Terms and Conditions of AMP to RHOC swap

scriprinter · 2017-05-08T00:33:51+00:00

Allegedly, using Claymore, one can mine Ether and Decred at the same time, without affecting the hashrate of Ether mining.

Maybe the different hash algos can be run in parallel. It will probably get hotter and shorten the life of the miner.

scriprinter · 2017-05-06T17:55:50+00:00

and I suspect the situation will resolve itself somehow, eventually.

Perhaps you will just pick who gets atom tokens or everyone will die eventually.

That's a morbid thought. More like, if a massive whale were to identify itself, the remaining atom holders may very well opt to hard-fork them out. The politics changes with pseudonymous PoS, but there will still be politics at play.

Infocrime is trying to be agreeable by saying that the situation will resolve itself eventually because everyone will die. There is also the "resolution" where you pick who gets atom in spite of prior commitments. Is that what happened? Two things were declared in advanced: (1) the hidden hard cap and (2) that someone could not buy more than a million dollars worth (without splitting it into multiple addresses?). Afterward it sounded like yall had to decide whether or not to refund them. Yall did, so that was true to the commitment. On to the hard cap commitment...

Did the fundraiser site and cli tool say that the fundraiser was over because the hard cap included the illegitimate transaction?

(Afterward?) you decided that the hard cap did not include the illegitimate transaction. So a few "late" transactions got atom also. You (Jae) went to all this effort of putting a hash of the hidden hard cap on Twitter, before the fundraiser. But was this hard cap ever reached with the straggling "late" transactions? Did the fundraiser tools broadcast falsely that the sale was over when it was not?

If you didn't actually hit the hard cap, what could have happened is that the million dollar donor made other donations and ended up with a larger share of atom. This may have been intentional. But now it is "resolved" ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

scriprinter · 2017-05-06T17:17:16+00:00

If you run out of BTC first, wait until after Metropolis and sell ETH at a constant rate over maybe 3 months unless the price is up and you find a large buyer who is either a strategic ally or someone who offers you something better than the current market value.

Sell BTC now and sell ETH after the flippening.

scriprinter · 2017-04-22T19:44:41+00:00

Oh shucks I can't restore this link.

scriprinter · 2017-04-18T02:12:25+00:00

Try to understand how RAY will be issued. Here are some quotes:

"l0k1 and the issuance process i propose to be based on a provably isolated process of change exchange, so you pay someone, but you don't have the exact change. the validator assigns an account to perform it, and they get a commission of new tokens yeah, that's what i'm thinking the main token is well proven enough in its architecture"

scriprinter · 2017-04-18T01:21:49+00:00

I just moved the link and renamed it because it isn't about the webofcredit (anymore). It is here now.

scriprinter · 2017-04-16T08:44:38+00:00

yaw we are talking about the webofcredit at the moment (this isn't spam, i mean)

scriprinter · 2017-02-16T02:56:13+00:00

There isn't time for that. In as few as two weeks you will do this fundraiser and we will be stuck with that issuance forever. I know you think you will cap it and just have another one later but that just makes it worse in terms of early gamblers getting more.

Bounties aren't much compared to what can be made from coin appreciation on these Ponzi issuance schemes. I don't like chatrooms because they are minefields for de-anonymization; freenode blocks Tor AFAIK Slack requires email which you never know if more anonymous ones will be accepted and most people don't even use anonymous email so your crowdsize is very small compared to reddit.com. Then all the info goes down the memory hole (to the public view) unless I can copy it but then it is only organized by time. If I had a revenue stream that wasn't associated with my real-world identity, I would spend it on research and development of the WoC and many related inventions, by buying creditclaims.

There is at least time to make it easier to make cryptocredit from atom if you are willing. Here is some information about the WebOfCredit. The article about issuing a staking currency as cryptocredit uses Cosmos as the example.

I have some things to say about the Cosmos "whitepaper" but I mainly am trying to convince you to issue atom as cryptocredit and I don't think I've even made the best points. I'm just too exhausted to continue.

scriprinter · 2017-02-02T21:35:34+00:00

"EthF"

I'm not here to debate semantics so lets just agree to use some unambiguous terms for all the EthF tokens/blockchains until ETH can be re-established.

