HAVE I BEEN JEWED!?

[Anonymous No.9863976]

[Anonymous No.9863988]

>>9863976
Yeah you bought An erc 20 token and now you can’t sell it

[Anonymous No.9863990]

>>9863976
yes

[Anonymous No.9864014]

>>9863976
me chinese. me play trick. me put pepper on your dick.

[Anonymous No.9864016]

>>9863976
nah, you're good

[Anonymous No.9864159]

Yes lmao

[Anonymous No.9864531]

Yep. Considering everything else is on a massive bullrun, and only EOS is down, I'd say so.

[Anonymous No.9864775]

>>9863976
>$4 billion raised
>they didn't even bother to make voting tools
you've been jewed pretty hard anon

[Anonymous No.9864945]

>>9864531
?

[Anonymous No.9864962]

>>9864775

>didn't bother to make voting tools

If you're gonna lie, at least make it believable.

[Anonymous No.9865036]

>>9864962
please link me to the official block.one voting tool

[Anonymous No.9865060]

dan got rich af tho

[Anonymous No.9865065]

>>9864775
> just like ETH did
> oh wait
this is what decentralization looks like. the COMMUNITY builds the products on the platform.

[Anonymous No.9865071]

>>9865036
Search cleos. You may not like it, but it is thats what optimal performance looks like.

[Anonymous No.9865088]

>>9865071
For $4b that thing should give blowjobs, instead it's a command line tool that has to be compiled

[Anonymous No.9865104]

>>9865036

https://github.com/EOSIO/eos/wiki

Install cleos. The official command line tool from block.one for voting.

Now watch, you'll move the goalposts and say:

>implying normies can figure out command lines

To which I'll then link you the greymass or liquideos voting tools

To which you'll then point as 'proof' you were right when you weren't because you never originally specificed that block.one didn't provide a GUI voting tool.

You see how predictable you ethdrones are? Because it's the same fucking argument you guys come and shit up every thread with.

Now call it a decentralised scamcoin, then accuse Dan Larimer of being a pedo. Meanwhile keep all your money invested in a coin where the chief community officer tweeted pic related.

[Anonymous No.9865107]

>>9865065
>the COMMUNITY builds the products on the platform.
hey make some products on my community i just need 4b

[Anonymous No.9865117]

>>9865071
Just look at this shit. There was no way in hell 15% ever manages to vote according to these instructions.
$4B and EOS would have never launched without other people doing development for free.
That's a fucking scam if I ever seen one

[Anonymous No.9865130]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6cYoN-1LQ8

but these air drops are too good

[Anonymous No.9865143]

p****hile coin

[Anonymous No.9865166]

>>9865104
>you never originally specificed that block.one didn't provide a GUI voting tool
sorry I have to spoon feed you
for $4 billion it's ridiculous that they haven't created a GUI voting tool
and I'm not an "ethdrone"
eth is a slow buggy piece of shit, but EOS isn't any better

[Anonymous No.9865192]

Laughing at EOS bag holders. DYOR

[Anonymous No.9865201]

>>9865166

>EOS isn't any better

Literally no one has used it yet, also the entire point of how Block.One has designed EOS is as enterprise software. They're not going to hold your hands, CLI tools are considered the norm in enterprise, server side software. Why is this so hard for you reddit cucks to understand, Block.One develops the software for the Block Producers, the blockproducers develop interfaces for the end users. This actually makes EOS more flexible as it gives a wide range of different options for how you experience it. The same way CypherGlass is currently funding a hardware wallet.

Meanwhile ETH still has essentially only two functional ways to interact with the blockchain, MEW and MetaMask, and even then with most DAPPs using MEW is an absolute pain.

[Anonymous No.9865215]

>EARTH OPERATING SYSTEM =

21 nodes

[Anonymous No.9865226]

>>9865117
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA holy fuck rip "normie coin"

[Anonymous No.9865249]

>>9865117

See: >>9865201


It's incredible the type of mental gymnastics you faggots go through to 'catch out' EOS. You are the crypto equivalent of 'gotcha journalists' and it's infuriating. Always ready to jump on any technicality that somehow proves it was a scam. There are simple, EASY to use GUI tools produced by trustworthy block producers that work as a front end for the CLI. But it doesn't matter to you, it doesn't matter to you if I LITERALLY walk you through how it works and why you're wrong if you say Block.One didn't provide a voting tool, because it wasn't a download iOS app with a big shiny button. That's what the block producers are for, that's why the system is actually unique and clever. One back end made by one company, many extensible front ends by others.

Does it matter that EOS had one of the most active githubs ever? Nope because of that one bug some chinks found a week ago. Etc. Etc. It's frustrating talking to you guys not because us EOS bagholders are coping, but because its abundantly clear you've made up your minds.

>>9865215

>Peer-to-peer electronic cash system
>3-7 tx per second

>Decentralised supercomputer
>5 mining pools control 84% of the mining power

Do you not see how meaningless and reductive these arguments are? Why are you so stubborn in repeating this '21 block providers hurr centralised' bullshit.

