Topic: POLL - which coins are scams as defined in the OP? (Read 11787 times)

No, you have a problem with misreading, what I said was that your accusation is that TPTB_need_war is a sham, but you're incorrectly using the word scam as a stand-in.

Also, as far as breaking anonymity is concerned, this is a fallacy that I somewhat covered in this thread in #2:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-shitcoiners-guide-to-shitcoin-logic-1430839

BTW, Shadowcash was brazenly using this "prove it" argument until they weren't

so..........

basically you were saying that TPTB is a sham...
 

BTW, Talk is cheap, here i  remind you of the challenge by Dash team to de-anonymize their tx  ::

It's a great analogy considering it is only referencing the difference between scam and sham, which you seem to not get. I'm sure you have a problem with TPTB_need_war's appraisal of a certain shitcoin you defend, but calling it FUD, or calling its critics scammers, doesn't remove the criticism, it only distracts from it--so instead of wasting people's time with petty jokes and personal trolling, maybe find a technical basis for why the criticism is or isn't true. Though I doubt technical discussions are really your strength and the sideshow antics are the best you can do (and just a heads-up, this failure for technical merit by its defenders is probably why that coin is rated so high in scam polls).

Tell me the source address of this transaction then if it's oh so weak:

quite a bad analogy considering that justin beiber did not fud on death metal music.
say... if  u claim that  u were justin beiber and  u also claim that metal death music are product of satan. what would that be  

That would be a sham dev, not a scam dev. Can't really scam anyone unless products and/or money are exchanged.

If someone sells me a Justin Beiber CD and tells me it's Death Metal, then they scammed me. If Justin Beiber tells me he's playing guitar for a Death Metal band, then he's a sham, or phony, or liar--but he'd need to sell me tickets to his pop concert or to a Metal show that doesn't exist for it to be a scam.

Do you see the difference?

As for your not-so-subtle attack on TPTB_need_war, he's working on something, has proved that he excels at analyzing complex systems, and has a deeper than most here understanding of math, so some of his bravado is warranted, though whether he finishes his current project or how much of an impact it makes remains to be seen. But given you've kept to your noob namesake and have perpetually backed a poorly built coin, you are hardly in a position to judge, unless you aren't a noob trader and are actually a long standing troll with a long standing agenda of criticizing anyone who criticizes the alt project you are backing--then you'd be the sham, and the equivalent of a bad actor prating on the stage with the same tired lines and 2-dimensial character development.

scam dev is when dev keep hyping about his ability and promise about the next big coin he is about to make and he never did make one. nevertheless he still able to badmouthing other coin project which already delivering product.

shame on you scam dev, shame on you....

For this thread, a scam coin is defined to be one where the insiders have hyped features which can not work as described or features which do not exist and profited on selling coins (tokens) to the market. Scam coins do not have actual usership and do nothing to help the crypto currency ecosystem grow because they are just mining the speculators and preselling hype. Having no usership is not by itself an indicator of a scam coin, for as long as there is sincere effort and realistic plans to achieve user adoption and network effects (but a year after selling $18 million in tokens for vaporware and still having only ~0 users is a strong indicator of scam), and not just predominately selling hype for insiders to sell tokens to mine the speculators. In other words, a scam coin is just using hype (and not actual technical achievements that have been well vetted by substantial and non-biased expert peer review) to pretend to be about real adoption and really just exists to create and sell tokens.

Bitcoin is the reserve currency of gambling

Re: [POLL] Should Alternative Currencies Have Their Own Forum Section ?

Although philosophically I'd like to vote "yes", I voted "no" because the reality is the scams are the BTC economy:

Re: Bitcoin is the reserve currency of gambling?


Evidence the explosive growth of ShapeShift.io:


More details at this interview:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/erik-voorhes-interview-creator-of-satoshi-dice-and-shapeshift-1447019

Re: Bitcoin is the reserve currency of gambling?


Replies from others are emphasizing the use of BTC for gambling, but the keyword in my subject title is "reserve".

My point is that BTC is the unit-of-account by which everyone measures their gambling success, not fiat.

When someone gambles on an altcoin "investment" (speculation), they are hoping to get more BTC. They don't cash it out to fiat, they HODLit to gamble some more altcoin "investments". Even if you include gambling sites that accept Bitcoin, the gambler is likely HODLing their BTC gains (if any) and not cashing out to fiat.

"Ignorant bullshit."  -- TPTB_need_war and his take on ICOs

POWs at least require the cost of mining to determine a value.
ICOs can work (honest project managers required) but they are nothing but I.O.Us based on speculation of the value of the a projects potential.
The tokens themselves we created at near nill cost.

Lol, yes these dorks are going to dominate by requiring bloggers to learn Github. 