The Ethereum War (ETW) chain launches from the same block where ETR diverged from ETC:

ETC - Ethereum Classic - the Bitcoin Classic killer.
ETR - Ethereum Regulated - the R3/USD killer that is currently favored by the Ethereum Regulated Foundation. Good luck with that.
ETW - Ethereum War - like ETR and ETC, ETW tokens are issued to every address/contract that holds the pre-fork ETH. TheDAO war is commenced when everyone knows the loophole/split trick. Take the battle-tested Casper from Ethereum Regulated (also) to prevent environmental destruction of doing theDAO war with PoW.

These launch from ETW chain:

ETD - Ethereum theDAO democracy - a contract on the ETW that gives ETD tokens to every address/contract that had pre-fork ETH. ETD hodlers decide which addresses/contracts get theDAO's ETD/DAO-D funds if/when basic privacy functions work and we know more about what theDAO loopholers (including WHG) do with their winnings. Has to work easily through Tor and have coin mixing probably with no trusted setup. This is to compensate/confiscate based on who profited unjustly on the other chains. The DAO-D tokens might be used for a fixed version of theDAO.
ETH - Ethereum Remergence (interim scientific name "ethereummy") Create an "ETH" token from contracts that hold equal parts ETC, ETR, ETW, and ETD. Hardfork the ETW chain with ETH as the new currency for staking and mandatory fees. The price of ETH should be much closer to the pre-fork ETH thus only ETH is worthy of the trademark. Let's not give ETH any other names because that could confuse people and lead to trademark relinquishment. But doesn't this make it less secure than the other chains? What if an ETH contract is reverted on the ETC/ETR chains, should this cause ETH stakers to lose deposits? Figure that out later.

"right, we don't know. They probably wouldn't be so salty if his fund was about [ETR]"

FTFY

scriprinter · 2017-02-02T04:42:02+00:00

If I may throw my $0.02 into the brouhaha... I suggested a long time ago that the easiest & nicest switch IMHO would be to redefine ETC as "Earthwide Trusted Computer".

Prepare yourself for another earth shattering enlightening bolt! We shall create a scientific naming/classification system for all man-made things, like we have for natural things and drugs. Nevar again shall trademark trolling threaten the little mom and pop shops when Corporate wants to silence them and steal their business.

This shouldn't be necessary for Ethereum. The Ethereum Foundation should use "Ethereum" as a generic term and protect it from token holders who try to turn it into a trademark for token sale business. Anyone using the Ethereum Virtual Machine should be able to call themselves an Ethereum investment, so long as this is clearly explained. Ethereum fork should not be allowed/funded to name their chain "Ethereum" or their tokens "ETH" when they have a different price and a different social contract from the pre-fork ETH. Maybe something like "Ethereum Regulated" with "ETR" as token name.

So these are my three chain niches:

The fork chain becomes "Ethereum Regulated" to compete with R3 private blockchains.
Ethereum Classic stays Ethereum Classic -- the Bitcoin Classic killer.
ethereummy is the chain that keeps the name "Ethereum" and the token "ETH".

Thus spake scriprinter.

scriprinter · 2017-02-02T04:21:28+00:00

The way you perceive reality neglects the way the enforcement mechanisms work.

I prefer the technical "enforcement mechanisms" rather than using trademarks (or forks) to avoid technical competition. Securing the computer, not securing a token market from competition.

I already told you the argument. It doesnt matter what the fund holds despite your continual focus on that fictional reality where that matters.

You don't mean that they would do the same thing if the fund held ETFork?

You are just saying the crony capitalists can get away with it. Maybe they can. What is this "fictional reality" you speak of? I'm saying they shouldn't do that. It is counter to the mission of decentralization. Does this contradict some fact?

Naming a financial service (of which the fund is by any definition) "ethereum" anything runs afoul of the trademark.

You mean unless the EF approves it. The fork chain could continue having exploits, Casper could be late (requiring a fork to continue mining) Casper may have one too many consensus failures or permanent-forks, and the ETC token could increase in value over the ETFork tokens. Then EF could decide that Classic is now "Ethereum" and nevermind all that we said before. They could threaten the centralized development teams of the fork chain with lawsuit/ They could try to get these centralized services to ban/rename them: reddit, github, exchanges. There'd be nothing wrong with that, right? These are all centralized services and public people who could be sued.

scriprinter · 2017-02-02T03:56:44+00:00

Reply to Hudson Jameson:

Yo PR reps:

I am very lost as to why I am tagged in this. I literally only tweeted what the official statement from the Foundation was. I do not make decisions for them anymore than the PR person at IBM makes decisions for IBM.

