Topic: [XC][XCurrency] Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat / Pos - page 167. (Read 1484218 times)

This tech already exists in another currency which have this as their primary focus. I like the idea. But now you will fundraise this tech "again"? Great plans are good, but its taking away the focus on XC which is a excellent currency. And now i am starting to get worried, and the reason for this is that i have seen these great plans before in other context where talented people have lost their focus because they want to much. In 90% the plans are spinning out of control. In this case i am concerned that XC will loose ground.

More and more people are noticing this, and the answer that they get "trust us, its best for XC" like some sort of elitistic elite. BUT, if you do not have the peoples support in this you will loose. This is not some experiment, people invest real money into this.. im supporting wtih 1900XC, not much. But when 100 people with the same amount starting to get as confused as i am regarding Dan`s involvement in other currencys and this great plans, poeple will cash out.

I agree, monetising leveraged networks is fantastic logic and should be encouraged and is a logical way to motivate growth. I do believe that sharing resource to become more powerful is also attractive. I believe it does however, in my opinion, come with some drawbacks in the proposed form of a bridged network. I don't like a circle within a circle i cannot see how its a step forward. I see it only as a reaction to current market and projected market variables. And thats where it, for me gets a bit scary because i see bias towards money and a move away from tech and its relevance to begin with.

i believe that collaborating can be done without leveraging each others resources in this way and batching it in a group to frame it as "offering diversity i'm a one stop network shop" When its already there to begin with just not in this form. I believing solving the issue of teams and projects not collaborating with each other can and should be solved in a different way and will be down the track.

Not in one that results in a bridge network, but one that allows every network to be completely decentralized yet still sharing talent and tech as it is all open sourced mostly anyways! I believe a foundation that pertains to the alt coin industry is a broader and much wiser proposal one. With all innovative devs as panelists, a foundation where vc can come and speak with the talent directly through a foundation which holds all of the innovative development talent and not one that holds only a select few. I believe its possible within a foundation like that, the devs can collaborate with each other and share tech and their community resource to enhance and enrich the altcoin space and relevance on a much larger and more efficient scale.

I don't mean to come across that i discount the attractiveness of the bridged network proposal. I only want to show i understand and accept that from a programmers view it would make sense to think of things in terms of bubbles and try to form larger ones to connect to each other (Xbridge proposal). I would like to demonstrate that i would like to look at it as one big bubble trying to connect that to mainstream, its resource and not limit it to a select few that contains resource made up of mostly copied tech and top heavy with day traders/pump crews to begin with.

So to me its as you say "fee" meaning money. And i do agree it needs to sustain itself in some way; this whole industry via moentising its networks. But i don't believe it needs to in a way where it physically represents a corporation absorbing other tech to become stronger. I believe thats moving away from, in many ways what this is all meant to represent and what its fighting to move away from.

Does not mean we should not be having this dialogue in the first place though, its good and i'm sure you already you know that

We'll be sorry to see you go.

I'm also sorry that you're considering leaving for reasons that, in my opinion, are misguided. This is why:

- you worry that XC is " taking on side projects before its core tech and market dominance has fully matured"

- but that's like worrying that Google is diluting itself by creating the internet.

- No, Google can only achieve market dominance *with* the internet.

- In the same way, XC will thrive best by acquiring a broad userbase - through the Blocknet.


We've just given XC a massive increase in users, more revenue sources for Xnode owners, and funds and dev talent by the bucketload.

Really, this is nothing but awesome for XC.

I hope this post terminates this discussion.

- SDC are officially in. For heaven's sake.

- In order for a coin to become part of the Blocknet, its developers will need to code the XBridge into it and release an updated wallet. So not just anyone can add a coin to the Blocknet.

- We're creating the internet of blockchains. There is no incentive for any coin to distance itself. By joining a coin gains a huge userbase for its services *and* the services of other coins. Win-win, massively.

Although i can relate to what you are saying in some way i have also seen the opposite to many times: forced by commercial interested a project is rushed to deliver the goals set any way possible. This can all to easy result in tech thats not extendable and needs a complete re-write for the next fase. That in its turn will result in tech thats only limited (downwards) compatible.
See nothing wrong with already planning the next step when working on the current communication platform.
communicating a future direction != dropping the current work & shifting focus imo

That's like saying that the internet takes away focus from Google.

It doesn't. It enables Google to thrive.

Focus has *not* been lost. A huge userbase for XC has been gained.

You should all setup Xmixers right now. :-)

Hoertest, you really get the concept.

I hope everyone reads your post.

Morning all

You guys should read the thread before repeating questions that have already been answered.

The Blocknet will *not* dilute XC's resources, it will be the biggest powerhouse of resources that crypto has ever seen.

