes from exchange. Right now, they can use many features without having to sign up to any exchange. That's why smart voucher system is great, they can get started with the help of the referrer and get started. They could even attest their identity without any bytes, so they could buy bytes cheaper with credit card. Requiring new users to go to exchanges is not a great plan for adoption. Crypto-fanatics are ok with exchanges, but one day, your parents and relatives won't even know that cryptocurrency had that kind of shitty user experience https://twitter.com/FedericoTenga/status/1058316647289798656

The distro is finished, tony concentrates on dev work ... byteball becomes a shit load more decentralized, adoption is driven by motivated community members (the ones who left and/or became disillusioned when distro rules changed) working with funded foundation.

Steem and WCG distributions are so small compared to how much was wasted with moon drops. So, where are those HODLers now? Are they still using Byteball? Do they still have bytes or they just sold them to buy more BTC, so they could get more bytes with next moon drop, so they could sell it to buy more BTC again, and so on. Bitcoin distribution didn't work and that's why it was discontinued. Better distribution methods are available now, which engage unique users and distribution will take lot more time, which is better (for mass adoption) in long run.

distribution to steem shitposters doesn't help to adoption. Show me merchants who joined after steem or wcg distribution. (Sigh) 99% of the merchants joined in time of bitcoin distribution. Milano enthusiast joined with help a bitcoin distribution.
Your team is the anchor around byterbal neck.

And then what? Moon drops are over, already over half were distributed like that, if they waste the rest of 22% by giving it away like that then they don't have funds to reward newcommers anymore. Everybody suggesting more moon drop like distribution are thinking about getting themselves richer, not about mass adoption, which is the goal. What's the point of having more bytes if there is no users. That's why Bitcoin doesn't distribute everything at once either, but it's distributed over 100 years.

22% of coin supply distributed as a final new year moon drop, then Tony exits into the background to enjoy his hard-earned 1% and concentrate on dev work, leaving foundation to assist community members in further promotion activities and spreading adoption. That would put byteball back in top50 almost immediately!

No comments, just quoting for archival purposes because this is internet gold.

Look now,  it's better to admit you just hammer away on your keyboard without giving much thought to what you are writing. That is better than sticking to and try to defending the obviously insane ramblings that are there for anyone to laugh at. The fact you are unable to see why that paragraph is shocking is very worrying.

Let us hope your are "developing" the logo or something non critical that can be altered fairly easily.

To freeze genuine investors who purchased byteball on the open market ( i have purchased 10x more than i got for linking a small amount of btc) is not the same as freezing a HUGE amount of the total byteball that was given for FREE to a competing project manager for the bitcoin of others he was holding for the apparent development of his own competing project.

Tony did not allow this by accident. He was totally aware that competing project managers would link the dev fund wallets and suck up huge swathes of the total byteball minting because we brought it up before it went live.

At this time would it really be difficult for tony to collude with his 11 other personalities? especially if it was what that was what the community wanted.

I don't actually think it would be a great idea since we need to not pull any moves that crush the trust more for byteball. It would just be another change that should not happen.

It would be great to consult the community on big changes like stopping full moon air drops and such. These kinds of decisions are actually better made with vast agreement since otherwise the community loses faith.

I think it is better than tonych does not allow you to post further because your posts seem to confirm the suspicions of the remaining community: that the devs here believe a community should just be ready for any kinds of 180 changes whether good or bad for them regardless of what has been promised. Also the community should not question or raise any debate because only devs have the right to an opinion. Any complaints about not keeping to agreements is whining and fud.

I would keep "developing" the logo and get a new spokes person for byteball if you want any chance of gaining some traction.

I understand on deeper technical matters the community must not expect to have too much input. Although some decisions could be explained if people ask. However on simple matters that I have mentioned already there is no need for the communities opinions to be totally excluded.

Now stop replying to me unless you have something new to add. I can't waste time restating the obvious over and over and asking what is only reasonable and a given in most communities. You want a community to bring you a network effect then you need to treat the community (your investors) with some respect.

Regarding the 20-50x - That is depending on many factors but it is realistic for this to eventually become a top 20 project if a few things can be sorted out.

Another one who doesn't know what fair means. Nobody is entitled to get the bytes and if distribution doesn't work then it needs to be fixed, not just continue with a broken one. Bitcoin is laughable, was designed to be decentralized currency, but thanks to a broken distribution system, becomes more centralized with every day. Byteball is moving in other direction, started as centralized and becomes more decentralized every day.

Great example of great communication from the first days. Nice to reread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1608859.2180

And I am the crazy one here? Maybe let's take a vote to freeze your wallet?

The fact that you suggest something insane like that confirms that you have zero idea what cryptocurrencies are for and how Byteball works

Just a hint, you can't sensor transactions on Byteball, it would be possible only if majority of the witnesses would collude, but it will go against the protocol rules and it would be visible for everybody and would result in hard-fork.

On Bitcoin, in theory, you could do it, just need to have enough computing power and you can decide, which transactions get added to block.

yeah steem distribution is the apogee of the byterbal madness. Honestly, i won't be surprised if these madmen will close this topic and create a moderated one. This is the only place where these sectarians cannot drown out the voice of the community. LOL they wrote more than a dozen complaints about my posts in the hope that they would ban me.

Not to beat a dead house, but this whole emphasis on "fair distribution" by tarmo and shit talking about Bitcoin is laughable.

You know what's not fair? Announcing a distribution schedule and mechanism, then pulling the rug out from under it two or three times - first cancelling BTC air drops, then delaying Bytes drops, and finally abandoning the original distribution mechanism completely.

You know what else isn't fair? Dribbling out coins to people that have access to shit loads of crappy CPUs (WCG) and account farmers on steem. That's really unfair to me as I only have like five computing devices and think steem is a swamp of shit tier content born out of a scam.

You know what is fair? Announcing a distribution mechanism and schedule and standing by it like it's etched in stone. In ten years Bitcoin hasn't changed its mechanism or schedule at all. You think it would be more "fair" to halt mining and pass out remaining BTC to WCG bot nets and steem lords?

Let's take a vote to freeze that wallet, and any other huge wallets we know ico managers are holding.

Sure going back on the rules is something we have done before that affected lots of small investors was not cool so going back on the rules to rectify a huge mistake will soon blow over.

I could have linked much more btc to get free byteballs but only linked a tiny amount to not be greedy. Others had no such worries. You can not rely on peoples sense of fair play. They just take the max they can.

Anyway let's all try to get along and not let infighting destroy the community further.

Just in future let's debate any sensible requests from the community that gets some traction with others here.