Topic: SuperNet, are you in? - page 2. (Read 5610 times)

The entire operation is dependent on one anonymous person. Too risky to invest in this.

I don't think the NXT devs are aware of his identity.

you would have to ask the dev i find out what he does when everyone else does (i get no insider info ever nor have i asked for any)

If you're ever up for a giggle, feel free to satirize the above FUDster by changing his target to Berkshire Hathaway.

You've done nothing but make ad hominem attacks and unsubstantiated claims while linking to your post and spreadsheet. Here's a short list of the claims you've made with no evidence what so ever:


Not true as shown above in an eariler post.


Evidence? And as far as I know any coins held by superNET are to be held indefinitely. Certainly any sale of assets in the form of coins will go to a vote.


Again, evidence?


Now you're accusing him of falsifying volume and inflating the price of his assets. Evidence?


...


So now the voting on BTER where people have openly purchased ~3k BTC of TOKEN is rigged?


What are you talking about here? He's the one saying he owns the assets and he's often mentioned how much the total asset value of his shares of his assets are. Why don't you think it's a good thing for someone who's producing something that drives the price of an asset(technology, trading, providing a service, whatever) to own a large part of that asset? Isn't economic incentive a good thing?

All you've done is attacked James by accusing him of doing the things above but the only evidence you've presented thus far is your spreadsheet that outlines which parts of jl777 assets are owned by other jl777 assets.

Anyone who's read the superNET thread knows that James holds large portions of his assets and the all of his assets are cross owned in a multitude of ways. It says so right in the superNET OP. Where did he claim otherwise? And why is that necessarily a bad thing? He's the one developing the technologies or choosing what coins to invest capital in those assets, so owning the assets that he's attempting to increase the value of makes sense from an incentive standpoint.

Regarding the typos in the PDF, that document wasn't written by James. If you're trying to claim some intentional deception on the part of James you're going to have to try harder.

In natural and evolutionary biology, systems of interdependence win out over systems of competitive eradication. I thought this was very accurately  & beautifully expressed by Este:

"Usage and network effect is the most important aspect of what makes a currency successful. Having a common bond that joins myriad quality services together in to one unified interface is something that is needed in this space where we constantly have new technologies competing against each other. Maybe superNET won't be 'the one', maybe you or someone else will create a competing network that offers better services and ends up being the dominant connective force in crypto. Who knows what will happen. I do think that some sort of unifying network like this is inevitable. Before I thought that maybe there wold be some ultra-technologically superior crypto that would come out and just dominate the market, I had never thought of the possibility of just having a common network to share technologies that would essentially allow for unlimited growth just by adding useful tech to a singular gateway. This way technological process can happen gradually in an iterative fashion that eliminates the need for 'marketing' coins. People who develop useful services will likely want to join, and it will likely be beneficial for them to join so that they can take advantage of the network effect that is offered."

The supernet ecosystem is not top down, as many people would try to paint it. It is an emergent system, and this is why it will succeed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence

http://www.amazon.com/Emergence-Connected-Brains-Cities-Software/dp/0684868768

You seem to be working under the assumption that simply because jl777hodl has purchased SimGate, that all of Nxtblg assets are associated with jl777, and that is simply not the case. You're trying very hard to find/see relationships that do not exist, which is why you don't understand them.

FYI. I'm the issuer of those assets, and the reason why they're "dead markets" is that I want it that way. To be frank, my landline Internet went down shortly after I issued those assets and it took the phone company three weeks to track down what was wrong with the associated lines. The first problem was a corroded wire protector at the base of the pole, and the second (believe it or not) was some butterfingered line technician mis-wiring the connection for my line in the neighbourhood aggregator box.

Call me an Internet addict or whatever, but those three weeks were really hard on me - especially since I had to try my best to field redemption requests by fumbling around with an Android cell phone. Since neither of those cryptos have Android wallets, you could say that I went through a challenging time.