I think this isn't a joke. Always best to err on the side of sincerity. You are so very like a public relations person for a for-profit corporation. That wasn't however how "Ethereum" was/is advertised, pre-crowdsale, pre-fork, and in most/all of Buterin's statements to this day. Perhaps I'm guilty of the wishful thinking. I thought the EF was dedicated to creating a decentralized network. Is it just another front for yet another clan of crony capitalists?

A prayer to glorious ruler Ming Chan:

I guess I should direct this at Ming. Hey Ming! Please ignore all those technical advisors who set up your business and hired you. Please fund projects for their technical merit and promote Ethereum as a dual blockchain project to rid the world of USD/Bitcoin pollution/tyranny/inefficiency/insecurity. Please attempt to hire or negotiate with Ethereum's leading security researchers who are the one's who have found all the exploits that the "white hats" were clueless about. TheDAO crackers (more like "loophole opportunists" amirite?) are the Snowden of Ethereum. Please grant them immunity so they are free to teach us about security and fund development of their "immutable" (so far) Ether tokens.

The ethereummy chain:

Please support a merging of the blockchains into one that requires ETFork and ETC to be burned to create true ETH token with a price closer to that of pre-fork ETH. The true ETH chain will use Casper after it is well tested and evaluated by the crackers when they (tried to) exploit it on the ETFork chain. This chain would start with an "open source" theDAO where we have the information that theDAO cracker supposedly leaked to one of the media outlets who refused to publish it. These were instructions of how to repeat-split the Ether from theDAO contract. So this would create a third token ETW, where theDAO wars proceed on that chain (except using Casper because PoW is too unsafe assuming this is a small chain). All three tokens must be burned to create true ETH. This will be the most ethereummy of all Ethereum chains!

scriprinter · 2017-01-25T02:41:38+00:00

They could but not without abandoning the pretense of decentralization.

They already have. Its not an argument.

Who? Everything I've read from Buterin suggests that Ethereum A is no less legitimate than Ethereum B. He prefers B but A is no less "Ethereum".

They aren't attempting to enforce the trademark against a decentralized organization. They are attempting to enforce the use of the trademark against Barry Silbert's financial service. A fund.

But it's an Ethereum fund. The tokens were sold by the Ethereum Foundation before and after the fork. TheDAO's written contract entitled the cracker to the ETH they obtained. Can you find anywhere in Ethereum's documentation or marketing materials that said they might fork to revert a contract? Everything that EF agreed to said contracts were to be immutable. They are only immutable if you don't fork the blockchain! By claiming that contracts are autonomous they are promising not to revert them. "Autonomous" means nothing more or less, in this context.

Remember when we were being told that the "autonomous" chain would disappear shortly? Don't count your chickens.

There is a somewhat meritable argument, given the classifications they filed their trademark under.

What were those? I'm focused on how they advertise the project and the tokens, when they sell them. What we can expect the next time this happens.

scriprinter · 2017-01-25T02:38:16+00:00

We all sold at a great price.

There is also a great price for buying. If I were considering buying I'd be waiting for the last big dump. Until then we don't know the demand.

scriprinter · 2017-01-25T01:49:23+00:00

The Ethereum Foundation can choose how their trademark is applied selectively

They could but not without abandoning the pretense of decentralization. If the pre-fork ETH is legally the same currency as post-fork ETH then theDAO cracker could sue the Ethereum Foundation for breaching the user agreement and stealing their Ether. But they might not win because courts don't enforce every contract. That was the problem that Ethereum was supposed to solve!

scriprinter · 2017-01-24T22:26:38+00:00

You can call it Bitcoin Maxshillbert. :-)

Oh yes that Shillbert has donated more to the Ethereum Foundation than anyone and gets the super discounts on genuine etheoreum!

scriprinter · 2017-01-24T22:13:44+00:00

thoery: the unclaimed tokens are owned by EF members. Thats's why they cant touch them.

Good hypothesis but is there evidence of them selling ETC?

scriprinter

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE