Yes guys this is a good time to buy some Warp again.
We got accepted to a new Exchange, got up to 60k Satoshi.
We are back now at sub 30 Which is really cheap.
Because it is certain we will go higher as the 60k again.
Also the Wallet really looks nice good job!
Topic: WARP - Something different - VPN Wallet BETA Release - Bittrex/YoBit - page 29. (Read 116015 times)
March 07, 2016, 12:43:32 PM
March 07, 2016, 12:33:20 PM
It happens, no biggie.
March 07, 2016, 12:31:36 PM
Awesome wallet! Time to buy more homies!
Dump on news
March 07, 2016, 12:24:58 PM
Awesome wallet! Time to buy more homies!
March 07, 2016, 11:37:25 AM
https://github.com/warpcoin/warp/releases/tag/v1.1
Linux Only.
Follow instructions.
Installation of OpenVPN via the said link.
Run Wallet.
Min 100 WARP in order to run VPN.
Report bugs to [email protected]
Awesome job @shapetwist!
March 07, 2016, 11:27:54 AM
https://github.com/warpcoin/warp/releases/tag/v1.1
Linux Only.
Follow instructions.
Installation of OpenVPN via the said link.
Run Wallet.
Min 100 WARP in order to run VPN.
Report bugs to [email protected]
March 07, 2016, 11:01:04 AM
I want to translate to indonesian, how much bounty I will get???
March 07, 2016, 10:37:07 AM
Guys, I am all for taking as long as necessary to develop something and getting one's ducks in a row, even if it takes a year. In the ugly world of virtual currencies there is very little that can be done to assess devs and whether they are above board or not. One of the few things that can be looked at is actions and if a promise is made if the promise is kept. I am therefore a strong believer in less is more. If a dev is working on something then dont give a fixed deadline unless you have the resources to deliver - project management 101. Rather talk about in the next few weeks or couple of months or when it is ready or keep a low profile. If you want to be loud, fine, but have the resources in place to make good then on what you say.
Lets look at 2 scenarios:
Dev A:
Ill deliver feature X by next Monday. On Monday the dev posts his dev did not have access to the internet. By Wednesday he is sick. By Friday who knows? People get anxious and start to ask questions. Dev finally delivers by the next Monday.
Dev B:
Ill deliver over the next few weeks or so. Monday in 2 weeks the dev delivers and makes a post with the links. Everyone claps hands for the dev for delivering.
Both achieve the same delivery date but dev B has also achieved some credibility whereas dev A has lost credibility.
I re-iterate that I would like to see warp succeed, but I have lost twice recently with coins where the dev starts with excuses after making promises and it turned out to be a duck. Apologies for saying if something looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck that it probably is a duck. It is possible though that it could not be a duck, but statistics in virtual currencies are heavily against that. I would appreciate if the dev can work on his delivery statements and rather make statements when the delivery is ready for release or then if he decides to make a promise, to keep to it. It is not my coin though so I have no say in how dev wants to run things. It is important to make sure that there is nothing that could make the public think it is a duck (perhaps mistakenly), especially if the coin has the potential to get onto a big exchange like Polo and if the dev team wants to be taken seriously. This actually makes me think that I tweeted Polo to consider warp a few hours before the promised release which then did not happen (which in hind-sight was premature). This should be enough evidence that my intentions are pure.
Lets look at 2 scenarios:
Dev A:
Ill deliver feature X by next Monday. On Monday the dev posts his dev did not have access to the internet. By Wednesday he is sick. By Friday who knows? People get anxious and start to ask questions. Dev finally delivers by the next Monday.
Dev B:
Ill deliver over the next few weeks or so. Monday in 2 weeks the dev delivers and makes a post with the links. Everyone claps hands for the dev for delivering.
Both achieve the same delivery date but dev B has also achieved some credibility whereas dev A has lost credibility.
