My stake of 1 million XEM harvested 5 blocks in the past month which contained 3 XEM.

I'm seriously thinking of buying back in to refund my supernode. I miss it so much!

Anybody interested in contributing to share rewards which are currently @ 4.7% / year? I still hold 1 million XEM and have another partner who has 650k so there's room for 1.35 mill more. Planning to setup a trust or LLC to protect funds.

Here's the original thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=440185.msg4918440

The cost was between 0 and 0.075 BTC or 750 NXT depending on how early you participated. One stake was 2.25 million XEM.

What I did was just add my Trezor account as co-signer to my existing multisig account. Then if I lose it, I can still sign using my cold storage wallet.

As many people say "there's no such thing as bad press". On the surface these headlines look very bad for NEM but anybody that looks into the details will learn it was the exchange NOT NEM that was hacked and they might be exposed so some new details about NEM such as it's amazing on chain multi-sig and smart asset support or the way the NEM foundation has responded to the hack which is unique and first of it's kind.

Most likely the rally was fueled by news that the exchange will be reimbursing it's customers in fiat. That means these XEM holders will be reimbursed with JPY and many are likely going to replace their stake. If the stolen XEM are effectively blacklisted, that means the supply decreases and the demand increases as people replace their stolen XEM.

In the end, nobody knows why really

Fungibility is not binary where a currency is either 100% fungible or 0%. Yes Monero is much more fungible (not 100%) and I would even say it's the most fungible of all blockchains. It wins in the privacy category but that is not NEM's market. NEM is a smart asset platform that is willing to trade fungibility (some but not all) in exchange for transparency.

The point is that this tagging system is NOT a blacklist but a tool that can be used to track stolen assets. Yes this does in fact reduce fungibility but not as much as a true blacklist such as the case with Ripple or the ETH hardfork. I personally think this approach provides a good balance and is aligned perfectly with NEM's value proposition.

Nope. That's only true if every single exchange, ICO, etc that supports NEM is MANUALLY tracking the stolen XEM and manually blacklisting in real time which is simply not going to happen. Even if so, many exchanges don't require verification so it wouldn't reveal who attempted to cash out.

Even with the tagging system, chances are there will be some exchanges that won't utilize it.

To the people worried about fungibility, they need to remember that this blacklist via tagging is not centrally enforceable. It is an opt-in tool that exchanges can use to avoid stolen XEM at THEIR discretion. NEM foundation can not enforce this blacklist so it's not a problem in relation to centralization.

As far as how the tagging might work, I would assume they might exempt known legit addresses like exchanges or community funds etc which would be trivial to do. I also assume they will not flag small amounts. Any innocent accounts that receive stolen funds and are flagged could simply surrender the stolen funds they received to have the tag removed. They could even automate all of this.

1) An account receives say 100+ stolen XEM.
2) System then flags the account via mosaic and includes a link to a PSA about the tag in the transactions message.
3) The PSA (public service announcement) explains instructions on where to return the stolen funds.
4) Account holder sends stolen funds to recovery account.
5) Flag is removed from account. In reality they can't automatically remove the flag so they could set a second flag that designates the account was cleaned. Or they could be sent enough of the mosaic to allow it to be removed manually.

Definitely feasible and an interesting way to address the issue of stolen funds.

You're only seeing the reaction from the crypto world and most people don't understand that a C rating is not bad and BTC didn't get an A because they just never give out A's. There's a ton of other people out there who had dismissed Bitcoin early on as a ponzi scam who might take a second look after seeing these ratings.



Not sure how you can be so confident on what is true or not in regards to how these ratings effect every single person out there haha. Wish I was omnipotent like you ;-). Don't confuse opinion for fact...

You're thinking only of crypto enthusiasts or wall street investors. I'm talking about the people that have ignored Bitcoin because it was a scam or ponzi scheme. They aren't going to invest based on these ratings. The fact that they even researched and rated them might make them take a second look. I have a friend that stayed away for years until he heard about the futures contracts. He didn't purchase any but the fact that they existed made him reconsider his understanding and he started asking me for more info which led to me selling him $3300 worth of XEM. These ratings could have the same effect.

Re: "dumb money", you don't think there's already a ton of it in these markets? You don't think these headlines could bring in more?

The fact is that people do pay for their research so even though you and I don't care, others do in fact value their ratings. This is meaningful as it gives credence to crypto assets for that audience regardless of what we think.

They are not meaningless at all. By giving these ratings, they are making crypto assets more legit and mainstream. These ratings are not based on the merits of the technology but their potentials as investments and they NEVER give out A's. A rating of C is not bad like in school grades and actually indicates to hold that investment.

* Price Excluded

Looks like they are including the volume at least.

This is why it's recommended to never send directly from exchange to exchange. If you can't find the transaction in the block exploer then Spectrocoin might not have sent it. Also, Bittrex does not currently support deposits from multisig accounts so if Spectrocoin uses multisig that could also be the problem.

Not sure about deposits but I have a XEM withdrawal that's been stuck at Polo for a few hours. I assume they are having issues with their XEM wallet looking at the spread between them and Bittrex. Bittrex wallet is working normally but beware that you can not deposit FROM a multisig account.

Latest episode of Inside NEM is out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmaLUT4hXrw

Great news re: Zeus Exchange

I was able to successfully log into Trezor wallet this weekend via NanoWallet 2.0 but I have no testXEM to play with. If anybody has any to spare, please send to TBBRFM-E6P2O2-PAXTYL-UKDMBM-H3B3XT-5KX3EC-IKWE! Thanks in advance!

Too late, ICO is over.

Take a look at https://comsa.io/en/ which does exactly that and is supported by NEM foundation.

You can see the pull request was merged in github 17 days ago:
https://github.com/trezor/trezor-mcu/commit/a856542b750be5d7e5ed86aed8795844e3dd202e

I haven't seen any information on when the new firmware will be released.