Poloniex says that they never agreed to participate in the giveaway. That's quite shitty as I'm sure many people deposited bitcoin or refrained from withdrawing with the understanding that Poloniex would participate, now those people will be unable to use that bitcoin to claim Lumens.

The question is, will Poloniex claim the Lumens or will it just go to the organization? This mistake may lead to the organization earning a significantly larger share of the giveaway, maybe it wasn't such an accident? Maybe Poloniex or the Stellar Organization will find a way to reconcile this? 

https://twitter.com/Poloniex/status/879511304075083781

For the record, $UNO is strong as hell! https://twitter.com/Cryptopoker_/status/876213495582339072

I was just using that as an example for discussing why it doesn't actually matter [for rarity] how far you can subdivide units, I wasn't saying anything about value.

I have been bullish on UNO for years, & I continue to remain bullish long-term, but I highly doubt it will ever have even 5% the market cap of bitcoin, too much of a disparity in name recognition, venture capital, etc. Maybe we'll eventually see 1 UNO = 1 BTC, that would give UNO a market cap of >1% of BTC's.

That's right about the units zyzzyvas.

Regarding what you were saying about the divisibility, whether you look at whole units or down to the 'satoshi-level' (10th place after the decimal), the total units of two given cryptos will still share the same ratio. So no matter how far you subdivide it, the max number of bitcoin is always 84x greater than the max number of UNO.

Although it's repeated often enough in different ways that it may seem like a gimmick to any outsiders, UNO has legitimate rarity. The inflation rate is roughly 0.1%/year & falling (0.173% tangential inflation with a halving in <3 months). Of >800 cryptos ever listed on coinmarketcap, UNO has something like the 35th lowest number of produced units, but of those 35 it is one of the few that wasn't premined, and is one of the most valuable.

Perhaps most influential is the fact that a few people have accumulated large shares of total supply. Distribution is a powerful component of value for currencies, and that is promoted through UNO's place as a base pair on Cryptopia. However, (this gets back to your question about whether UNO is more of a currency or a commodity) having a few large investors is a powerful position for a crypto with the fundamentals of UNO (commodity-oriented). Several people with great patience &/or through great effort have accumulated 2-20% of total supply each. A few large holders have kept their funds locked away for years; these people likely earned their UNO fairly cheap during the early period with higher mining rewards, but it was done fairly & they have held strong (maybe they even lost their private keys, who knows). Others have accumulated through extensive buying; Exhibit A: the individual who seems to have been controlling much of the action over the last 3 months. Based on wallet movements, the (now disabled) Bittrex distribution tab, and market action, that individual has probably accumulated more than 20% of total supply.

Of course, all coins have their whales, but UNO is a crypto that is designed (and marketed) like a rare commodity, & as a result is being hoarded by wealthy individuals. Thankfully that's good for the smaller fish too, and today, owning just 1% of UNO makes you wealthier than 87% of people on Earth (according to globalrichlist.com). Perhaps before 2030 owning just 0.1% of UNO will put you in the 87th percentile of wealth globally.

I hope that is the case, & I would LOVE if it were true. Has he provided any evidence of that? He just popped into the Telegram chat a few weeks ago & people weren't taking him too seriously, but it would be huge news to the UNO community if he offered proof that he has been buying 20,000+ UNO. That would partially explain who has been doing so much buying. The thing is, I think it would be hard to accumulate that much unless he has been buying for months or years, & our pump was so perfectly timed with all other altcoin pumps & the purchasing of the Cryptsy coins, that it makes other explanations more realistic.

I haven't been in the Telegram chat for about a week, so I probably missed 1,000+ messages & may have missed some Pureboy news 

I think they are both. 0.008-0.01 is most likely still in profit territory for our chief accumulator, so if he convinces more people to sell then he has more UNO for the move into the 0.01s, if someone eats his sell walls then he's still making big profits (with more to come).

As several in this community predicted, UNO has fallen less in satoshi value than most other alts during what has been a bloodbath on many large markets.

...a whale that is going to be belly up.

FTFY

SirSmokes: The "Cryptsy Cold Wallet" is all the funds on Bittrex, it's mislabelled. At least one of the smaller wallets you mentioned though belong to the recipient of the Cryptsy auction; IIRC the 'auctioneer' did send them the ~15,000 coins in a single transaction.

In regards to a catalyst of adoption, you're right that it isn't a single catalyst like that. When people saw the rise to $1,300 & crash to $200 it was easy to be cynical about bitcoin, they didn't see the other exponentially smaller previous bubbles on the logarithmic chart. Slow adoption by word-of-mouth & accumulation by enthusiasts caused the price to rise, which got the attention of those cynics, "Oh shit, bitcoin's back & bigger than ever!" Coinbase is registering thousands of new accounts every day, LocalBitcoins volume has been surging worldwide. Everyone from Indian politicians with bribe money to uncles on Facebook are asking how to buy. In short, the price is validating bitcoin in the eyes of the public, & there are now many more services to accommodate them than there were in 2013.