It will significantly grow XC's resources.

 i think the market is still in place here. the magic word is fees. whatever coin you anticipate to get the most "cross usage" from the blocknet because of its distinct architecture you will want to hold in order to earn fees for offering that service. EG i think the xnode and xmixer protocol is the best anon solution and will get alot of usage in the blocknet even from coin holders that have some other kind of anon option in their node ( probably for important transactions, whatever). well thats just my few so i don't won't to start the anon debate here. Of corse i wanna hold XC and host as many mixers as possible. Blocknet in this regard is not one big all in one coin from an investment point of few, there is and will be still good and bad options within the ever growing network. SDC is a great one btw. So what the Blocknet does is increasing your userbase and by so your chance of earning fees while still keepig a market in place . for this regard i hope to see the list of participating coins grow quick and wide. there need to be competition on the blocknet. Then it has the chance to become a new internet and thats the vision as i understand it. Again every coin that generates some kind of revenue for his holders will benefit hugely from this network. the more it grows the better.

This tech already exists in another currency which have this as their primary focus. I like the idea. But now you will fundraise this tech "again"? Great plans are good, but its taking away the focus on XC which is a excellent currency. And now i am starting to get worried, and the reason for this is that i have seen these great plans before in other context where talented people have lost their focus because they want to much. In 90% the plans are spinning out of control. In this case i am concerned that XC will loose ground.

More and more people are noticing this, and the answer that they get "trust us, its best for XC" like some sort of elitistic elite. BUT, if you do not have the peoples support in this you will loose. This is not some experiment, people invest real money into this.. im supporting wtih 1900XC, not much. But when 100 people with the same amount starting to get as confused as i am regarding Dan`s involvement in other currencys and this great plans, poeple will cash out.

I wish I was informed by XC team about Blocknet,also puzzled as to why Qibuck was not approached since Qibuck was the first to approach XC on collab efforts? I do not see Qibuck on the diagram of accepted coins.

Hey guys

I've set up a node but don't have transaction income yet after 12h+

Running throught port 9050

XCurrency.conf

-addnode ... the onions an some regular ones
-rpcallowip=127.0.0.1
-rpcuser=...
-rpcpassword=...
-server=1
-staking=0
-listen=1
-daemon=1
-keypool=100
-gen=0
-genproclimit=-1
-distmode-autonode=1

P2P port running as service

Running 8 connections ...

Something forgotten ??

Bumping for answer.

I can't see how Dan can take on another huge project like the Blocknet. Its been mentioned many times that you guys are up all hours working on XC. Add to that several code reviews and other collaborations. The Blocknet is founded on Xbridge which is based on XC's technology - I can only assume then that Dan will be the main developer on this. XC and Blocknet development sound like two seperate full-time jobs to me.

The "final" Rev 2 was released a month ago and we're still getting updates to fix bugs. Linux and mac wallets are STILL not available after being promised several times that they would to be out by now. The XC Inc. ITO is also now pushed out to 2015. Tor sticks should've been shipped by now. Dan also mentioned a couple weeks ago that a mobile wallet will be released in 2 weeks - that would mean it would be released this weekend, is that still the case?

The list above are not complaints and I'm okay with slight delays here and there (I work on projects all the time) but we have all these delays and now Dan's going to further dilute his attention away from XC?? This will surely slow down XC's development even further. Can we at least get a rough dates for upcoming XC milestones?

I see it as a unique funding attempt to funnel into another. uniting is a good thing but is this really necessary if you remove the market variable?

I'm not sure i stated there was need to change the way a blockchain works? Sorry if i came across that way. They will need to communicate however. Why are there only a few projects listed and a foundation being formed if it is as easy as you seem to think to create it, with their code as is. Why not all 500+ projects if people did in fact not have a choice to opt in/out?

This proposal is a circle within a circle in my opinion and it may not hurt anyone to be in or out although its being sold by a few as that is the case. Its still a choice and not one that someone can make for each community "weather they like it or not".

Think that in theory this could work as long as the bridged services are fee. If not the bridging node has to pay in the relevant coin.

I don't think this indicates lack of focus at all - in fact it shows incredible focus. There is no point building the perfect ecosystem if no-one wants to use it - this looks more like developing on various fronts but in preparation for the launch. I don't think it will slow us down at all and if rev3 were ready today and this were in the pipeline I would have waited for this to come out BEFORE the launch.

Are you sure there is a need for changing how participating coins' blockchains work? You could add a lot of functionality to the wallet and it would still operate in the same network with other vanilla wallets, no voting or forking would happen.

Which would require the users of each coin to vote with their nodes! thus it being a decision made by people to accept it or not!

I'm not really sure what you are getting at but you seem to be of the opinion this is a centralised decision. And to me that mindset tends to be a killer in this industry.

And because all cryptos are (or should be) open source, anyone can do that.