Topic: VERITASEUM DISCUSSION THREAD - page 97. (Read 251011 times)

LOL, People actually take the predictions seriously? I know Clif's been fairly accurate lately on some things, but anyone who puts their full faith and trust into predictions - no matter the methodology or who they come from - deserve to be disappointed.

Clif's twitter prediction was simply "... 'good news' for @veritaseum on/about the 24th!"  (give that +/- 3 days).

18K tokens out of 100M is a drop in the bucket.  It sucks, to be sure, but hardly a significant impediment to the project.

Hopefully the perpetrator will be tracked down and punished.

The price is already going back up and might hit a new high later today.

Be careful to pick a fight with banksters. They can start wars.
But who knows what the incentives are. Let's see how this recovers, and how Veritaseum inc. will recover from this.

Clif High's prediction for a high VERI price on July 24th isn't looking so good, perhaps the web bot data actually suggested a strong drop. Sucks for me, I put a lot into VERI this past week.

People who have been buying the VERI tokens that a "hacker" sold on EtherDelta should consider that Reggie may have just lost his financial incentive to continue the project. Then again, what else would Reggie actually do after investing so much into this? We'll soon see the core of his passions by whether he endures.

Hmm, what kind of organization would have the ability to hack 2FA twice? Who would have the incentive to slam VERI just a day before high price expectations set by Clif? It seems an individual hacker would have waited a day in case of higher prices (assuming that he/she follows Clif High). It seems a corporate or government agency would have the most incentive to slam VERI a day before high expectations. I do not presume that any government actually works for our interests, neither collective nor individual. May this be designed as yet another excuse for our masters to crack the whip for more regulation of our affairs "for our own good"?

Another possibility should also be considered. Do we know if Reggie actually had more than hopes and dreams to sell us? We might not know because only people that signed an NDA were allowed to know the details. A scenario that investigators must consider is that Reggie invented a hacker story for a token liquidation, tax write off, and reasonable excuse to exit the project. Which erc20 wallets use 2FA? Why wasn't Reggie using a hardware wallet for amounts so great? Hopefully Reggie didn't pull a Danny Brewster (NEOBEE) on us as he joins his relatives in Jamaica with couple million worth of crypto. Such concerns come from painful experience.

Andreas Antonopoulos is one of a couple advocates of NEOBEE that lost some credibility when Danny Brewster had lied and disappeared. I wonder if Clif High, Bix Weir, and Joe (jsnip4) will likewise lose followers from this. The Populous token already lost a lot of value along with VERI. The elevated prices of many markets could be affected by this theft. Confidence has been shaken.

I suppose one positive is that more VERI would actually circulate if the project endures.

Hacker sent around 4500 VERI to etherdelta so there's half a million bucks he's trying to unload

https://etherscan.io/address/0xd82557a3a76341390bdadd6bf5012f88219d94ca#tokentxns

One upside is that it's good for distribution and the long term

Hi Khylst, would you mind sharing more of the specifics about how you lost the VERI... how were you scammed into sending it to the thieves' address? I'm new to cryptos and am here to learn. If we can learn from you ... that would be awesome! Thank you

I see some "filthy rich" holders with 1 address heavily loaded with various erc20 tokens worth some $ millions.
This is a potential danger because if this account gets hacked, ALL the tokens will be lost.
By right, the holder should generate multiple offline addresses and transfer a portion of each token to each of the addresses for cold storage.
So in case of mistake, the holder only lose a small portion, instead of everything.

I suppose the hack was due to phishing sites like myetherwaillet, myetherwalliet, etc.

I also got in at .55. There have been some huge blocks put below market for quick sale.

I feel bad because I know I'm buying from the hacker. At lease I'm a long term player and believer in the project.

Even if the address is known, is it possible to find the responsible party and retrieve the funds?  I also ask because I lost a significant sum of VERI and I know the address to which it was sent.  Maybe there is hope?  Needless to say, it's been tough watching the price skyrocket!

just bought some cheap VERI at 0.55 i guess the guy who dump is the hacker

Hope thus isnt a scam to sell some of their stock pile of veri.

Yes, expect the price to be suppressed for short term.

That explains the dumping on ED.

$4.5million USD worth of VERI stolen



See here:

https://ethplorer.io/address/0x17f96db403e2f8e0461f9d75e1f1a3a0caff3fb5#pageSize=100

https://ethplorer.io/address/0x3fff90bf314673194c3a265ed1c0aa68f59550c4#pageSize=100

Right, because business owners want to dilute themselves every time they acquire a new customer.

Toknormal, you better go and defend your dash... seems people are leaving in droves cause of people like you....

https://www.reddit.com/r/litecoin/comments/6p2fwh/just_sold_all_my_dash_for_litecoin/

  Thank you for your illustrates.

Indeed Dorky.

Something that illustrates the various aspects of the business model from the perspective of all stakeholders involved, as well as each of their priorities and risks, i.e.

 • ICO/exchange market investors
 • the interests of the issuing corporate entity
 • potential "institutional investors"

Here's an example to start you off and give you some ideas. This one illustrates the two potential scenarios I outlined in an earlier posts whereby instead of selling the 'reserved' token supply on the open market they are held by a corporate entity instead and shares sold in that corporate entity. As you correctly say, I may have no idea what I'm talking about - it's just that scenario 2 looks far more attractive to me both from the issuer's point of view and from that of prospective 'institutional'. Feel free to respond with a similar document showing why it isn't.

Finally, there is one aspect missing from this analysis of course. That's the thing that everyone has been asserting consistently in this thread which is that VERI is "software" and not a "trading security" (even though it's traded and held as one by every poster I've seen). But to make a proper appraisal of that dimension of the token we'd need to see the applications concerned and be able to quantify its potential revenue earning capacity.

Lets see what Monday brings on that front

Dorky. You seem well educated and fairly intelligent. On the top of that you are also patient and willing to help/educate. I would feel much better and would be also much more productive for our VERI community as a whole, for you to allocate your precious and limited time into writing/recording some more tehnical stuff and creating a "document" aka VERI for dummies video/PPT version. By doing that you would create something immensely important for VERI holders and others too. Your time is too valuable to waste it on people like toknormal.