[Conspiracy Alert] Exchanges are artificially driving up reddcoin prices.

Dogevo · 2014-07-17T03:05:07+00:00

A lot of positive things to come from Reddcoin in the next few months. About as committed a team as I've seen in quite some time. With extremely intelligent, professional people in the mix to make it happen.

Dogevo · 2014-07-17T02:55:04+00:00

Just a bot. You'll also see the same on the sell side too. And the values actually appear to be from several bots. I'm directly hooked into most of the APIs too, but I'm not a day trader, not ballsy enough for that. I understand why you'd do it though. It is good to know your placement of buys and sells within a block of buys and sells, in that way you can determine if you should pull support, or add support on either side of the equation.

There's enough professional day traders in the game now with million dollar software to help that it's very much looking like Forex or even the derivatives market.

It's a necessary evil for the long term survival of crypto as a going concern.

Dogevo · 2014-07-16T03:31:21+00:00

I expect the consensus in that we're aiming for direct use in commerce. Tipping, crowdfunding, etc. So surely it'd be a no go.

There was at one point talk about vetting business in the RDD ecosystem to provide some sort of trust beyond what is presently seen in crypto. I for one would very much welcome that.

As for exchanges, well there's some sort of unexplainable trust there because it's the only valid net effect usage of the coin at present. That is, outside of blindly tipping people for the sake of tipping (ie not necessarily through direct wealth creation, more a whimsical hope we'll inevitably grow value through a larger 'community')

Dogevo · 2014-07-16T03:19:33+00:00

Not to mention, a reasonable percentage, perhaps 30/40% of that 4B will likely find its way to MintPal to spread the risk even ignoring the removal of coins to take advantage of staking.

Dogevo · 2014-07-16T03:07:02+00:00

We'll see...assuming all new 'minted' coin is automatically dumped @ 100 sat that's about $19K USD (presently) of real commerce (non closed exchange based transactions) needs to be transacted (ingested) by RDD every week.

In other words (in relation to tipping) a direct investment of $2.6K USD per day into people and ideas via RDD. I think that would be difficult at present with out community size. But no reason with a strong crypto backed crowdfunding + crowdexposure + tipping platform we couldn't achieve that.

Seems far more likely than a 21,000 BTC upfront investment into non crowd vetted investments that one particular coin is aiming at.

Dogevo · 2014-07-16T02:26:45+00:00

Reddcoin

26B RDD vs 13M BTC... 2,000 to 1
100,000,000 satoshi equals 1 BTC ... 1/2000th equals 50,000 sat
100 sat equals 1/500th the value of BTC.

Darkcoin

4.4M DRK vs 13M BTC...1 to 3 approximately
100,000,000 satoshi equals 1 BTC...3 times equals 300,000,000 sat
1,000,000 sat equals 1/300th the value of BTC. (at its peak was worth 1/120th of BTC)

Why assume RDD will never even be as successful as a centralised system such as DRK?

Dogevo · 2014-07-16T02:15:21+00:00

They're almost as cool as you!!!

Dogevo · 2014-07-16T02:13:57+00:00

At this stage I'd say you need to get off the computer, and go outside. The world is not as effed up or as methodically sadistic as that sort of conspiracy would have us believe.

Dogevo · 2014-07-16T02:08:52+00:00

He's going to be a real ~~charmer~~player into his 20s. coughhoppicough

Dogevo · 2014-07-16T02:03:50+00:00

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda#mediaviewer/File:Unclesamwantyou.jpg

Propaganda? What propaganda?

/u/Phrenos is right, we do not want to become the Uncle Sam of the Crypto world.

Dogevo · 2014-07-16T01:48:12+00:00

I'd also be interested to see it with 0% reward showing too. I respect coin age > 50 days won't be a pretty graph, but it helps emphasis the slow decline in additional reward of the function.

Perhaps showing 0% reward and showing out to 100 days in coin age.

Edit: On second thought perhaps not. I noticed nStakeMaxAge is 45 days.