[Anonymous No.9865260]

>>9865201

> CLI tools are considered the norm in enterprise

>Block.One develops the software for the >Block Producers, the blockproducers develop interfaces for the end users.

remind me again why this is a better value proposition that AWS?

you guys have honestly been Jewed 4billion for some do-it-your-self spaghetti code.

the delusion is strong in you EOS bag holders.

this will never gain mass adoption, it can't even find consensus to bootstrap this trash

[Anonymous No.9865270]

>>9865201
not a reddit cuck
again, for $4 billion, the least they could do is make the software usable by anyone
at least enough to vote and actually get the mainnet launched
and I agree, eth is garbage too

[Anonymous No.9865299]

>>9865260

God damn you guys really do argue like jewish lawyers. As soon as I counter a point, instead of ever recognising it's validity, it's immediately a pivot.

Gee I don't fucking know, why is ETH worth 50 billion, or never mind that 150 billion at its peak, when THE NUMBER ONE DAPP ON IT IS CRYPTO KITTIES. Honestly every time I point this out you fuckers disappear, you never address this. You never explain what ethereum, right now, is USED for besides ICOs. ICOs and ponzi scheme trading card games. Does this justify 150 billion market cap at peak and nearly 50 billion now?

How about the fact that none of this crypto stuff is really justifiable yet, no one even really knows if decentralisation is possible, scalable, or even useful. This market is built around hype, and marketing, and some degree of functionality. EOS can market itself, it doesn't fucking matter why it's better than AWS because no one really knows why ETHEREUM is better than AWS, because decentralisation for now only makes sense for black market currencies. Smart contracts are literally years away from being deployed at a minimum, and we still don't even know the amount of decentralisation necessary.

What I will tell you is the mere existence of AWS does not make EOS obsolete and pointless, because EOS is not shares in a company that turns a profit, it's a currency meant to drive a blockchain which is currently a very big buzzword, so there's a lot of upside potential.

Honestly do you guys just have a script like telemarketers use? First accuse it of being vapourware, then accuse Dan of being a PnD scammer, then accuse EOS of centralisation (despite again not address the FIVE MINING POOLS THAT CONTROL ETH), etc.

What kills me most of all though is how ideologically driven this is, it's like you guys suddenly really care about the underlying product, when I bet if I looked through your blockfolio it'd be full of moonshot shitcoins.

[Anonymous No.9865329]

>>9865299

you're an idiot triggered EOS bag holder who voraciously assumes everyone criticizing it holds any ETH at all. strawman argue some more?

moron

[Anonymous No.9865342]

>>9865299
why do you keep pointing out how bad eth is?
no one's arguing against that
just because eth sucks doesn't mean EOS doesn't

[Anonymous No.9865349]

>>9865270

They did, via the block producers. Does it ever cross your mind that this shit is by *design* that the entire purpose is to stimulate competition between block producer candidates to produce better products?

Does it ever cross your mind that the whole reason bitcoin works is because of how it leverages incentives to allow for independent parties to secure the network, that this is precisely what made bitcoin 'decentralised' and that in the same way that bitcoin rewards miners with bitcoin for processing transaction, EOS is attempting to take that concept and expand it immensely by essentially incentivising EVERY aspect of the blockchain with EOS tokens at a lower inflation rate than ETH.

So whereas in bitcoin the only variable determining your reward amount is the raw amount of processing power you contribute, with EOS because the participants are block providers who are voted in, their rewards are proportional to the entire sum of the service they provide. This isn't laziness this is actually genius, it's using the game theory that was foundational in Bitcoins whitepaper but applying it to every aspect. So block providers will compete to provide better interfaces, better wallets, better uptime, lower fees, etc. It's like taking a 1 dimensional variable and taking it into 3 dimensions.

In fact if block.one DID provide an official wallet, it would undermine this process because everyone would use that. But no you don't care, you don't care that people who have been in this space a lot longer than you, who understand the game theory behind why bitcoin works and what makes it decentralised are really excited about EOS.

Because >muh only 21 producers
>muh brock pierce is a pedo
>muh year long ICO

You literally have no inkling of the ideas EOS has put out. EOS may fail, but others WILL copy its model because it is unique, and it may be better, we don't know yet. But to say it's centralised vs ETH is ignorant at best, disingenous at worst.

[Anonymous No.9865353]

>>9865299
>doesn't understand the value proposition of decentralization
>shills EOS because it's a buzzwordchain
>conflates mining pools made up of thousands of independent block producers with 21 block producers that theoretically won't form blocks

BRAINLET
R
A
I
N
L
E
T

[Anonymous No.9865361]

>>9865353

exactly typical EOS parrot. not-gonna-make-it

[Anonymous No.9865369]

>>9865342

Maybe because ETH is the number 2 cryptocurrency by value, and is a direct competitor in terms of services.

Honestly you must be baiting me, surely you know how obvious this is. This is like saying 'Lol why does it matter if facebook is better than myspace, I think myspace is shit'. You are intentionally creating a framework for this discussion in which it is IMPOSSIBLE to establish value statements. By disavowing Ethereum and simply making general criticism of cryptocurrency (such as its lack of decentralisation) but aiming them squarely at EOS you create a catch-22.

If I point out EOS strong performance, you'll simply say it's not decentralised because of it. If I point out its as decentralised as Ethereum or Bitcoin, you'll simply disavow them and say they are also shit.

Are you just some profoundly cynical 30 year old boomer, or are you intentionally trying to trigger me?

[Anonymous No.9865383]

eos late adopters clearly getting nervous

[Anonymous No.9865393]

>>9865369
>you'll simply say it's not decentralised because of it.
But he used right about that..

