What is the official launch date? What is the deadline for burn?

The SegWit2x fork that was due to go ahead on November 17th (and was cancelled on November 8th) would have increased the block size form 1MB to 2MB, and nothing else. Segwit itself is already activated.

The new 'SegWit2x' due in the next day or two is led by another team of people, and aims to deliver completely different things to the original project: it increases the block size to 4MB (not 2MB), premines 2 million coins, switches from SHA256 to X11, changes block time, changes difficulty recalculation algorithm, makes some not-clearly-defined claims about stealing Satoshi's coin, and promises some future features that will almost certainly never be delivered. The *only* thing it shares with the original project is the name.

Actually, it is just another altcoin forked from Bitcoin. By itself, that's fine: anyone is free to do that. But many people see the SegWit2x name and assume it is a retry of the last SegWit2x fork, which it isn't. The devs are claiming they are renewing the cancelled project, which they aren't. This is where the fraud is.

This farce of a project raises enough red flags that anyone with even half a brain should avoid it like the plague.

But, sadly, enough folks will be gullible/desperate enough to buy it that the "devs" will likely end up with a decent profit before they ditch everything.

That, plus the fact that there's no block explorer, and long periods of few/zero blocks (e.g. between 14 November and 3rd December this year, a total of 3 blocks mined).

Why don't you check on the block explorer, see how long the previous 200 confirmations took?

XCP deposits to BTER are disabled at present (although withdrawals are perhaps working). I don't know how long that's been the case, or how long it's likely to stay like that.

WTS qora @ 4 sats (minimum 2 million)

EDIT: currently earmarked for sale, but transaction not yet completed

I think now would be a good time to take this somewhere else and not derail the thread further. And if you respect your fellow readers, please edit away the quotations in your posts, or delete them entirely, as frankly it's an eyesore

It's sometimes hard to strike the right balance between promising something that you're not sure can be delivered, and waiting until it's all done before announcing it with huge fanfare. The signs were there, if not presented on a plate. I personally think the PR was okay, maybe I'm wrong; clearly we disagree, and I'm fine with that.

I had some conversations with a couple of the Counterparty core developers at a conference earlier this year, and they do come across as very competent, professional, and genuinely interested in delivering the best platform they can (no matter how long it takes). Very different from the scam artists that plague these forums, and crypt in general. I'm happy to remain invested in XCP.

You mean, entries like this in the public git repository?

On the storage of keys: If private keys are required to sign PoS blocks by the staking clients then they are clearly being stored/saved somewhere on those clients. In memory, on disk in a reversibly encrypted form, etc - they're still out there. (Not to mention being sent unencrypted in a web form over the Internet). Or am I missing something??

On trust issues: You've accepted that this system requires trust in you. No matter how trustworthy you've been in the past, requiring this much trust in any person should raise alarm bells.

On network security: Putting a layer between virtual staking clients and public mainnet is a sensible approach, but you should accept that it isn't possible to 100% prevent unauthorised access. (And using phrases like "I assure you, though, our blockchain will now not ever be compromised", and wanting "third party peer validation that our blockchain is entirely secure" are clearly nonsense)

On blockchain security: You haven't addressed the point about >50% of the staking power being controlled by a single group of people, and the implications of this on overall blockchain security?

"Offline Staking" is a centralised solution to the problem of people not wanting to run their clients 24x7, and it suffers from at least two clear issues:

1. The private keys of all accounts that are being offline staked are in the hands of one central body. The coins are therefore vulnerable to being stolen through external hacks, or the operator can simply run away with the funds. As such, this is similar to keeping them on an exchange. Exchanges have been hacked in the past (it's not possible to completely prevent this, no matter how secure people say their servers are), and exchange operators have run away with funds in the past.

2. Blockchain security in decentralised PoW/PoS systems is dependent upon no person (or group of people working together) having 50% of the hashing/staking power. If you have the private keys to 60% of the coins, you can execute a double spend attack whenever you like.