I re-iterate that I would like to see warp succeed, but I have lost twice recently with coins where the dev starts with excuses after making promises and it turned out to be a duck. Apologies for saying if something looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck that it probably is a duck. It is possible though that it could not be a duck, but statistics in virtual currencies are heavily against that. I would appreciate if the dev can work on his delivery statements and rather make statements when the delivery is ready for release or then if he decides to make a promise, to keep to it. It is not my coin though so I have no say in how dev wants to run things. It is important to make sure that there is nothing that could make the public think it is a duck (perhaps mistakenly), especially if the coin has the potential to get onto a big exchange like Polo and if the dev team wants to be taken seriously. This actually makes me think that I tweeted Polo to consider warp a few hours before the promised release which then did not happen (which in hind-sight was premature). This should be enough evidence that my intentions are pure.
I read your reply and I am sure of your good intentions. However, I really think most of you are making a big deal out of this beta testing release.
Yes, it makes sense that I am judged according to other devs performances, since you have nothing else to compare to. But you are questioning my credibility for deciding to postpone the launch of non-working binaries. I have announced in good faith - not to be loud. And when I did, I had working binaries for both Linux and Windows. Since then, small changes were made to the code in order to protect WARP, and the free use of the wallets' VPN function. Shit happens and windows has a hard time compile the new code.
Noise is something I don't want to bother much with. I am the same guy that ran a successful ICO with no escrow, the same guy that is doing what he promised from off the beginning. If I have to compromise a few days in order to succeed, I will.
Again, this is just a public beta testing. Untested software works like this. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. It's not my fault if this beta release is being hyped. Being that the case, you should demand explanations from whoever hypes it, and not from me.
March 07, 2016, 10:35:51 AM
I like to submit a feature request for the future: decentralized DNS (like Namecoin) with .WARP extension.
So someotherwebsite.warp links to IP 123.123.123.123
The new World Wide Warp !!!
So someotherwebsite.warp links to IP 123.123.123.123
The new World Wide Warp !!!
March 07, 2016, 10:19:40 AM
I think you're totally right c12345.
Btw, are you on Slack? Shape, gave us the "why" and it was not just excuses.
Pokeytex said, he'll reply to u as smart as your post soon.
Btw, are you on Slack? Shape, gave us the "why" and it was not just excuses.
Pokeytex said, he'll reply to u as smart as your post soon.
March 07, 2016, 10:15:41 AM
Guys, I am all for taking as long as necessary to develop something and getting one's ducks in a row, even if it takes a year. In the ugly world of virtual currencies there is very little that can be done to assess devs and whether they are above board or not. One of the few things that can be looked at is actions and if a promise is made if the promise is kept. I am therefore a strong believer in less is more. If a dev is working on something then dont give a fixed deadline unless you have the resources to deliver - project management 101. Rather talk about in the next few weeks or couple of months or when it is ready or keep a low profile. If you want to be loud, fine, but have the resources in place to make good then on what you say.
Lets look at 2 scenarios:
Dev A:
Ill deliver feature X by next Monday. On Monday the dev posts his dev did not have access to the internet. By Wednesday he is sick. By Friday who knows? People get anxious and start to ask questions. Dev finally delivers by the next Monday.
Dev B:
Ill deliver over the next few weeks or so. Monday in 2 weeks the dev delivers and makes a post with the links. Everyone claps hands for the dev for delivering.
Both achieve the same delivery date but dev B has also achieved some credibility whereas dev A has lost credibility.
I re-iterate that I would like to see warp succeed, but I have lost twice recently with coins where the dev starts with excuses after making promises and it turned out to be a duck. Apologies for saying if something looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck that it probably is a duck. It is possible though that it could not be a duck, but statistics in virtual currencies are heavily against that. I would appreciate if the dev can work on his delivery statements and rather make statements when the delivery is ready for release or then if he decides to make a promise, to keep to it. It is not my coin though so I have no say in how dev wants to run things. It is important to make sure that there is nothing that could make the public think it is a duck (perhaps mistakenly), especially if the coin has the potential to get onto a big exchange like Polo and if the dev team wants to be taken seriously. This actually makes me think that I tweeted Polo to consider warp a few hours before the promised release which then did not happen (which in hind-sight was premature). This should be enough evidence that my intentions are pure.
