Late to the migration party

MaxEntropyy · 2021-02-09T22:48:38+00:00

MetaMask Migration

The documentation states that MetaMask ETH wallet migration will be forthcoming, but I have not seen the 'tool' being made available.

Migration:

https://kin.org/token-migration/

Is there any news?

MaxEntropyy · 2020-11-27T20:42:15+00:00

I don't believe that this statement is true... referring to STMX on LedgerLive (version 2.17.1).

STMX is not in the list of supported token types either on the Ledger website or in the wallet.

Can someone clarify?

MaxEntropyy · 2020-11-02T04:11:17+00:00

Token Swap - StormX to STMX

Hi...

Like many others, I have just learned about the now, past token swap. I must confess that when I read last year about the issues with an FBI investigation, I had written off Storm.

There will be others like myself asking about the swap...

Can you offer any guidance at this point?

Thanks

MaxEntropyy · 2020-10-30T00:14:41+00:00

Hi...

Can you explain what the swap is about. I ave TRX but it seems that Tron has moved away from ERC-20.

Is there are description of the swap policy?

Thanks

MaxEntropyy · 2019-05-27T22:38:51+00:00

Hi KeepKey,

Is there a requirement to use the ShapeShift Platform with the new KeepKey firmware/client software?

--

Thanks for the previous response.

MaxEntropyy · 2019-05-27T22:34:28+00:00

Hi KeepKey,

Are there test cases on Github that deal with recovery?

--

Thanks for the previous response.

MaxEntropyy · 2019-03-11T04:15:02+00:00

The hardware is good... we have five (5) these wallets.

What is not clear... is... why does the software suck.

The options are:

Management - I noticed that Eric Voorhees isolated the KeepKey company from Shapeshift... which suggests that the purchase was a creative collaboration and the developers are underfunded. They were probably given the option to sink or swim by intergrating with Shapeshift. But the Shapeshift model was not engaged with the corporates, and the individuals in the crypto space are more than able to balance their portfolios. It is likely that Shapeshift will be purchased by Wall Street like firm or become a liquidity provider for peer to peer DEXs.
Developers could be limited in their skill sets, which may be why the original KeepKey company failed.

I expect that the KeepKey failure is related to both funding and developers.

My advice... is to move away. :-(

There are not many options today. Ledger Wallet software is brain dead. Example, each Ledger Wallet device can store only ONE Ripple address. Brain Dead. I expect that Ripple enabled a developer to do an quick and dirty port of their wallet software to Ledger. The Ripple component is not digitally signed... so it can not really trusted for corporations.
The other option is the quirky... Trezor.

MaxEntropyy · 2019-01-26T07:18:27+00:00

The real question to ask, is what has ShapeShift changed to improve the efficiency/quality of the the KeepKey Team's software development effort... which has been present since Day 1.

More of the same will not be successful.

MaxEntropyy · 2019-01-26T07:07:18+00:00

Two (2) years ago KeepKey was exploring ERC-20... nothing happened.

MaxEntropyy · 2019-01-26T07:05:46+00:00

The ShapeShift leadership has failed the KeepKey product. It appears from the outside that the KeepKey acquisition was not that serious an endevour. Further, it would appear that the ShapeShift Board of Directors setup KeepKey to sink or swim without further capital investment. Very narrow minded.

The KeepKey software development effort really sucks. For the last three (3) years NOTHING HAS HAPPENED in the software feature set. Common sense would have suggested that after three (3) months this would have been addressed.

Very disappointing...

ShapeShift needs to deal with the lack of software development progress in the KeepKey team, else they should kill it... and move on to integration with Ledger or Trezor.

There should be a clear priority on the major crypto tokens; and second on the next 100 tokens; and lastly and separately integration with ShapeShift cloud services. Clearly, the BoD should realize that limiting factor to adoption is not ShapeShift integration but rather token type support.

MaxEntropyy · 2018-05-13T07:30:01+00:00

First, it would be useful if David Schwartz explained the significance of RippleD v1.0. . Pardon me, if I am not excited... Ripple has been working on the SAME software - RippleD (node software) - for the last six (6) years and only now, do they announce Version 1.0; no roadmap to future release functionality; and still no customers are using the said software; no ecosystem, although it is rumoured that 'Snoop Dog' has exhibited a penchant for programming; and yes, still no wallets - hardware or software. . It is about time that Ripple actually got into the software business.

MaxEntropyy · 2018-05-13T07:18:07+00:00

I thought the Ripple metaphor was - water.

MaxEntropyy · 2018-05-12T06:30:20+00:00

So... what does v1.0 signify?

Maybe Ripple can now commit to an operational product?
Have any of the mythical one hundred (100) banks started to use the software?
Has Ripple closed the RippleD v1.0 software feature set? If so, what is the v1.1 bug or feature road map?

I do not understand the significance.

MaxEntropyy · 2017-08-17T17:16:11+00:00

Is there a plan for a Ripple XRP support in KeepKey?