[Anonymous No.9865404]

>>9865117

http://is2.4chan.org/biz/1528866976049.png

>>9865299

simplified

[Anonymous No.9865415]

>>9865353

Explain the value proposition of decentralisation? True decentralisation is a dead end because it enters direct competition with too many bureaucrats, things like Monero can exist under the shadows, but a truly decentralised ETH like cryptocurrency that actually triggers enforceable contracts etc, incentivised via tokens held by a bunch of NEETs, WILL. NEVER. HAPPEN.

The best we'll ever get is some government blockchain run by several countries, secured not by tokens, but by bureaucrats. You know that the single most powerful force in this world is not the military, or CIA or anything like that, it's the millions of paper pushers securing themselves pensions by being horribly inefficient but because they control the keys to adoption they will never make themselves obsolete.

Don't believe me? Technology will 'find a way'? Look at healthcare in America lmao, so expensive and it hasn't gotten any cheaper in years and years. You're chasing a pipe dream kid, I'm trying to tell you to make money selling this trinket, this thing that will give you decent returns based on marketing and a novel approach, maybe many years down the line there will be a better alternative.

You've filled your head with ideology, if the value proposition of decentralisation is so great, why is no one doing anything with it? Please tell me why is the top 5 ETH DAPPS basically a bunch of digital ponzi schemes? What are we waiting for? Sharding? Plasma? So when those come out, in however many months then we'll see adoption? You're gonna get cut out man, the corporations that do use blockchains will use hyperledger. EOS is a decent chance at good gains.

[Anonymous No.9865452]

>>9865404

http://vote.liquideos.com/

I have already explained why having the block producers develop the front end for the user experience is a design choice, it is fundamentally better. It leverages competition, 70 block producers competing for 21 spots means each producer will try and develop better tools. Instead of just each redirecting towards the 'official tool', imagine if instead of miners wasting computer power competing on producing the most number of hashes, that investment and money was redirected to maximising the user experience.

Let that sink in, don't reply yet. Really consider, slowly, what I just said.

>Imagine if all the money miners on Ethereum or Bitcoin, instead of investing the money on ASICs to produce endless hash functions, invested that money into providing better service for the end user

Do you get it yet? Please tell me you fucking get it. EOS is taking the principle behind mining, where tokens are rewarded to people who produce the most hashes, and instead rewarding people who contribute to the product. A block producer makes a shitty wallet? This is the moment to shine for another block producer to make a better one and secure votes. This leverages competition without WASTING it, but leveraging for the best possible end user experience. For the love of god please tell me you understand why this is clever, at the very least even if it doesn't work in the end, its fucking clever.

[Anonymous No.9865455]

>>9865349
too bad they can't compete on the basis of the only thing that matters to every holder, the block reward inflation. enjoy the 5% inflation forever!

all the things you mention are provided as public goods, and can't provide the basis for competitive improvement.

if EOS was designed for the benefit of its users, block producers would compete on the basis of accepting the lowest compensation, and the funding for public goods would be decoupled and provided for by a different on-chain governance mechanism.

instead, it was designed from the start to allow cartels to form and extract monopoly rents forever.

[Anonymous No.9865471]

>>9865455
in short I think EOS fills a solid niche, and I eagerly await a competitor to come along that was designed with the interests of its users in mind, rather than overwhelming greed.

it wouldn't even be hard to fix.

[Anonymous No.9865487]

>>9865455

And there is the pivot! Do you see what I mean by the pivot?

See my argument was in response to the statement about Block.One not making a GUI tool, I addressed it very thoroughly, and out of nowhere 'too bad it doesn't solve inflation'. I mean come on, I wasn't addressing the inflation. This is such bullshit it's just endless pivots, you guys are literal snakes.

BUT I do know one thing, you guys are too good to just be mETH-heads from reddit. These pivots are indicative of coordinated efforts, so you're clearly from some discord. I have no idea what your endgame is because 4chan biz cannot affect the price of EOS.

Maybe you guys are actually EOS holders and you just want me to reassure you faggots by dissecting all this bullshit FUD? I don't know but I am going to bed, the inflation thing is not an issue but it is too damn late for me to address it now.

[Anonymous No.9865490]

>>9865452

>I have already explained why having the block producers develop the front end for the user experience is a design choice, it is fundamentally better.

muh western financial systems.


I have one acronym for you normie EOS Bagholder

RINA

[Anonymous No.9865522]

>>9865104

I won’t move the post but let me switch fields.

NORMIES DONT EVEN KNOW WHY THE FUCK THEY WOULD EVEN NEED VOTING RIGHTS LET ALONE FIGURE OUT HOW TO

[Anonymous No.9865544]

>>9865487
I'm not that other guy, I'm telling you exactly what my primary problem with EOS is, and what I think its successor will fix.

anybody with half an understanding of economics, game theory and political science would have been able to deductively come to these same conclusions.

EOS expects token holders to make (and be sufficiently informed) about allocating massive economic rewards without themselves having any direct economic interest.

if you're a token holder, you get to decide which cartel will ass-rape you for 5% on the basis of how many warm fuzzies they give you, in the form of public goods that they either have already delivered (no further incentive), or are yet to deliver (no direct way to hold them accountable).

do you get it yet? do you see the $20 bills lying on the sidewalk for a better governance model to pick up?

[Anonymous No.9865556]

>>9865452
>he think you can democratically create code
kek
e
k

[Anonymous No.9865562]

EOS=bitfinex coin
Given how few people turn out to vote, one big exchange that votes can instantly take over the chain by electing BPs they control
(they are not _supposed_ to vote because that breaks eos constitution).
When analyzing security only the weakest point required to obtain full control matters. Ie. if your door is made of wood it doesn't matter how good your titanium padlock is.