Good points JC. Lets look at 2 scenarios:
Dev A:
Ill deliver feature X by next Monday. On Monday the dev posts his dev did not have access to the internet. By Wednesday he is sick. By Friday who knows? People get anxious and start to ask questions. Dev finally delivers by the next Monday.
Dev B:
Ill deliver over the next few weeks or so. Monday in 2 weeks the dev delivers and makes a post with the links. Everyone claps hands for the dev for delivering.
Both achieve the same delivery date but dev B has also achieved some credibility whereas dev A has lost credibility.
I re-iterate that I would like to see warp succeed, but I have lost twice recently with coins where the dev starts with excuses after making promises and it turned out to be a duck. Apologies for saying if something looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck that it probably is a duck. It is possible though that it could not be a duck, but statistics in virtual currencies are heavily against that. I would appreciate if the dev can work on his delivery statements and rather make statements when the delivery is ready for release or then if he decides to make a promise, to keep to it. It is not my coin though so I have no say in how dev wants to run things. It is important to make sure that there is nothing that could make the public think it is a duck (perhaps mistakenly), especially if the coin has the potential to get onto a big exchange like Polo and if the dev team wants to be taken seriously. This actually makes me think that I tweeted Polo to consider warp a few hours before the promised release which then did not happen (which in hind-sight was premature). This should be enough evidence that my intentions are pure.
Deliver when you are ready, but do not give deadlines!
March 07, 2016, 10:12:08 AM
Guys, I am all for taking as long as necessary to develop something and getting one's ducks in a row, even if it takes a year. In the ugly world of virtual currencies there is very little that can be done to assess devs and whether they are above board or not. One of the few things that can be looked at is actions and if a promise is made if the promise is kept. I am therefore a strong believer in less is more. If a dev is working on something then dont give a fixed deadline unless you have the resources to deliver - project management 101. Rather talk about in the next few weeks or couple of months or when it is ready or keep a low profile. If you want to be loud, fine, but have the resources in place to make good then on what you say.
Lets look at 2 scenarios:
Dev A:
Ill deliver feature X by next Monday. On Monday the dev posts his dev did not have access to the internet. By Wednesday he is sick. By Friday who knows? People get anxious and start to ask questions. Dev finally delivers by the next Monday.
Dev B:
Ill deliver over the next few weeks or so. Monday in 2 weeks the dev delivers and makes a post with the links. Everyone claps hands for the dev for delivering.
Both achieve the same delivery date but dev B has also achieved some credibility whereas dev A has lost credibility.
I re-iterate that I would like to see warp succeed, but I have lost twice recently with coins where the dev starts with excuses after making promises and it turned out to be a duck. Apologies for saying if something looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck that it probably is a duck. It is possible though that it could not be a duck, but statistics in virtual currencies are heavily against that. I would appreciate if the dev can work on his delivery statements and rather make statements when the delivery is ready for release or then if he decides to make a promise, to keep to it. It is not my coin though so I have no say in how dev wants to run things. It is important to make sure that there is nothing that could make the public think it is a duck (perhaps mistakenly), especially if the coin has the potential to get onto a big exchange like Polo and if the dev team wants to be taken seriously. This actually makes me think that I tweeted Polo to consider warp a few hours before the promised release which then did not happen (which in hind-sight was premature). This should be enough evidence that my intentions are pure.
Lets look at 2 scenarios:
Dev A:
Ill deliver feature X by next Monday. On Monday the dev posts his dev did not have access to the internet. By Wednesday he is sick. By Friday who knows? People get anxious and start to ask questions. Dev finally delivers by the next Monday.
Dev B:
Ill deliver over the next few weeks or so. Monday in 2 weeks the dev delivers and makes a post with the links. Everyone claps hands for the dev for delivering.
Both achieve the same delivery date but dev B has also achieved some credibility whereas dev A has lost credibility.