Maybe I'm neurotic, but those three weeks of no-Internet hell made me lose all taste for doing anything with those gateways except (possibly) buying out the rest of the holders someday. I won't be re-issuing any of the assets I got back from redemption requests. Since I issued those assets to widen the distribution for both Simcoin and NFD, it was little more than a promotional technique for the underlying alts.

But now that you mention it, I do have to thank you for digging up James' buy. I had no idea that most of the Singate I issued is in jl777hodl!

not my cup of tea

I guess you have trouble reading? Lets do an Explain like I am Five for you - The issuer had an asset - SIMGATE 67% of which issuance was held by jl777hodl - now I have to wonder what kind of association that means? jl777hodl has 67% of the only asset issued by the account. I am having a hard time understanding the relationship between two....and the account tried to issue NFDGate which again was a "gateway" asset. again what is being implied...I surely can't tell. Oh the difficulty.
Ah yes, unless using maths:
jl777 = MGW, a gateway asset
jl777hodl=jl777

From above,
jl777=jl777hodl

NXT-PSY8-B4SS-JQ7G-AJD86 = NxtBlg = Simgate = Gateway asset
NxtBlg = NFDgate = another gateway asset
jl777hodl = 67% of the Simgate asset

From above,
jl777 = Nxtblg or something to do with Nxtblg

Thats certainly not telling at all.


And that was not the truth? Or was my detailed search not mentioned in the post? Hmm...lets check..."I did a longish of jl777 holding's here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8795729" --> so anyone with half a brain would check the reference being made and then say whether I lied or not. You got to love how BCT people make shit up.

So no more of the 5x-10x increase or huge increase in NAV or any of the kool aid stuf? You got to love when people go back to debating facts.

Is it a publicly known fact that the assets which he is donating was held by him? Until then general public who vote in are aware of this fact,the voting is rigged. Secondly there was no need to propose a change after the ICO has started but not ended.
Thirdly, correct me if I am wrong but he owns 10% of Supernet and going by the backhandness (again this has no facts - see no lies ) which was shown in other jl777 asssets, I am willing to bet he owns at least a good degree of voting influence. It would be surprising if it gets voted NO.

And holding a majority of the asset without public disclosure is fine? Had it been coins, no one would touch it with a long pole but it is asset, so fuck it and take my money?

And as I said earlier too, you are on kool aid. There are number of issues, including his association with shady assets, pumping his own assets (considering he owns most of them), false claims - he does own the majority of sharkfund0 -- the place where he got 4x returns (I for one certainly would love to see some auditing of books of sharkfund0), and generally a lot of typos - example pdf says NXTPrivacy owns 50% of Privatebet (its 60%), holds 30% of crypto card (its 40%), owns 8% of jl77hodl and HRNXTPool 33.6% (which goes under underpromise and over deliver). So yeah with the tape over your eyes, you can only see one issue being raised.

Thats a lot of words being used for a gateway for coins with contextual advertising. As the saying goes - even if put a lipstick on a pig, it still is a pig.

Actually, though you couldn't possibly know this, NFDGate/way assets have nothing to do with any jl777 action, but are part of an entirely different project.
So its not very telling at all.

I don't own any TOKEN for what it's worth. I'm interested in superNET though and I want to see it succeed because I think it will be a good thing for the sector. The only "Kool-Aid" I'm drinking is the one in search of facts and truth. Whether those facts are for or against jl777, I don't care. But I'm just calling it like I see it. I'm not vouching for anything. People should do their own research and invest only what they can afford to lose in every case.

The reason I asked you to tell the truth is because clearly you were bending the situation by saying that "he has asked for 500 BTC for "2000 BTC worth" of his own assets.".

First of all, it is a proposal to for people who hold TOKEN to vote on. So if they feel it's not in their best interest, then they can simply vote no and the asset will stay how it is.