The wallets list is more informative for information about our mystery whale. It appears that a few weeks ago they withdrew ~8,000 UNO, something like 30% of the total Bittrex UNO. So they're withdrawing some of what they're accumulating, at least for now, they could of course deposit it all within minutes. Our data is a little more limited since Bittrex removed their distribution tab, but in my opinion it's a safe conclusion that the person who is regularly buying up the ask side on Bittrex is also the one who withdrew thousands of UNO recently (& the one who had 10,000+ UNO visible on Bittrex when they still had their distribution tab). 

Ya... It should go 0.00012207 > 0.00006103 > 0.00003052 > 0.00001526 > 0.00001000

Maybe there's a typo in the source code and they meant to code for a 0.0001 minimum?  

Ahh, thank you Learnminer! This is the answer I've been trying to get for some time.

I understand why people are opposed to raising the minimum block reward. I've even said in the past that I'm in support of UNO development as long as it doesn't touch the maximum coin count or the block reward. I was just thrown off that people had been saying '250 years to mine!' for years, then when I ran the calculation it was 2,500 years.

I'll shut up about it (other than celebrating halvings) unless we run into related problems that may be caused by the 0.0001 reward.

Edit: Oh, 0.00001  

That's even lower than I was thinking, so actually there is a typo on the website, just not in the direction I was thinking. So it's ~25,000 years to reach completion? Well like I said, we'll see what the hashrate and hashrate distribution looks like at that reward level.

Be sure to fix that part of unobtanium.uno Learnminer: "finishing with a minimum subsidy of .0001 after 15 halvings."

I actually don't know, I've wondered about that before. If it's a mining pool then theoretically customers could migrate if an unsavory decision was being made. I'd guess that kind of majority creates a vulnerability to potential attacks by the pool operator? Maybe that's something we should all focus on, improving mining pool hash distribution.

I have also spoken about raising the minimum block reward from 0.0001 to 0.001 (if it drops below 0.001 at the millionths block, which I haven't been totally convinced that it will). Such a low reward (0.0001/block, ~0.05 UNO/day, 1/20th of what it is now) may make hashrate distribution even worse. In the telegraph app recently it seemed like 3 of 3 people said if it goes to 0.0001 we should keep it there. I'm of the opinion that we should wait and see, but reconsider if hashrate &/or distribution falters significantly.

I'm also not sure about orphan blocks, can anyone comment on that? Is it a problem? IIUC, it's about UNO's somewhat fast block generation rate (3 minutes) coupled with the sometimes significant shifts in hashrate (with the coin ranging from about 1-10 PH/s lately). I suppose it is "inefficient", but it doesn't seem to cause any significant issues.

Question: Will some of the more limited supply altcoins like Unobtanium have value as collectibles in the future?

Answer: Unobtanium? Is that really an altcoin because I've never freaking heard of it. Hold on a second. Opens tab to research Unobtanium then immediately forgets about it. No, no they won't. Because what is securing that coin? There's no security in that altcoin.

My response: 10 PH/s is securing it, but you wouldn't know it's merge mined with bitcoin because you stopped researching it immediately after you opened the tab in order to advertise your $9,000 Casascius coin! FFS! Alright buddy, I'll be sure to share that clip in the future when UNO is highly valuable. We'll all get a good laugh.

I recently said in the $UNO Telegram chat why it was still bullish despite breaking the $BTC trendline, but we haven't even broken the USD trendline.



Tweet link: https://twitter.com/Cryptopoker_/status/863180757317144576

Unobtanium 38 month graph:



Tweet link for retweeting: https://twitter.com/Cryptopoker_/status/863180757317144576

Yea FK, as I said in the Telegram app yesterday or the day before, that dip from 0.009 to 0.007 was clearly an opportunity to BTFD!

Congrats to all UNO believers and HODLers.

I'm not getting a connection either. I'm sure you can export the keys or regain them through a set of Electrum code words (assuming you wrote them down). I'd rather figure out how to re-establish the connection though, since I use that wallet (along with others) and we should have it working smoothly for the community. I'm guessing it's just a matter of adding some nodes; an electrum node list has probably been posted somewhere in the last 20 pages of this thread, but if we're patient a kind person will probably show up with instructions for us  

Correct, the electrum wallet doesn't need to sync the whole blockchain. However the new version of the core wallet should work well. From my experience it might even recognize the old .dat automatically. Otherwise you would search for your UNO wallet folder then drag and drop the .dat. Either way, click file > backup wallet and save it to a USB drive (as suggested above). Then you could also load the .dat from the USB drive rather than searching it in your PC hard drive.

Also if you save it to a USB drive be sure it's password protected (encrypted) or you could then delete the file of course (in case you lose the drive), but best to have a backup at all times anyway  

Edit: Oh, I don't know about the latest version of the core wallet for Mac, sorry.