I re-iterate that I would like to see warp succeed, but I have lost twice recently with coins where the dev starts with excuses after making promises and it turned out to be a duck. Apologies for saying if something looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck that it probably is a duck. It is possible though that it could not be a duck, but statistics in virtual currencies are heavily against that. I would appreciate if the dev can work on his delivery statements and rather make statements when the delivery is ready for release or then if he decides to make a promise, to keep to it. It is not my coin though so I have no say in how dev wants to run things. It is important to make sure that there is nothing that could make the public think it is a duck (perhaps mistakenly), especially if the coin has the potential to get onto a big exchange like Polo and if the dev team wants to be taken seriously. This actually makes me think that I tweeted Polo to consider warp a few hours before the promised release which then did not happen (which in hind-sight was premature). This should be enough evidence that my intentions are pure.
This is a well thought - well articulated point. I don't know @shapetwist personally but I do know he will respond with another well thought - well articulated response. You make a lot of sense and you are right. I always say "Under promise and over deliver!". I am not making excuses for @shapetwist but I do read the slack a lot - he is constantly working on this coin! - pokeytex
March 07, 2016, 09:34:15 AM
Guys, I am all for taking as long as necessary to develop something and getting one's ducks in a row, even if it takes a year. In the ugly world of virtual currencies there is very little that can be done to assess devs and whether they are above board or not. One of the few things that can be looked at is actions and if a promise is made if the promise is kept. I am therefore a strong believer in less is more. If a dev is working on something then dont give a fixed deadline unless you have the resources to deliver - project management 101. Rather talk about in the next few weeks or couple of months or when it is ready or keep a low profile. If you want to be loud, fine, but have the resources in place to make good then on what you say.
Lets look at 2 scenarios:
Dev A:
Ill deliver feature X by next Monday. On Monday the dev posts his dev did not have access to the internet. By Wednesday he is sick. By Friday who knows? People get anxious and start to ask questions. Dev finally delivers by the next Monday.
Dev B:
Ill deliver over the next few weeks or so. Monday in 2 weeks the dev delivers and makes a post with the links. Everyone claps hands for the dev for delivering.
Both achieve the same delivery date but dev B has also achieved some credibility whereas dev A has lost credibility.
I re-iterate that I would like to see warp succeed, but I have lost twice recently with coins where the dev starts with excuses after making promises and it turned out to be a duck. Apologies for saying if something looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck that it probably is a duck. It is possible though that it could not be a duck, but statistics in virtual currencies are heavily against that. I would appreciate if the dev can work on his delivery statements and rather make statements when the delivery is ready for release or then if he decides to make a promise, to keep to it. It is not my coin though so I have no say in how dev wants to run things. It is important to make sure that there is nothing that could make the public think it is a duck (perhaps mistakenly), especially if the coin has the potential to get onto a big exchange like Polo and if the dev team wants to be taken seriously. This actually makes me think that I tweeted Polo to consider warp a few hours before the promised release which then did not happen (which in hind-sight was premature). This should be enough evidence that my intentions are pure.
Lets look at 2 scenarios:
Dev A:
Ill deliver feature X by next Monday. On Monday the dev posts his dev did not have access to the internet. By Wednesday he is sick. By Friday who knows? People get anxious and start to ask questions. Dev finally delivers by the next Monday.
Dev B:
Ill deliver over the next few weeks or so. Monday in 2 weeks the dev delivers and makes a post with the links. Everyone claps hands for the dev for delivering.
Both achieve the same delivery date but dev B has also achieved some credibility whereas dev A has lost credibility.
I re-iterate that I would like to see warp succeed, but I have lost twice recently with coins where the dev starts with excuses after making promises and it turned out to be a duck. Apologies for saying if something looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck that it probably is a duck. It is possible though that it could not be a duck, but statistics in virtual currencies are heavily against that. I would appreciate if the dev can work on his delivery statements and rather make statements when the delivery is ready for release or then if he decides to make a promise, to keep to it. It is not my coin though so I have no say in how dev wants to run things. It is important to make sure that there is nothing that could make the public think it is a duck (perhaps mistakenly), especially if the coin has the potential to get onto a big exchange like Polo and if the dev team wants to be taken seriously. This actually makes me think that I tweeted Polo to consider warp a few hours before the promised release which then did not happen (which in hind-sight was premature). This should be enough evidence that my intentions are pure.