Yes, bitfinex is not going to attack the chain, but what if they are hacked? Bitfinex was hacked at least once already, they lost 120k BTC two years ago.

EOS is the first crypto platform that effectively relies on security of just one exchange. If a hack happens the attackers can do literally everything, as EOS is fully mutable. This includes changing the state of any dapp with potentially irreversible external effects. In other words, EOS is fully centralized to just one entity.

[Anonymous No.9865573]

>>9865490

Here comes the shill we've all been waiting for. Nice so you aren't mETHheads, you're fucking ADAfags. Even better, the coin everyone forgot was even in the top 10. Good luck releasing it, I don't know what level of education you have, I got a master's degree, and if there's one thing I learned its that perfectionist/academic types like Charles Hoskinson are nightmares when it comes to pushing a product.

The punchline is the more money you give fucks like him the longer they take, ADA is the real definition of vapourware. Read my lips, you're gonna be waiting til at least 2020 for a product. Seriously now I just feel sorry for you, you have no idea what you're dealing with here. Its a great idea, the research is stellar, but it isnt gonna come to market any time soon and they don't even have the one saving grace that a corporation has, which is shareholders breathing down your neck. ADA is the Duke Nukem 3D of cryptocurrency. Honestly go read the Wired story on how that happened.

>big budget
>perfectionist

Nightmare combo. The whole Cardano thing is like funding cold fusion via kickstarter.

>>9865522

Only 15% of people need to vote, it was the best compromise they could come to, and it'll be over in a week. Just like every other 'stage' that was a 'disaster' worked out fine. Not even gonna address it because it'll be over so soon.

>>9865544
5% inflation is so minimal, consider that in order to outpace that you need to simply grow your value base BY five percent, and because it's going to go to block producers who can get voted on, they aren't gonna get it for free. Ok so this is where it's about how cynical you are, on PAPER the system is brilliant. The 5% inflation can be thought of as a reinvested dividend, which most investors believe reinvesting dividends (instead of paying them out) is good. EOS grows in value, 5% is paid out to block producers to keep improving the product.

The cynicism is thinking people will not vote/care and be exploited.

[Anonymous No.9865581]

>>9865471
A R K
R
K

[Anonymous No.9865642]

>>9865556

People would have said the same thing about bitcoin 'democratically securing a network, LMAO' except thats the whole point of the 'coin' aspect, have you been living under a rock? EOS is simply extrapolating the foundational concept of bitcoin, if you can incentivise network security, you can just as easily incentivise network development.

You know when we say democratically create code, the block producers aren't all gonna be working on a single github of the source code. Thats the fucking point of block.one, they are like the trunk of the tree, they're the base, that is NOT done democratically. The block producers optimise performance and produce front ends, concurrently NOT concertedly. So then people have options. The worst providers will continuously get weeded out.

>>9865562

This is now cynicism, so this is not a criticism of any of the 'on paper' aspects of EOS, it's a criticism of how things will play out. Which we don't know for sure, but I do know I can't argue against cynicism. Jihan, maybe not now, but at one point could certainly have done a 51% attack on BTC but it would devalue it. I think ultimately market incentives dominate, bitfinex has MORE profit to be made acting more or less transparently and supporting the infrastructure/design of EOS, than it does forming a manipulative cartel. I also believe that the current vote to launch is NOT indicative of individual participation once mainnet and dapps are active. In the same way that in the first year of ETH people just kept it in wallets, it was over time people started installing stuff like metamask and interacting with the web 3.0. In the same way EOS will ease people into being proactive with voting and interacting with blockchains.

But again, EOS's vulnerabilities, will different in nature, are no more severe than bitcoins, especially in the first 8 years of bitcoins existence. Like with all community driven things, a bit of luck is needed.

[Anonymous No.9865689]

>>9865642
in what ways is EOS better from ARK

[Anonymous No.9865738]

>>9865642
>eos can be taken over by anyone controlling bitfinex
>cynicism
???
>it's a criticism of how things will play out.
it's a criticism of DPoS and the way it's done in EOS
>but at one point could certainly have done a 51% attack on BTC but it would devalue it
a 51% attack on btc can't edit existing accounts, it can only reorder transactions.
>bitfinex has MORE profit to be made acting more
which is irrelevant if they are hacked, like they already were once

[Anonymous No.9865811]

>>9865689

Is this the new pivot? How about its better than ARK precisely because after 14 months ARK has less brand awareness than fucking Tron, compared to EOS which is only just getting warmed up. Or that by having an immediate ICO, which brainlets will argue is better, the people who profited the most from ARKs price rise are early whales, not the dev team. EOS kept selling tokens as the price went up, so nearly half of the market cap of EOS is funds available to EOS to market their product (and they will market the shit out of it), or how about that there are *700* Ark delegates. You think thats better because its 'more decentralised'? If you have 700 delegates on a coin with a 180 MM market cap, with profit sharing, how the hell are these shoestring budget operations going to improve the product?

You see it still clicked in your mind why EOS is different, you're still thinking in the mind numbing, spreadsheet style 'point scoring' autism of previous PoS systems, where all that matters is how well the coins are distributed, what percentages are being given to stake holders etc. But ultimately the reason these models are unsustainable is because nothing is giving these coins value beyond their baseless accumulation.