The proposal only pays out if and only if the NAV of UNITY reaches an agreed upon value, which will likely be something like "UNITY is listed in the top 5 or 10 assets on coinmarketcap.com". I don't know exactly what it's going to be, but obviously the whole deal in contingent on a massive increase in value for the UNITY asset.

These are the scenarios:
1. Vote No, nothing changes.
2. Vote Yes, UNITY now holds additional assets and will pay out 500 BTC upon reaching the agreed upon value

In the #2 scenario there are two scenarios:
1. UNITY does not increase in value to the specified NAV point and no more BTC is allocated beyond the 1% currently available.
2. UNITY does increase in value, people holding UNITY now have multiplied the value of their holding, and now James has more working capital(which will likely amount to 2-5% of the market cap at that point).

I don't think anyone is saying that all assets, crypto or otherwise can immediately be liquidated for whatever their current market value is. Obviously it doesn't work like that, so when dealing with a large portion of any asset, the value is debatable. James has not claimed otherwise as far as I know. I think it's more than reasonable that the person who is developing such a large project should have adequate capital to work with to make it the best it can possibly be. I told him that I thought he had made a mistake in only allocating 1% of the fund for working capital. That's incredibly low for such a large project, whether it raises 5k BTC or 10k BTC(5k looking more likely). What is 50 BTC when you have random projects here raising 1500 BTC IPOs for development? Why shouldn't superNET be able to pay its developers competitive rates and contact the highest quality people to audit the code and do security checks?

I think you're focused too much on the fact that he's decided to pledge a large amount of assets that have a nebulous value associated with them. Not on whether having additional working capital would be good for the project or not. SuperNET is not just the MGW dressed up differently. Usage and network effect is the most important aspect of what makes a currency successful. Having a common bond that joins myriad quality services together in to one unified interface is something that is needed in this space where we constantly have new technologies competing against each other. Maybe superNET won't be 'the one', maybe you or someone else will create a competing network that offers better services and ends up being the dominant connective force in crypto. Who knows what will happen. I do think that some sort of unifying network like this is inevitable. Before I thought that maybe there wold be some ultra-technologically superior crypto that would come out and just dominate the market, I had never thought of the possibility of just having a common network to share technologies that would essentially allow for unlimited growth just by adding useful tech to a singular gateway. This way technological process can happen gradually in an iterative fashion that eliminates the need for 'marketing' coins. People who develop useful services will likely want to join, and it will likely be beneficial for them to join so that they can take advantage of the network effect that is offered.

So now you believe what I wrote in my first post to be statement which can be analysed and not a lie? Because you did say "No. At least attempt to tell the truth." I guess this is the jl777 way, first call some a liar, when proven say you were just trying to "objectively" analyse the situation.

Problem with conditional reward is this, it comes due to "2000 BTC" worth of assets which are not worth their price. And you are such drunk on the kool aid that you just are copying what jl777 is saying - 5x - 10x, massive amount of ROI, etc. Lets look at the hard numbers from jl777 himself. If he raises 10k BTC which he is aiming for (and people seem to be rooting for), at current rate the market cap will stand at 4,774,400. The last coin on number 10 is Maidsafe with 8.58 mill. So 5x on the first percentage he takes? Thats funny. My maths say its hardly 2x. So that is a short term reward. Yes he will need  10x to reach 2015 yr end and we will see if the project is around at that time.

Assets are not valueless because of the work put in and the technology? Either you don't understand pricing or you are just trying to push a point. What is the worth of myspace today? The technology or work doesn't matter. It is what people are ready to pay for something which matters.

Considering he holds most of his assets himself or via proxy is a rather telling story, no matter what keiretsu BS he sells. The story is either there is no market for his assets and he is artificially creating volume by selling among himself or he is controlling/cornering the assets by setting vague structures (thrown in words like vertical, horizontal, keiretsu etc etc). In crypto, that should concern you.