Then @ 26mins we have Greg Meredith raving about recruiting an economist and hiring a former Ethereum developer who talks about Oleg's monad blogs. As if this focus on eggheads has anything to do with wide-scale adoption of a social network.

At @30min, Greg admits that the "Lively Gig" team has stated, "Synereo doesn't know what they are doing".

At @38min, Greg points out that there is an insoluble problem in that the value of AMPs will be siphoned off to ETH or BTC units. And he admits Synereo can't scale for 18 months, because current block chain model won't scale and will need to be replaced.

Exactly why I don't investigate Lisk because then I am going to be attacked. Btw, smart contracts basically have no use cases that can actually work and sustain a decentralized Nash equilibrium (because block chains can only do that with data internal to the block chain, not external data). So I don't have to investigate to make a reasonable guess. And I did state it was a guess. I didn't state it was fact.

"probably safely assume" - based on hearsay and gut feeling?
Man, I don't know about LISK and really don't care, but it's sad to see when "scientists" become common trolls.

I have made a decision not to investigate any new coin projects, because then I would feel compelled to release my findings, which would mire me in more time wasting defenses against trolling and ad hominem attacks.

But you can probably safely assume it is another shitcoin in the mold of Ethereum. But I really don't want to enter more of these battles. I am trying to get my own software development and startup work moving at a faster pace.

Nice topic you got here TPTB.

Any thoughts on Lisk?

I've read most of the 50+ page Synereo white paper, expended several hours viewing some of their YouTube Hangouts, done some limited discussion with their founding developer (username here Elokane), and posted in every recent Synereo thread in Altcoin Discussion.

Synereo was launched as a vaporware ICO and the math whiz on the project is Greg Meredith who is into process calculus research and was one of key persons apparently on Microsoft's BizTalk design. Greg is into using Scala and also is collaborating on the math modeling of Ethereum's upcoming, promised Casper design (which btw several of us, excluding smooth, have criticized in the Ethereum Paradox thread for its fundamental insoluble flaws).

I have pointed out that there are numerous P2P (aka distributed) social networking projects, so the idea of Synereo being the first and able to sweep the world, is very slim, especially they have no compelling features afaics. Thus I have criticized them for preselling tokens ("AMPS") with no adoption and on hype. Their major claim as an innovative feature is an "Attention Model" which is composed of reputation ("Reo") and a counter-vailing force of being able to pay to override reputation with the AMPS tokens. In other words, they aim to make the content that the users share more relevant. I had pointed out that the Reo needs to be fine-grained on for example #hashtags, and Elokane indicated that although that is not in the white paper they are implementing something like that, yet there is no holistic public specification afaik. They are claiming to be very close to beta, but I've pointed out that doesn't mean they are any where near adoption. I have also pointed out that Facebook users don't seem to have major complaints about the relevance of shared content on feeds, thus I doubt anyone will adopt Synereo (because their friends won't be there and much less content sharing and other chicken and egg dilemmas).

Also I have pointed out that the economics of advertising is the most someone could expect to earn by being paid to share (the AMPs model) is perhaps about $1 (in developing world) to $10 (first-world) per day and probably not that much. It simply isn't worth anyone's time. People don't join social networks to be paid some palty income. They join for other more important reasons. Thus I've argued the economic model for the AMPS is fundamentally flawed.

Thus I have argued they are preselling shit which no market.

Also I don't really understand the process calculus well enough to know if it is technobabble bullshit or not, but it sure looks like it to me. It looks like ivory tower shit that has no real implications in the real world. What did BizTalk do that was relevant? I did a Google search and it seems basically no one used it? Excuse me for being skeptical but the selling of ICOs is becoming too lucrative and attractive for every Joe who has some technobabble to make n00bs drool.

Smooth is not involved in my JAMBOX project at all. I occasionally trade ideas with him about technology. My JAMBOX project will when it is crowdsourced (not for tokens just for Tshirts!) will explain that it targets compelling features and economics. I have not yet announced that, because for one thing is that at the moment I am working on potentially creating a new programming language based on top of Rust, or perhaps contributing to Rust. Because JAMBOX is based on the concept of empowering mobile apps, and so I need to be sure the language we are using is the best in severals ways one of which is JIT compilation.

I don't hate Synereo's people. I just wish they hadn't done a vaporware ICO, both for the legal reasons of selling unregistered investment securities to non-accredited USA investors apparently in violation of securities law as provided for by the Supreme Court's Howey test and simply because it is the antithesis of the objective ethics (i.e. no zero-sum games) of meritocratic software development to sell vaporware.

I want to say something regarding GadgetCoin and IOTA, I follow them from the very beginning, guys behind these two projects are very talented and skilled, these two projects are very potential,  it's not necessary to argue on which one is better, time will prove it, client release will prove it and  market will prove it, if the guys can cooperate with each, it's the best thing,win-win is real win.