I have tried to address every point in a non-shilly way, but at this point I'm just gonna fucking shill because I've earned it. EOS is taking traditional business models, traditional value creation models, and leveraging them using the incentives established in blockchain. By distributing the coins entirely to block producers, by having a smaller number of highly powerful BPs, you create a system much closer to a traditional business. These BPs can actually DO something. Will they do something? That's up to us to find out, but at least they have some decent incentives to do it.
1/2

[Anonymous No.9865833]

>>9865811
you showed your true self i'm out

[Anonymous No.9865839]

>>9865689
>>9865811

2/2

Do you get it now? That you have been fundamentally, on a very basic level, deceived about what makes a crypto valuable by whales who accumulate shitcoin master nodes then shill them on you by boasting about how decentralised they are and how its the future without ever explaining how the fuck a decentralised token is going to generate value? They lie to you and say it's better this way, but its essentially a pyramid where the devs are actually in the middle because of ICOs, and the whales who don't give two FUCKS about the project have the controlling stake, then they shill you these bags and you're stuck with them. Devs have no real incentive to do anything but dump because even if they increase the value of their tokens, they can only ever diminish their supply, they can't create more tokens (because that's '''bad''' lmao) do you not see where this is going? Everyone is saying 'oh well blockchain isn't producing anything' because every blockchain product so far is modelled in this bizarre way where revenue is ultimately going to users not employees. The whole system makes no sense, really close your eyes and think about it.

The reason so many people hate EOS is because it's not threatening to undermine ETH so much as it is threatening to undermine all these other bullshit 'masternode' coins like StakeNet or whatever the flavour of the week it was a few months ago.

[Anonymous No.9865889]

>>9865833

Lol I'm not really trying to persuade you, I'm trying to have this shit memorialised in this thread so a year from now I can look back at how insane this whole bubble was. How absolutely ridiculously the whole thing was structured, people expect to stake coins in a network, then receive a monthly percentage of these staked coins, and then other people will just develop and improve the network for them?

>They'll improve it because they'll also hold coins

But then you demonstrate that such a model has poor economics because I the dev hold X amount of coins, do X amount of work, and you the '''early adopter''' who does 0 work, provides 0 additional funding, and bought for pennies reaps the rewards of that work? These systems are not sustainable business models, you're asking for a free lunch. EOS solves these with an inflation system that goes towards the value producers, if they fail to produce value, then sell your coins, I will and I'll walk away from EOS. But you cannot fault the EOS *model* as it's the only one that makes sense. Every other model essentially rewards people for buying before everyone else and not selling. This model works for bitcoin because the fundamentals of bitcoin are relatively constant, it's a 'store of value' or a 'currency', depending on your viewpoint. However if you're developing a platform that intends to work as a 'service' like ETH or ARK or whatever, you hamstring the platform by ensuring the vast majority of rewards simply go to early adopters for no reason. EOS is structured in such a way that new value is given to the value producers, whilst your investment grows in value in a linear and sustainable way, any PoS that does not have inflation is essentially a ponzi scam. Likewise coins that produce a service like Ethereum, require developers who are essentially self funded, to create value for miners. The entire system is messy. The incentives that work for bitcoin don't work for PaaS without reworking like EOS did.

[Anonymous No.9865902]

>>9865839
ARKs ico didn't even hit the goal devs don't have shit to dump ark have 51 community voted delegates not 700 and most of them only hold 5-8% of the generated blocks and give the rest to the voters some delegates help with the project but others are just wale voted that are in for the profit and this can happen on EOS too when a huge amount is owned from wales and it will be 10x worse coz EOS depends on the development from the bps

[Anonymous No.9865930]

>>9865889
Man thats a fucking great post. I am still unimpressed with EOS but you make some strong arguments.

[Anonymous No.9865944]

>>9865889
you have to understand that ARK is the middle ground form ETH and EOS

[Anonymous No.9865970]

>>9863976
Nope this is pure aryan white male scam. 0% subtle and yet idiots fell for it anyway. Bernie Madoff tier.
Larimer and Brock must be cashing out their billions atm.

[Anonymous No.9865978]

>>9865902

You're not helping your point, how will they fund development of the project?

It's better that EOS depends on developments from the BPs. I don't know how else to break it down for you, the traditional incentive models of PoW and PoS don't work for platform based cryptocurrency. Think about how business work, they have shareholders, the shareholders value increases from the demand for shares, but the revenue from sales and product development goes to employees. These balance each other out.

The business spends its money becoming a better business and the shareholders value increases from external demand. Now translate this to traditional PoS, it doesn't work because essentially there are no 'employees' since the way the cryptocurrency is structured you have to own shares to make a profit, but companies end up selling all the shares during the ICO. The reward model doesn't work. Saying that EOS is shit because you can't trust the BPs is like saying a company will fail because you can't trust it's employees. That's a fair point, but it's on the BPs, the MODEL that EOS is using is better though full stop. The BPs will develop products and services built on a singular source code, the BPs will receive the inflation.

It's funny that this 'inflation' thing upsets so many people because they've been conditioned by the pyramid like structure of most cryptos for so long but it's the only route that makes sense because how else do you continuously ensure a revenue stream for your 'employees'? Why do you think so many coins just stagnate after an initial burst of development?