March 07, 2016, 05:05:54 AM
March 07, 2016, 05:04:35 AM
Observing what is going on here I get the same feeling as with Axiom (where I lost some). The warp dev also seems to be outsourcing his dev work, which in itself is not a problem, just that it creates more risk especially if the 3rd party is not joining the party. At some stage also the funds will run out. It just seems that the excuses are lame - in the old days "the dog ate the homework" and today "the Internet was down".
I would like to see warp being successful just like anyone else, I am just observing the warning signs.
I would like to see warp being successful just like anyone else, I am just observing the warning signs.
There's no outsourcing here. The vpn developer has become part of the team but prefers to stay anon. He has little patience for this forum, which I understand.
Instead of releasing a non-working beta I did the most sensitive thing which was to postpone it until it works and to deliver an earlier version - so you see this is not vaporware.
Or should I get a lame excuse instead? Ok, I forgot my magic wand in the back of Satoshi's super golden yacht-plane.
People are so impatient. But for most of us it's just another coin to buy low and sell high. For you it's like a child that has to grow and develop.
Don't feel rushed, just keep your own pace. It's ready when it's ready.
March 07, 2016, 03:20:57 AM
Observing what is going on here I get the same feeling as with Axiom (where I lost some). The warp dev also seems to be outsourcing his dev work, which in itself is not a problem, just that it creates more risk especially if the 3rd party is not joining the party. At some stage also the funds will run out. It just seems that the excuses are lame - in the old days "the dog ate the homework" and today "the Internet was down".
I would like to see warp being successful just like anyone else, I am just observing the warning signs.
I would like to see warp being successful just like anyone else, I am just observing the warning signs.
There's no outsourcing here. The vpn developer has become part of the team but prefers to stay anon. He has little patience for this forum, which I understand.
Instead of releasing a non-working beta I did the most sensitive thing which was to postpone it until it works and to deliver an earlier version - so you see this is not vaporware.
Or should I get a lame excuse instead? Ok, I forgot my magic wand in the back of Satoshi's super golden yacht-plane.
March 07, 2016, 02:47:57 AM
Observing what is going on here I get the same feeling as with Axiom (where I lost some). The warp dev also seems to be outsourcing his dev work, which in itself is not a problem, just that it creates more risk especially if the 3rd party is not joining the party. At some stage also the funds will run out. It just seems that the excuses are lame - in the old days "the dog ate the homework" and today "the Internet was down".
I would like to see warp being successful just like anyone else, I am just observing the warning signs.
I would like to see warp being successful just like anyone else, I am just observing the warning signs.
And if you read between the lines you see "I want to buy cheaper WARP"
Or maybe just impatient? Quite clever I must say, almost sold some... ALMOST 
Exactly the same though than you!
March 07, 2016, 02:01:28 AM
Observing what is going on here I get the same feeling as with Axiom (where I lost some). The warp dev also seems to be outsourcing his dev work, which in itself is not a problem, just that it creates more risk especially if the 3rd party is not joining the party. At some stage also the funds will run out. It just seems that the excuses are lame - in the old days "the dog ate the homework" and today "the Internet was down".
I would like to see warp being successful just like anyone else, I am just observing the warning signs.
I would like to see warp being successful just like anyone else, I am just observing the warning signs.
And if you read between the lines you see "I want to buy cheaper WARP"
Or maybe just impatient? Quite clever I must say, almost sold some... ALMOST March 06, 2016, 11:58:53 PM
Observing what is going on here I get the same feeling as with Axiom (where I lost some). The warp dev also seems to be outsourcing his dev work, which in itself is not a problem, just that it creates more risk especially if the 3rd party is not joining the party. At some stage also the funds will run out. It just seems that the excuses are lame - in the old days "the dog ate the homework" and today "the Internet was down".
I would like to see warp being successful just like anyone else, I am just observing the warning signs.
I would like to see warp being successful just like anyone else, I am just observing the warning signs.
March 06, 2016, 11:04:39 PM
just wondering, for winblows 7 and the 1.0.5 wallet, is there an .ovpn file I should be using for the openvpn config? or should I just have to have openvpn installed and start the in-wallet vpn function?
Jump to: