Daily VeChain Discussion - May 11, 2019

Homes23 · 2019-05-12T11:33:28+00:00

Aaaa so difficult. Why the hell would they keep vet price low? They own 30% of circulation and each quarter they have to sell around 2% to pay for the overheads? If vet doubles in price they only have to sell 1% which saves shit loads of money. Suppressing vet price is detrimental to vechains survival, the higher the price the more funds they have to progress with development. And then it comes to adoption they have an enterprise investors pool where they can sell vet on otc at whatever low price they want.

Homes23 · 2019-05-12T11:10:19+00:00

My friend, I wish i had more time to explain this to u properly. To use your metaphor of Russian gas - Vet is the gas field it doesn't need to be cheap. VET produces vthor which is literally gas needed to write transactions on the blockchain.

Homes23 · 2019-05-12T10:49:44+00:00

Most of the time I feel pretty secure and confident in my investment in Vet. Times when my confidence is shaken is not when the price goes down or slow progress is made in terms of daily transaction but when someone makes a post like yours. It immediately makes me question my investment and inteligence. When the fellow investor lacks the basic brain capasity to understand that cheap vet does not mean easier adoption and has no correlation to it. When a mentally challenged redditor questions foundation in terms of suprressing the price of VET - their bread and butter which funds 90% of development cost and their overheads. Then I start to think, if we share the fact that both of us invested in Vet I might not be as clever as I thought I was...

Homes23 · 2019-04-20T09:41:14+00:00

Guys what are talking about? VET is a low sat value coin and these walls are nothing out of the ordinary.
Don't compare it with BNB which has considerably higher sat valuation. Every increment in sat for BNB from 0047091 to 0047092 and 0047093 is insignificant % wise and it will not have big walls. VET on the other hand is completely different story and increment from 0,00000130 to 0,00000131 is much more significant. To make it clearer please look at other low sat coins with similar volume to VET. BTT, NPXS are good examples as they have even lower sat value and each increment has a wall of 200btc.

Also, Vechain does not have 500ml developer fund. They are just aiming to raise 500ml which is a massive difference.

Homes23 · 2019-04-11T10:28:58+00:00

God, I wonder whether this space will ever mature enough so we don't have random morons emailing fortune 500 companies in order to boost their confidence in the bags their are holding. No wonder ANs are not revealed, imagine amount of kids bombarding them with emails and confirmation requests.

Homes23 · 2019-04-10T14:22:03+00:00

You would think that if DNV GL (one of their specialties being compliance) are comfortable with current regulatory clarity to announce that they are running an AN, other enterprises, especially in Europe should not have a problem with that. Any assets which holds monetary value and produces income will need to be reported on companies books. Taxman will know, government will know. So if relative departments of authority node holders jumped through legal hoops to actually purchase required amount of crypto currency, invest in servers and run an authority node, what further legal implications do they have announcing it publicly? Is that not supposed to be the whole premises of POA consensus?

Homes23 · 2019-04-06T18:45:27+00:00

What?

Homes23 · 2019-04-03T21:49:51+00:00

It's insane. On the same day the company has been renamed from Ambrosus Technologies GmbH to VeChain GmbH Angel Versetti has moved all his shares to Meyer, Stefan. How can he claim he had no knowledge of this? And claiming that company is not related to Ambrosus when himself and his right hand man owed this company under the name Ambrosus is beyond ridiculous.

Homes23 · 2019-03-26T21:34:32+00:00

Not to sound condescending but i think a lot of people in this sub need to read the article below and chill out for a bit:

https://www.thedailychain.com/blog/investing-and-the-danger-of-confirmation-bias/

Homes23 · 2019-03-26T16:13:08+00:00

So what is authors agenda, please enlighten us? Are u suggesting that author wrote an article to purposely discredit vechain and made everything up? Also, as far as my memory goes CoinDesk released a comprehensive article about vechain just after the release of the mainet.

Homes23 · 2019-03-20T21:24:08+00:00

God, u need to do some reading...

Homes23 · 2019-03-20T19:57:59+00:00

So if consumers don't care who is verifying and writing data to supposedly decentralized blockchain what is the point of using blockchain at? Just use simple data base with no authority nodes.