Let me rephrase it this way, lets look at it as a series of problems:

Ethereum spends a lot of resource on mining, ethereum needs scaling solutions like plasma. Wouldn't it be great if the resources spent on mining, were spent on developing plasma and sharding? Yes? Great ok so now we have PoS!

cont'd.

[Anonymous No.9865989]

>>9865117
Use EOSC instead of CLEOS. Pure command line tool with very few source code to review (if you are willing to compile yourself).
Instructions: Copy paste your keys, copy paste a couple of commands with the names of the producers. Done. 20 seconds.

[Anonymous No.9866011]

>>9863976
>only reason EOS is not below 1 bil is because people stuck on exchanges and can't sell it
amazing, really amazing

[Anonymous No.9866024]

>>9865978

So we agree PoS is a better resource allocation than PoW. But theres another issue, PoS will still just reward the people with the most coins the most, I mean thats fair enough since they are the early adopters, but in some cases some really talented great developers have NO coins. Should they work for free? What about as the coins get more expensive, how are newer, better, young talent going to be able to reap the rewards of their contribution if the barrier for entry keeps getting higher? It's like being hired by Google but then being told 'your salary depends on how many shares of Google you own'.

So then we agree everyone benefits if the people who contribute the MOST get the best reward. So maybe the PoS rewards should be allocated by developer contribution, not by simple wallet holdings.

UH OH. New problem. Who decides who the employees are? How do you maintain a 'decentralised' structure if you need someone determined how much money developers get of the new blocks. Ok well then lets have a voting system where everyone votes on the developers they like the most.

Bang, you get the 21 BP system. Now the 21 BPs eos has may be scummy bastards. But there is *no* better model right now. Everyone upset about inflation doesn't get that you can't continuously employ people to develop and improve your platform (since its more complex than a currency) without inflation.

The problem is if EOS succeeds it spells absolute DEATH for the masternode scams that are rampant in crypto. You know most people making money in crypto do so shilling bullshit masternodes that are just races to accumulate the most before you get dumped on then move on to the next one. EOS is taking PoS from a pyramid style spreadsheet race, into actual product development with 'employee' salaries' This is why so many pajeets from their discords spend all day FUDDING it.

It isn't even ETH holders, it's fucking masternode shills who push bags of COLX etc.

[Anonymous No.9866029]

>>9865978
i don't have any pow and pos coins and you don't realize yet that 99% of the public is retarded and you can't trust them for voting the developers of a project what will hapen to EOS when lets say 8-21 bps are private owned and the rest are voted retards the project will die off

[Anonymous No.9866071]

>>9866029

At some point you have to trust the game theory, basically individuals are very very dumb, and yet they can come together and create very complex things as long as you establish the right framework. Every participant in EOS is incentivised to produce the best product, 21 BPs is small enough that you can have a focused group of devs, with oversight, everyone can get to know each BP intimately from memory, whilst also large enough to counteract bad actors. If it was 3 BPs I'd be worried.

Let me put it this final way, EOS is not a democracy, it's a republic. But just because it isn't a democracy doesn't make it a monarchy or a dictatorship. The great thing about republics is that they are 'guided' democracies, there is a balance of accountabilities both ways. People can't really be scammed into accidentally voting for some single pajeet, because there is oversight over BP candidacy. Likewise BPs aren't totally autocratic.

I'm telling you, EOS might fail, but it's model is the best shot we've got.

[Anonymous No.9866080]

>>9865978
>the shareholders value increases from the demand for shares, but the revenue from sales and product development goes to employees.

please stop now, you sound like a retard on adderall

[Anonymous No.9866082]

The most bulkish indicator for me is that chinks fucking love EOS. Most of the volume and crypto searches for EOS are asians.

[Anonymous No.9866089]

>>9865036
scatter
from scat
you know?

[Anonymous No.9866094]

>>9866080

You know executives are employees right? Where does revenue go then genius.

[Anonymous No.9866095]

>>9866071
also how can you prevent ddos attacks if the daps are tax free

[Anonymous No.9866107]

>>9865978
You don't get it, it's not supposed to be a company, but a base layer protocol. The development is supposed to be temporary until everything works by itself. Sort of like C language, the standard is very old and finished.
That moment in ethereum is supposed to happen with full sharding and full pos. At that moment the system is finished because it scales along with nodes.

The model works as long as initial funds last till that moment.

[Anonymous No.9866108]

>>9866080
are you retarded ?

[Anonymous No.9866114]

>>9866080

Perhaps I should have rephrased, production, which includes employees. But anyone not suffering from aspergers would understand what I meant. Revenue/profit should predominantly go to producing 'value' of SOME kind, whether its a service or a product.

Most PoS coins take 'revenue' (aka newly generated coins) and funnel them right into the hands of people who already have most of the coins.

[Anonymous No.9866118]

>>9865642
>>9865573
Babbys first emotional investment

[Anonymous No.9866137]

>>9866107

It's going to be something in between, a base layer protocol but also a service for end user interaction. There is nothing novel about creating a decentralised base layer protocol, most shitcoins are attempting that. What EOS is attempting to do is at the very least more ambitious than those coins, a base layer protocol, and service layer all continuously evolving and developing.

[Anonymous No.9866139]

>>9864531
Slow down there, killer. Sarcasm in large amounts is just confusing.

[Anonymous No.9866160]

>>9866118

Lol I've been investing for 8 years now and I bought bitcoin in 2012. How about you? What (((masternode))) is your discord shilling this week? Payfair? XSN? COLX? Bulwark? Bitcloud?