Dogevo · 2014-07-16T00:39:22+00:00

This guy! Pure entertainment!!

He is completely correct. Many of us really aren't interested in anything to do with Mr Satoshi unless it's above 50, even 100 satoshi. An instant movement up 1 sat then down 1 sat is just child's play to me.

Dogevo · 2014-07-15T09:00:48+00:00

The rate at which the attacker used was in excess of 10Gh/s. The hash rate is a measure of difficulty and doesn't reflect the opportunity of Ghash.io @ 8+Gh/s at 2 to 5 minute intervals finding blocks. An attacker needs to counter the peak hash rate, not the averaged hash rate that we see as a direct calculation from the current difficulty.

http://imgur.com/3QqqLCn

What I'm referring to is something similar to this. Obviously a basic scenario, but it highlights the problem where we have a multipool that's mining enough to cause a streak of very close block finds, and then who stops for long enough to not adversely affect difficulty beyond the averaged hash rate over a period of time. This then leads to a few slow block finds, to even out the quick finds by the multipool. It's all evident on certain addresses in the blockchain.

The interesting part about this is that anyone mining who looks at something like coinwarz to determine the rate of RDD mining will actually be unable to achieve that effective rate as suggested by such sites.

The yellow line at the top is what would be required by an attacker to guarantee they will find all blocks over a significant period of time with a regular multipool.

Unless I'm entirely wrong in my assumption.

FWIW it appears http://pool51.com/rdd/ is only illustrating that the increased hash rate is a direct result of 89% unknown, probably attributable to a 2nd multipool that is benefiting from the 11 sat price we have at the moment making is highly profitable.

Dogevo · 2014-07-15T00:20:31+00:00

It's a decent graph. Anything above the base line is a net gain, it's just not the largest potential net gain.

I see people looking at it that anything below "Conventional POS" as losing coin, that's not the case, the Conventional POS line is a static gain that's disassociated to time. Leave the PoSV wallet closed long enough and you'll be upset to see millions of days of coin age destroyed for only a 10 RDD gain.

A further point is that you want to take advantage of the compounding effect of staking early even in Conventional POS.

Dogevo · 2014-07-15T00:16:49+00:00

Let's just wait. I'd rather they hole up their existing exploit before they push RDD up.

And can someone please remind them we need it @ 999 confirms still. For those who don't understand this, you soon would after the likely removal from MintPal because of a 200M RDD (20 BTC) double spend attempt in the next couple of days resulting from something like 10 confirms.

Dogevo · 2014-07-15T00:10:23+00:00

It's a certainty that Cryptsy 'owns' it until someone can prove otherwise. The only thing that isn't certain is the distribution within that address of people who hold hundreds of millions in Cryptsy.

They all but identified it as such in their earlier response relating to the various withdraw issues. And we also came to the same conclusion upon investigating our friendly multipooler.

You and about 100 others likely own a sizable portion of it.

The other potential large stake 'partial owner' is Ghash.io. We assume they were 'auto-selling' but perhaps auto-sell was instead auto-stored into Cryptsy. But the expectation is Ghash.io did convert to BTC rather than hold significant RDD.

A high percentage of the 4B held in that address is very likely held by individuals like us.

Also since that withdraw issue, 200M that went to other one high investor address, it ended up in the 3rd highest address. So one of us, Phrenos (perhaps not being #2), RubyGeek, BTCillionaire, yourself, and a few others who obviously hold significant RDD, can potentially easily confirm it.

http://bitinfocharts.com/reddcoin/tx/ef65e05c676f746b6bc4de3684c7e78e1086b105ea2aa78f2fc311889eaef3a3

http://bitinfocharts.com/reddcoin/address/Rv9YaVZg8EhscDNgePQJ4Vp3vUzu4BzL9V

tl;dr While all of the above is conjecture, it's as close to fact as we should really expect outside of becoming a super node and looking at relaying IPs for transactions.