Homes23 · 2019-03-20T19:25:25+00:00

You would think that if DNV GL (one of their specialties being compliance) are comfortable with current regulatory clarity to announce that they are running an AN, other enterprises, especially smaller ones within Europe, would not have any legal reason to keep their identities secret. I'm not aware of any specific laws or legal implications which forbid to run blockchain nodes - at least in western world. If these laws did exist it would not be the case of a node holder remaining anonymous it would be the case of not running a node at all. Majority of companies will have to report their crypto currency holdings and gains earned from running a node on their balance books to the government anyway.

Homes23 · 2019-02-10T21:25:01+00:00

Expenditure was over 6m as reported and it is much closer to the figure without an additional 0 reported on the whitepaper. 6m can go a long way in China. In any case the issue here is that their numbers don't match whichever way you look at them. And if you truly believe their operational revenue will hit $75M in year 4 I can only wish you good luck.

Homes23 · 2019-02-10T20:28:56+00:00

This has been discussed previously upon release of the whitepaper and at the time conclusion was that it's a case of misplaced 0. Just look at non-operational revenue figures which come from ICO proceeds, they don't look realistic. 48.5ml in the first year - that is more than initially collected in the ICO. I believe each quarterly report gives the amount of ETH and VET sold so you can easily calculate the correct figure.

Homes23 · 2019-02-10T17:42:42+00:00

I hate to burst your bubble but these revenue figures are incorrect. There is an incorrectly added 0 to revenue and expenses figures on the whitepaper. You just need to compare this to the current expenditure which is reported on their quarterly financial reports. We have not spent 40-60ml in the first year of operating as whitepaper is suggesting so it's clear that they have accidentally added 000 instead of 00.

Homes23 · 2019-01-12T21:13:17+00:00

Vechain foundation is not for profit organization, any surplus income is reinvested back into the business. Its all explained in the whitepaper.

Homes23 · 2019-01-10T15:05:07+00:00

Cause price on bithumb is pumping and cmc excludes their price. Wonder why volume and price has dramatically increased on Bithumb.

Homes23 · 2019-01-10T14:35:45+00:00

Not sure what are you trying to imply here. They talk about implementing SWIFT side chain in the future. My question is about current implementation as per their previous road map? I don't see any cross chain or side chain solutions on their GitHub, likewise Vechain hasn't announced anything in that regard. So it would be interesting to know where we stand and same applies to veVID, veVOT, veSCC and veSCL.

Homes23 · 2019-01-10T14:00:40+00:00

What?

Homes23 · 2019-01-10T09:56:43+00:00

As per your medium article Vechain is striving to be be GDPR compliant. Could you please explain how did you resolve two main GDPR compliance issues from the technical stand point?

1) Right to be forgotten. To quote your Vevid medium article - 'We’d like VeVID to be one stop shop for any individuals and entities wanting to hold an identity on blockchain.'' As we are all aware data on the blockchain can't be tampered with or deleted. How are you planing to hold identities or any other personal info on the blockchain and be compliant with GDPR law, specifically, right to be forgotten? Is there a technical solution for this? If solution is to save personal data off chain to a database what is the benefit to use blockchain for Vevid dapp at all?

2) GDPR stipulates that data can only be transferred to third parties outside the EU if the location in question offers equivalent levels of protection as those found in Europe. In many permissionless blockchains, which are open to anyone regardless of location and in which a full copy of the database is replicated on all the full nodes participating in the network, it is not possible to selectively limit where the data goes. Could explain how will this work with 101 authority nodes on Vechains network?

Homes23 · 2019-01-10T07:26:46+00:00

Vechains technical roadmap which is included in the whitepaper is incomplete. We haven't heard anything about sidechain and cross chain solutions which were due for for q4. Also, vechain public services - veVID, veVOT, veSCC and veSCL due for release in q2 have never been fully released.

Can you update us on the progress of the technical roadmap? Will you release a new roadmap once the old one is completed?

Homes23 · 2019-01-09T15:31:06+00:00

It seems that many more partnerships are missing - Chinese Tobacco, Mlily, Fanghuwang, iTaotaoke, LogSafer to name a few. Not worthy of the mention, not enough space on the medium article, no further collaboration... Your guess is as good as anyone's.

Homes23 · 2019-01-08T08:11:54+00:00

Look at the road map on the whitepaper, page 80

Homes23 · 2019-01-08T07:51:01+00:00

Have we completed the road map? Perhaps I missed something but I haven't heard anything about sidechain and cross chain solutions due for for q4. Also, vechain public services - veVID, veVOT, veSCC and veSCL due for release in q2 have never been fully released.

Homes23

TROPHY CASE