[Anonymous No.9866164]

>>9866114
my problems with eos is too over hyped for what it ofers right know and the price is in buble they didn't need to 4b to let others do the heavy work you cant trust retards to chose dev teams and wales will fuck it even more

[Anonymous No.9866178]

scamcoin

[Anonymous No.9866217]

>>9865201
you realise that mew and metamask are both built by third parties right? they just use the "tools" that ethereum produced (web3.js)... same in how eos just produced eos.js

[Anonymous No.9866224]

>>9863976
what you retards seem to fail to grasp is that once these BP's are voted in, there is NO WAY of voting them out. if the community can barely even vote to get the chain started, how can you expect them to consistently vote to keep the chain honest?

[Anonymous No.9866240]

>>9866217

I know that and the real Ethereum wallet, MIST, is garbage. But if you read through all my posts you'll see that my point is development for ETH like most PoS coins is very much voluntary. It's *too* community driven, this makes it ultimately very slow and uncompetitive because as a developer you know the gains from your work will predominantly come from the tiny fraction of shares you own. Whilst early adopters reap all the benefits. Meanwhile EOS has a competitive model, as I explained above.

[Anonymous No.9866264]

Wow it's tanking almost as hard as NANO.

[Anonymous No.9866275]

>>9866240
be a wale that bought a ton of EOS at 0.5$ vote yourself as bp earn EOS for life

[Anonymous No.9866287]

>>9863976
yes

[Anonymous No.9866295]

>>9866275

Gee wouldn't it be nuts if Dan Larimer actually thought of that and so created a prolonged coin distribution, but despite that everyone calls the prolonged coin distribution a scam even though its almost as if it prevents this exact situation you're describing.

[Anonymous No.9866309]

>>9866071
>>9866137
Eos inflation kills it long term because it goes to BPs. In 15 years past BPs own majority of the supply. Given how few people vote, how static BPs are likely to be and coins already owned by whales I give eos 2 years before BPs create a nonremovable cartel that votes for itself. 5% compounds fast.
A separate problem is risk of vote buying, it already exists, that's what eosdac airdrop was - they share 75% of rewards. This is a failure mode because as this creates the equivalent of social welfare (eg. sharing 99%) that can prevent investments.
>I'm telling you, EOS might fail, but it's model is the best shot we've got.
The best model is a benevolent dictator. I don't see anybody better than vitalik. If he manages to get ethereum to full pos with full sharding this is it, the system works by itself indefinitely.

[Anonymous No.9866319]

>>9865104
Take this bullshit back to 8 mile.

[Anonymous No.9866321]

>>9866295
gues who bought there

[Anonymous No.9866340]

>>9866321

Jesus christ, are you that retarded. Do you not get that the circulating supply has been changing this whole time? So in the circle zoned, the price may have been 50 cents, but less than 10% of EOS was even circulating, PLUS you wouldn't be able to accumulate all of that 10% without making the price shoot up, so yeah maybe one or two super whales has like 1-2% of EOS at most.

This is what I'm saying, the people who FUD EOS seem to have done the least amount of research about it. Why do you dislike something you never even researched?

[Anonymous No.9866365]

>>9866309

>Vitalik
>Benevolent dictator

He has less than 1% of the supply and unironically does most of the work. Have you been following what I've been saying? The problem is how to ensure a continuous flow of coins to the developers that increase those coins value, without relying on centralised authority. The solution is voting for developers/BPs and giving them the inflation. PoS/PoW simply ends up accumulating all the tokens in the hands of buyers. There needs to be a steady stream of tokens going to devs. Because as the scope of the coin expands, the number of devs needed grows, why do you think ETH development has slowed down despite a market cap of FIFTY fucking billion? Because most of that fifty billion is in the hands of NEETs fapping away to their pizza collections.

[Anonymous No.9866367]

>>9866340
20M EOS daily volume for 3 months one whale can have like 20% cartels are unavoidable

[Anonymous No.9866394]

>>9866367

You are not thinking this through, 20 million was the VOLUME, that means how many times tokens changed hands, could have been the same token. EOS distribution was roughly 2 million coins coins a day for a year. There was a 3 month period were prices were that low, that means TOTAL 180 million coins were in circulation by the end of that period. I'm starting to suspect you have a poor understanding of how crypto works full stop, like you confused volume for circulation. Which is a REALLY rookie mistake. Are you a summerfag teenager?

[Anonymous No.9866412]

>>9866340
>2%
Are you fucking retarded? you just proved him right.. if a whale owns that much they can already vote themselves in RIGHT NOW and get 50% of all the votes

[Anonymous No.9866443]

>>9866365
You ignored the described problem with bps voting for themselves. Again, 5% compounds fast.
>He has less than 1% of the supply and unironically does most of the work.
That fulfills the benevolent definition yes? There's EF though, I think they have 700k eth left
>Because as the scope of the coin expands, the number of devs needed grows
Maybe from $1M a year to $10M a year. EF has enough funds for decades of that.
>why do you think ETH development has slowed down
Devs are ironically too rich so they work on interesting cool solutions rather than what's needed now. Vitalik isn't a good manager.

[Anonymous No.9866465]

>>9866412

First of all 2% is the most extreme example. Second of all BP voting is not first past the post, it's proportional representation, with an excess of 9. This means that 2% of the votes wouldn't ensure jack shit because even if you dedicate all the votes to yourself, everyone else can vote 30 times and you get fucked.