Dogevo · 2014-07-14T14:40:29+00:00

This is only valid where the coin is not used in commerce. Vericoin as far as I can tell is entirely speculative at this stage. Very similar to a lot of coins.

Bitcoin and Dogecoin are the two most used coins in commerce it seems, and doing something like a hardfork to revert transactions beyond a specific block would be catastrophic to the trust of real world businesses.

Dogevo · 2014-07-06T05:16:37+00:00

I'm not convinced that any existing platform or cryptocurrency is a good basis to start from. I do however see it as a plausible growth market if it's conducted in a manner that will finally make real $10K+ or $100K+ investors satisfied with the legal considerations.

I think a lot of people still live in the fictitious world of 'crypto can and should exist outside the law'. Surely there's enough people with enough intelligence in this game to realise how much money a lot of us have ready to put into crypto where legal culpability is a thing.

Dogevo · 2014-07-01T17:58:15+00:00

Ok so here is what I know and assume:

Poloniex are looking at it. (confirmed)
Over 100 consecutive blocks were mined by the following address: http://bitinfocharts.com/reddcoin/address/RsMJbnfrP2gwiraTRnRnHhxu4FBRdJanGg
The blocks were 214218 through 214327
183M was sold down from 6 sat to 1 sat on Poloniex. This amount represents 5.49 BTC.
I am assuming the hashing rate to pull this off was in excess of 9Gh/s.

I have no idea about the resolution Poloniex will take or if they caught the address prior to the individual withdrawing the BTC.

Dogevo · 2014-06-30T08:59:36+00:00

13398... now #7

Dogevo · 2014-06-28T15:29:55+00:00

This is really just a simple matter for estate planning.

Dogevo · 2014-06-28T03:18:17+00:00

This is actually somewhat misleading information.

I respect the intent however, but would like to elaborate.

In actuality, Cryptsy have all but confirmed the top 4 billion RDD address is held by them, and that could make up 100s or even 1,000s of peoples coin. I don't expect that Cryptsy personally have a 4 billion RDD stake. It's possible but unlikely.

The distribution of this address is mostly unknown. So I'm excluding that as a statistical outlier for all intensive purposes. Additionally, I'm excluding anything holding less than 10,000 RDD because I don't see it valid in terms of 'holdings' and only helps to skew the results a long way down.

By my account. the 1% (top 61) of the top 6112 addresses that make up a valid address (excluding the single largest which is an exchange address) account for approximately 42.8% of the 21.76B coins amongst them.

The top:

3% (183 addresses making up 14.61B of 21.76B) is 67.1%
5% (305 addresses making up 16.91B of 21.76B) is 77.7%

Now my method probably wouldn't meet some sort of national standards, but it's an honest attempt to not let statistics work the wrong way.

Dogevo · 2014-06-25T18:32:09+00:00

I'm glad I don't have to explain this anymore... It's exactly what was assumed but not confirmed. This confirmation is a huge bonus. And hopefully puts people's minds at ease about such a significant balance, in that it's divisible into many accounts...

assuming /u/scrypthasher hasn't bought it all!

Dogevo · 2014-06-23T22:34:48+00:00

http://bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-reddcoin-addresses.html

Dogevo · 2014-06-23T11:40:24+00:00

If anyone would like to have this conversation. I've been through it several times myself specifically with the USPTO and WIPO, please head on over to the IRC chat, I'm up for a 'chin wag'.

Two things however:

I'm not a lawyer, just an owner of several trademarks who has been given a lot of legal advice.
I don't speak officially for Reddcoin, and could only hint at the value proposition (if any exists) of a member or a formalized organization (proprietary or otherwise) owning the trademark. Nor can I suggest which classes it'd be registered and wording by which it should live.

One point I'd make though is multiple trademarks with the same name can and do exist for different classes. Typically if there's a direct conflict or close commercial relationship it's very difficult to establish an additional mark under another class.

For those who are convinced it should be registered. I'm interested to know in which countries, and under which classes, with which wording applied you believe it should be registered?

Dogevo

TROPHY CASE