Topic: [UNO] Unobtanium Info & Discussion - Hardfork block 1042000 - Merge Mine w/BTC! - page 248. (Read 1047081 times)

I feel exactly, to a T how FallingKnife has explained it.
UNO is a very rare commodity/asset of itself and it doesn't need features and it doesn't need traded to some other lesser asset.
I personally do not like any of the asset based systems.
What a crypto needs to be successful is a strong, working blockchain. The blockchain shouldn't slow down due to disinterest and clog up with transactions, and it should be lower inflation than Bitcoin has had for several years.

As long as the coin is truly a rock solid working coin for transacting and has a fair, low inflation, the price will rise with due time. I think people like to scream about innovation because they believe for some strange reason that will amp up the price. As I stated the other day in chat, I would gladly help and join as a developer for Unobtanium. Over this weekend, I've been looking for issues with the AuxPOW code.  

tl;dr: No to adding useless features, UNO is a strong, stable store of wealth.

And frankly, to those that just want to add stupid features so they can sell and move along, should just go ahead and move along.

I would love to hear what everyone else thinks. My opinion is just that... my opinion, and it's not any better than anyone elses'.

But the way I see it, everybody doesn't need Uno.  Not everybody needs gold & silver, either. And besides, there isn't enough Unobtanium for everybody.

If our goal is to pump up the price and then dump on latecomers, then a centralized product roadmap with some amazing promises that are year or two down the road is a great way to go. There are so many coins that have gone this route, I won't even name them.  
If we want to go that route (which I don't), it would be easier to just clone an old failed project and take a huge pre-mine, ostensibly to hire a great unnamed development team. To save even more money and time,  we would paste the old roadmap and promises that people bought into before, then create some newbie accounts on BCT. We'd create a new logo, though. Something really impressive.  Rinse and repeat.

While I'd love to see great new features and services washing up on Uno's shores, there's very little work being done in crypto that isn't open source, and which couldn't be copied by a motivated dev later, and forked into Uno.  Cryptapus, god bless 'em, has brought many of these projects and services to Uno.

The innovation baked into Uno at birth can't be taken away.

Back in 2013, Blazr2 had the crazy idea, "Hey what would happen if I launched a coin that is the opposite of all the shite being launched right now? What if it was fair, fast to realize low inflation, not a scam, and what if were scarce. It's hard to believe that fairness could be considered an innovation (someday, maybe wallstreet will learn from Uno and its customer's the innovation of fairness... not holding my breath tho).

To me, fair-launch, rare, low inflation Uno is valuable because it's Unobtanium, and precisely because it is NOT a lot of the other things that are out there. There are zero empty promises with Uno. It's value today is exactly what it's value is today, and not what it will be after Xyz Dev releases the cool update that will integrate phone sex with the wallet in two years.

Unobtanium is not valuable because of a promise someone else has made. Nor is it valuable because it's backed by some centralized resource.   It's not valuable because it's backed by cow piss (sorry URO) or beer (KOL). It's also not a share in the promise of a precious metal stored in some mysterious centralized vault (sorry BIG).

To me, Uno is the first viable cryptocommodity. It is (and will be) the best way to transport large amounts of wealth internationally. The longer the rockchain persists, the more valuable it's story, like a rare gold Roman coin moving through history, desired more for it's connection with the past than the present value of gold. With it's low inflation and no pre-mine, Uno is the only viable cryptocurrency that's worth holding simply for what it is. Yes, someone clever can come along and append all manner of features to it, or just bring those features over from other coins, but cool features and empty promises don't make Uno valuable.

IMZ sees a real need for merchant acceptance and introducing Uno to a broader audience. I totally agree that in a world of 1000 cryptos screaming for attention, introducing someone one-to-one to Uno is a great way to spread.  And Uno is instantly transferrable, so why not embrace merchants who will accept it. As I see it, the main problem we have today is that there's no oxygen in the room for all of the screaming crypto.

Part of what we have to do is fundamentally very basic:  continue to exist.  Continue to develop the community (even a small community can have a massive impact on price and usefulness of Uno).  

Cryptos are being born and dying every day.  But anyone who is looking for viable long term cryptos capable of withstanding the test of time, Uno has to be on the short list. That list is getting shorter every month.

Would love to hear what you think.

I will look into secureae and see if any of the people in my wot have reviewed it, thanks.

It's good to see a sort of renaissance in regards to exchanges however. cryptopia is the only one I use for exchanging crapcoins to btc at this time.

Also good to see UNO stepping back from the black-hole that is cryptsy. The withdraw issues that everyone is complaining about were predicted not long after they opened ( though this can occur with any such exchange ).

p2p gpg contracts have never failed me yet. The proper cryptography is already there if people will use it instead of attemting to reinvent the wheel.

On that note.

I personally don't want code innovation.  
I would like the guys who can hardcore C++ to do an intensive review on UNO as it is and suggest any need for a possible fork.
But I am happy if we are 'locked in' code wise from here on out.  To fork never again.
Only update and maintain the core code in line with BTC protocols.  Plus release improved GUI wallets, but that's just cosmetics.

Thus, I would suggest that early 2016 is the last chance to fork, so either there is a reason and cause to 'innovate' with the code now, or live with it as it is for forever.  Investors, at least the intelligent ones, are going to want and demand that the "Code" is a scared public contract and "fork talk" is taboo.  There are a number of misguided personalities in the BTC-sphere that think they can fork ... they can't ... it would cause a civil war ... and ultimately if it goes down there will be 2 chains and 2 coins and tremendous turmoil.  It is to the advantage of UNO to be a hard line "No forks allowed" community past year 2016.  