Honestly this is very revealing, do you guys not know how any of this works? How old are all of you? Please tell me you know the difference between first past and post and proportional representation.

>>9866443

The 5% is not compounded inflation.

FOR FUCK SAKE LEARN ABOUT THIS COIN HOLY SHIT. Now I see why people say DYOR.

>Coin market cap is 50 billion
>10 million USD a year is enough for development

Please tell me this is bait kek. This is a bad idea for so many fucking reasons, honestly makes the whole 'ETH is secretly a commie coin' make a lot more sense. How do you justify a market cap that is FIVE THOUSAND TIMES HIGHER THAN YOUR DEVELOPMENT BUDGET.

[Anonymous No.9866475]

>>9866394
i didn't say 20m volume a i said 20m eos

[Anonymous No.9866511]

>>9866475

>i didn't say 20m volume a i said 20m eos

>>9866367

>20M EOS daily volume for 3 months...

You literally said daily volume but whatever, again even assuming worst case scenario someone were to somehow accumulate 10% of the circulating supply at 50 cents without moving the price too high, which would be challenging, and as the price moved high the distribution price would move high during the ICO, so you couldn't use traditional sell wall tactics.

How then do you get past proportional representation? If BP voting was first past the post, 2% would make a difference, agreed. With PR, you'd need like 20% to make a difference.

Every EOS token can vote for 30 different candidates, but vote for the same candidate only ONCE. So for every 1% lead you want to ensure, you need a theoretical 30% larger number of tokens...

Are you starting to notice a pattern, that every scenario has been accounted for? It's almost like the organisation that raised billions planned this shit out.

[SalviniRoll No.9866526]

>>9864531
>massive bullrun

[Anonymous No.9866541]

>>9866511
20m eos tokens daily volume
>Every EOS token can vote for 30 different candidates
yea this worked so fucking great on lisk right ? or are you a summerfag to don't know about it

[Anonymous No.9866544]

>>9866511
>>9866465
again, you outed yourself as a retard. people arent meant to develop on eos because they are paid by BP's. they are meant to build shit because they want to/have a vested self interst.

als, see >>9866224 how do explain this?

[Anonymous No.9866605]

>>9866224

>Can barely

It's already half done, stop being melodramatic like it's taken 6 months or some shit. Everything is happening along the timeline people expected. We were told it could take up to a month, we're ahead of schedule.

>>9866541

Fundamentally different coin and situation, LISK delegates work more as tradition PoS delegates so there was less incentive to vote conscientiously and again the LISK ICO was handled differently, market cap was a lot smaller, crypto was a lot smaller in general. You're comparing apples to oranges at this point. The distributed nature of EOS coupled with PR voting system fundamentally makes it virtually impossible for a BP to vote itself in.

In fact you can witness for yourself a whale who attempted this got BTFO: flytomarseos, they reached 4th place and then plummeted to 17th and dropping. The maths behind how PR works as well means with every vote that comes in it works exponentially against your favour. This BP will end up in 40th place kek.

[Anonymous No.9866617]

>>9866605
so if there is a malicious BP, it could take up to a month to vote them out? kek

[Anonymous No.9866624]

>>9866605
eos isn't distributed well
90% of all eos is in the top 20 wallets

[Anonymous No.9866636]

>>9866617
not only that a hacked exchange could destroy EOS and he thinks devs will make dpas on it

[Anonymous No.9866648]

As a dev who uses Metamask, Truffle, and all the Ethereum tools, I can tell you that the dev community is tiny, is shit, and all the tooling is shit.

If the BPs end up getting paid for developing (instead of the miners who get paid for circle jerking), EOS is going to destroy Eth.

Eth really hasn't had that much improvement in the last 1-2 years. Because not one cares about improving it. There's no incentive. The only incentive is to create scam ICOs and get rich.

[Anonymous No.9866674]

>>9866617

Ffs, the launch itself was said to take up to a month, because of debugging and testing, the voting was estimated to take up to two weeks, we're on day 5 and halfway done.

>>9866624

Wrong, 75% of EOS in top 100 wallets, which includeds exchanges. Yes it's not ideal, but pareto distributions are actually a consequence of free markets, you cannot blame EOS for the fact that fewer people have more money and I'd rather unequal distribution than restricted selling. Also etherscan isn't loading but I'd be extremely surprised if Ethereum wasn't similarly concentrated since pareto distributions are practically hard coded into nature.

>>9866648

Fucking this. Did you see the post above saying 10 million a year is enough development for a 50 billion market cap project, not to mention that ETH holders want to hit 100/200 billion.

Meanwhile complaining about 5% inflation, I mean the absolute greed and rent seeking nature crypto brings out is sickening. I'll happily take a 5% tax to unleash a product with a development budget effectively 5x greater than ETH at 1/5th the market cap kek.

I'm done addressing FUD. Glad someone else here gets it though.

[Anonymous No.9866681]

>>9866674

*50x bigger dev budget lmao.

[Anonymous No.9866815]

>>9866624
>Lying on the Internet
https://etherscan.io/token/tokenholderchart/0x86fa049857e0209aa7d9e616f7eb3b3b78ecfdb0

25% are not in the top wallets. From the top wallets, 10% are from exchanges. The truth is that, excluding exchanges (and note that due to main net launch, most people were scared to hold the tokens themselves), the top 20 wallets are going to hold 15% of all EOS max, and Block one alone has 10% of those.