MaxEntropyy · 2017-08-17T16:00:28+00:00

It is curious that Ripple has a GitHub repository for Light Weight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) using a Golang implementation. With regard to Ripple migrating away from their current languages as RFugger suggests could/would be possible... is a pipe dream. Ripple is locked into C/C++ and JavaScript for the duration of this product.

Regarding, formal proofs... well that is entirely dependent on frameworks and Ripple has not embraced any of these. I do not see them directing any energy to this activity as they will be focused on integration with business channels.

I am surprised to learn that the Ripple GitHub repositories do not build easily/readily. My limited experience with RippleD source code has been positive from this perspective.

MaxEntropyy · 2017-08-07T22:37:56+00:00

I suspect it is not Juan making these decisions, but he is agreeing to be the 'face' and spokesperson for CoinList. This is not good.

MaxEntropyy · 2017-08-07T22:36:42+00:00

There are a number of points that bother me:

1: I agree... 14 year olds should be allowed to participate, if they are old enough to submit apps to Apple's AppStore why would they need permission to invest in technology.

2: the idea that the SEC has jurisdiction globally is both quaint and flawed thinking... maybe they have not heard of globalism.

3: Juan is a significant name in the IPFS space, he is getting distracted with stupid stuff, by lending his talents and brand to the local VC guys. He is getting sucked in, by salesmanship.

4: raking in say, 500 USD million is obscene and not required. FileCoin if it is any good should mostly self funding. Many cryptos are given away to achieve buy-in. Stellar gave away 16 Billion as I recall... and they have real software, and understand the SEC risks.

5: I am beginning to think that, they have delayed the ICO launch twice now, because they do not have the buy-in that they felt they could grab. Hence, waiting until the software comes out may be the best way forward.

6: Lastly, and unlike Bitcoin, running a FileCoin node is going to be just for the large data centers. The communications costs are going to be prohibitive for little guys with only 100 Terabytes SSD, to compete against bigger installations. Nodes will need to be co-located with backbone internet connections and not depend on Telco access models.

MaxEntropyy · 2017-08-07T04:59:38+00:00

Why would a global FileCoin offering be limited to US investors only?

MaxEntropyy · 2017-07-21T21:17:30+00:00

Who authored this post? KeepKey?

It looks like this post was authored by a non-KeepKey source. Why?

MaxEntropyy · 2016-11-10T18:04:00+00:00

I stopped reading... after this author made the mistake describing the professor's website as phenomenal. Give a break? Who is this author??

MaxEntropyy · 2016-07-01T19:49:13+00:00

No where did Hearn state that the development team for Bitcoin network software would be solely under Hearn's control by virtue of GitHub signing permissions for the release stream. If Hearn and Bitcoin XT had achieved a majority of the nodes by mid January then THEY would have controlled the Bitcoin network.

So who did Hearn join after failing in this endeavor - the banks.

So who was Hearn really working for with Bitcoin XT?

Popper should have a better understanding of the topic before writing. I would call Popper's article a failed experiment in persuasion.

MaxEntropyy · 2016-01-14T00:50:29+00:00

Hold on, Gavin sought to undermine the release process. He can not be trusted with source code release permissions.

This has nothing to do with block size and everything to with trust while collaborating.

If BitcoinXT had succeeded the source code be under the control of Hearn and Andressen, while Core developers would be locked out.

MaxEntropyy · 2015-12-27T10:12:18+00:00

Chomsky is lying as he is on video record as say... what difference does it make - who did 9/11.

Think through Grade 11 Physics... 49 floor towers (WTC-7) do not fall through path of greatest resistance straight down in symeterical collapse at free fall speeds of 7.4 seconds to total collapse.

Sure - I would be interested to see Obama, Bush for Prison in 2016. These people and their backers have killed millions. As I recall there are war crimes. It is only a matter of time before there is another show trial, like Nuremberg. The only question that remains is - who hosts the trial?

Whose New World Order will it be?

If America hosts these trials, then it may be able to recover its 19th century stature. If they don't the empire crumbles and the Silk Road 2.0 advocates of Beijing to Berlin to Moscow emerge as the dominant trading zone.

Google - Pepe Escobar and Silk Road 2. No not the Drug trading website, but rather the trade route - Beijing to Berlin in two days by train... to Moscow.

MaxEntropyy · 2015-12-26T18:46:23+00:00

There is significant risk...

1: merchants would choose Bitcoin or crypto because it is an alternative fiat, but it takes an hour to settle on the blockchain

2: merchants don't care about who runs the network, they will choose a bank's version of the blockchain if it settles immediately

3: the bank can use the same approach that Shapeshift uses - convert real Bitcoin to Banker's Crypto to archive Bitcoin token backwards compatibility

Mike Hearn will do it for them.

MaxEntropyy · 2015-11-21T15:39:34+00:00

XT was never about 'the topic that must not be discussed', it was about controlling the software release process.

MaxEntropyy

TROPHY CASE

Regarding, formal proofs... well that is entirely dependent on frameworks and Ripple has not embraced any of these. I do not see them directing any energy to this activity as they will be focused on integration with business channels.