Going by your description of MGW, I mean, Supernet, there is some bad news. Unfortunately there is already a supernet like structure in place from jl777 itself - called MGW. Though currently it works for providing gateway for NXT to a coin, supernet expands it to do cross reference by increasing the pairings. The total market cap of the asset? 600 bucks. Yep, so lets bet the horse and the house on a service which does two way exchange ie not fixed to NXT. Lets put in 10k btc and hope nothing goes wrong.

Actually its funny, there is another asset on NXT AE called SIMGATE opened by a newbie account on NXt community called Nxtblg which was supposed to act as gateway for Simcoin (https://nxtforum.org/assets-board/(ann)-simcoin-gateway/) Funnily enough, 67% of the asset is held by jl777hodl.
Its even more telling the same account has issued two more assets - NFDGate and NFDGateway - both of which are dead markets.

And it would seem you read my post but dint understand it. I am arguing he is putting in assets which he owns and has no risk exposure to, and then wants 500 BTC out of the deal. So its all win for him and risk is to the investor. 

But it is your money. You surely will get some returns during the initial pump, people during the opening IPO did. Its not a long term project as you are making out it to be.

No, I'm trying to look at it objectively. I don't see how setting a conditional reward for being in the top 5 or 10 market cap values is a loss. Either UNITY NAV increases enough that holders have gained a massive amount of ROI and he gets a reward or he gets nothing and loses whatever the current value of those shares are.

The assets them selves are not valueless considering the amount of work that's been been put in to developing the technologies that they're based on. And the other assets which hold significant amounts of crypto.

The thing about superNET is that it intends to generate profits as a functioning gateway for crypto through fees and contextual advertising of useful services. So in order for those performance metrics to be hit people buying superNET are going to want to see it begin to show promise in those areas. And superNET succeeding is all predicated on James' technologies working as he intends them to, so all of this still has to come together for superNET to get to that level.

And I've read your post and the spreadsheet but I don't see how setting a performance based metric like that is a bad thing. It sounds more like you're arguing as if he were putting in 2000 BTC worth of assets now and directly receiving back 500 BTC right away, not when UNITY is multipled by x times in value.

Huh? You obviously are one of the guys on the Kool aid.

Did you read the long thread I posted on asset holdings? He already holds the majority of the assets which you prompt as "large amount of risk" ie they came at little to no cost to him. So where is the risk he is taking? Instead he is asking for 500 BTC or hoping the Supernet association will cause an increased interest in those assets for him to clear out.  There is no win-win, just loss for the investors.

That is the truth. If you still believe otherwise, its your money to burn.

No. At least attempt to tell the truth.

That only happens if and only if superNET reaches a very high market cap and gains a high market cap position relative to the top cryptos.

It's clearly a win-win for investors with James taking on a large amount of risk with a relatively small reward that happens only in cases of extreme success.

I did a longish of jl777 holding's here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8795729

Problem is he holds most the "assets" he "donated" to Supernet ICO are majority held by his own assets ie by proxy. And he has asked for 500 BTC for "2000 BTC worth" of his own assets.

If you are willing to pay so that one can get rich by:
a. buying a shit load of coins, pumping them and then dumping it on you
b. dumping an asset (or coin) held by someone

then yes you must buy the SuperNet ICO.

Fore those of you how have missed this: we just set up predictions on SuperNet on our prediction market. This numbers can not be influenced by sock puppets only by predictions on or against SuperNet.
We do not recommend or advise against an investment of SuperNet.

 https://www.fairlay.com/event/category/bitcoin/altcoins/

James(jl777) is the core architect of superNET and has development support and assistance from crypto_zoidberg(Boolberry lead dev) and coinsolidation(Bitmark lead dev). As well as a team of 3 or 4 dedicated people working on the superNET GUI programming. And this will likely be expanded further as time goes on.

You should ask here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-supernet-nxt-asset-12071612744977229797-supernet-kmd-assetchain-in-summer-762346

Who are the devs? And how many of them are involved?