There is value in being a conservative community that doesn't fork or change course every other week.

Thus innovation comes from not the 'devs' but from the community with solid plans and programs for adding value to the project.

Respecting Unobtanium this means: How can you argue, that everybody needs Unobtanium?  What it is unique characteristic?

At the moment, nobody needs it, one can invest in Unobtanium, but it is not evident.

You also could invest into another coin, e.g. Ether, Nxt-environment, who have innovative and exciting ideas! Others are also rare, fair... etc...



I'm not sure, the developers of Uno are able or willing to add any innovation.

So what is the masterplan? Waiting until the price would (maybe) raise?

I am just wanting a way to list UNO on http://www.secureae.com/
So more like a redeemable token 1:1 for UNO, the easiest way I see is a kind of periodic redeem dates managed by a small group.

Also, if you want innovation, UNO is in an excellent position to spinoff assets (or launch them)
  A.  Snapshots that create a new chain that is MM sha256
  B.  OR, snapshots that go onto NXT, XEM, or whatever proves to be a reliable 2.0 platform 

The key there is having a known community that can vet projects, review the business plan, and present it to the public.   

An already proven system exists for managing an asset (Besides NXT which is kinda clunky imo) https://docs.openchain.org/en/latest/

I was curious as to what sort of asset, etc. you guys are wanting to issue - maybe I missed it in the thread discussion. DVC was indeed nice for cryptoguild though I arrived late to that party.

Define innovation, please.

The branding alone cannot hold the price! The community itself cannot hold the price!

All cryptos without innovation will go the way down. Even Bitcoin itself will go down, if it will be uninnovative! Bitcoin has a problem with high transfer amounts! If blocksize not corrected, bitcoin will go down!

Change or die! Survival of the fittest Coins!

Where is exactly innovation at Unobtanium?

No, that's 0.0038%! That's part of the beauty of UNO, it's not hard to hold a decent share. I suppose that could be said about many low-marketcap altcoins, but people often celebrate having 1/1,000,000 bitcoins, with UNO only 196 coins gets you 1/1,000! Even 1% is achievable for many. 

Yobit's coin addition page specified 2 "business days" so I wasn't really expecting anything over the weekend. However I submitted very early on Thursday so if we don't hear anything tomorrow or Tuesday I will contact them.

Edit: I wouldn't really advise that we shoot for 1,000 coins there. It has slightly less volume than Bleutrade & we have 800 coins there. It also appears slightly less...reputable. 400-800 coins in Yobit wallets would be reasonable. Keep in mind that most of the UNO on exchanges isn't on the order books, and we're trying to break that habit. I personally will keep about 40 UNO there. 

Given this:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-10-25/bitcoin-bullion-soar-chinas-creeping-capital-controls-loom

I plan to help bolster the market on Yobit.net. Who else can assist?

After a discussion, we thought we'd need at least 1k $UNOs to get started.

Also, @NAT, have you heard anything from Yobit?

Thinking on it .
But rather avoid the burn route.
Wondering about a 1:1 exchange-able asset that trusted community members can manage.

I looked into creating a NXT asset last year.  The process isn't very difficult. It's quite easy to create an asset with NXT, and probably XCP as well.  IMZ created a NXT asset for DVC.

The question comes down to: will be people trust in the security behind the asset.
I suppose we could "burn" some Uno to create the asset, but the thought of losing a single Uno forever makes me ill.

B.N.: How would an UNOnxt asset work? I really like their 'secure access exchange', I have some NXT, Pangea and superNET shares on there. I'm just not sure how altcoin-asset pairing works. Would UNO be burned and paired to the asset or does it just allow UNO to be traded on the exchange? As long as it doesn't increase the total number of tradeable Uno I would be in full support of the idea.

That would get us on a decentralized exchange!

This looks awesome! I hate to blindly download though, anyone else tried this slick looking storage?

You can now place phone calls through Bitphone and pay for it with Uno, via Shapeshift.io.

If you try this, let me know how it works.

my wallet 7.54 Uno 0.00000001 % 

GOALS 2016
>84% of coins are in personal wallets
<5% on any one exchange
<15% on all exchanges/book/servers

_{(sorry i have 'more than' >< 'less than' dyslexia)}

GOALS 2016 (Q1)
UNOnxt asset 1:1 traded on the NXT open exchange
UNOxcp asset 1:1 ... but no sure if helpful since it doesn't have similar exchange that I know of yet
(same for ETH, BTS ... but they're still very beta about open exchange)


---
YEAP.  There are certainly stuck coins.  UNO less so than others.  But I've watched other-coins books and same asks stay in the same place for +12 months.

 
possible. and I think there are a couple top50 wallets that were abandoned.  mining was pure chaos 2013/2014, some of the guys with big rigs must have been very dizzy and under slept with constantly mining the NXT big coin, finding the pool, tweaking the miners, and hardware failure, coupled with btc prices peaking, and mt gox, passwords, passwords, passwords, passwords.  There is a good argument for "Lost & Abandoned %".

 

Do you mean '<5% on any one exchange'?

I'd say >84% in personal wallets and <11% in Cryptsy by the end of 2016 would be more reasonable but phenomenal. <15% in Cryptsy by the end of 2015.

The reason I'm pessimistic about Cryptsy itself is that signs point toward some 'stuck' coins there. I know that we've been reducing it, but a decent percentage of those must be abandoned. I mean, at this point, I wouldn't be surprised if someone died with 10,000 UNO on Cryptsy...