Of course, it can be argued that if you performed double spend attacks regularly, or ran away with all the coins, they would suddenly become worthless. And with the market cap as low as it is now it's probably not worthwhile to do so. But if it were to increase to, say, $1million, then an offline staking operator could probably get away with a decent amount in a one-off sell, and wouldn't care about the coin's subsequent value.

Virtual offline staking in its current form, requiring trust in a central body that operates the blockchain, is fundamentally against the point of crypto currencies. I think you'll have a hard time persuading people outside of the MMXIV world to take it seriously.

Closer to 2600?

(Your point still stands, though)

Well, I don't know why so many people don't understand this. The website says "The crowdsale ends at 11:59 EST". It doesn't say it ends at 11:59 EDT, nor does it say it ends at midnight "New York Time". Hardly relevant now (except to the two transactions that were submitted in the last 60 minutes). But still, you guys should read up on timezones sometime...

EDT and EST are not the same, are they?

Due to end at midnight EST, not EDT.

It's not yet midnight EST, is it?

Is it correct now?

The website says "END: ABOUT AN HOUR FROM NOW" but http://www.timeanddate.com/ says it is currently "Monday, 18 August 2014, 21:46:58 EST", that should be more than two hours?

Is there a working block explorer for SignatureCoin yet?

The two key advantages of PayProCoin were:

 - Ability to buy coins in the UK at local retailers via integration with established PayPoint facilities
 - Headed up by a UK registered company, including named individual as CEO

If PayPoint integration ever was working, it certainly isn't now. And fairly or unfairly, Darren's name is no longer a plus point. But, at least for a time, these were the main two key advantages of the coin.

With these gone, what does the coin have to distinguish itself from any others? Take out the fancy words in the first post and it basically says it's a Bitcoin clone with some fuzzy plans for payment integration. Payment integration is the Holy Grail; lots of coins promise it, and very few deliver anything useful. You really need to concentrate on nailing down these payment integration details.



How will you achieve the items on the roadmap?

 - No details were ever released about the buyback programme, leading people to make wild guesses as to what it is. You obviously don't have the funds to buy everybody's PRO at 2500 sats. Even offering a conditional buyback guarantee for coins originally sold by yourself isn't practical, or if it is can you explain how? Saying you'll offer a buyback programme and not giving details is irresponsible, and the only people who will take you seriously are the gullible and the pump/dump crowd who take advantage of them, and you said you weren't in it for the P+D.

 - The old roadmap mentions PayProProjects university project, but this requires significant PRO reserves which you don't have.

 - It also mentions PayProGift in early August. Was this anything other than vapourware?



Regarding coin count:

 - If initial block reward is 1,000 PRO/block, and block halving is every 20,000 blocks, this should mean a total of 40 million normally mined coins. Add the 40 million non-destroyed premine (ignoring the 40 million destroyed premine) means a total of 80 million coins (with the premine being 50%). Why do you say the total is 600 million?

 - You say "Coins in circulation: ~62 million as of August 6th" - but the block explorer says it is closer to 56 million?


This post is not intended as FUD, but rather points for discussion.

But - maybe not forever. Perhaps @Deadcrypto can bring it back to life!

Still - not everyone knows it's a Weiner coin, so it would be good to get CryptoAsian's website updated with Bryce's coins (esp. this one), and update the first post to include the five PODs.

Whilst that post is being updated, this part needs to be fixed too: "Until block 43200, fees are 1.429% of TX, destroyed". And update for XPD ticker.

And does the image in the first post really need to be THAT BIG?

40 million coins were sent to the address "PayProCoinPayProCoinPayProCoj6ngcU" on July 24th (block 13636). The other 40 million premine coins weren't destroyed, nor was the approx. 3-4 million instamine.

Were the coins really sent?

They can be seen in the block explorer: http://blocks.paypropool.com/address/PayProCoinPayProCoinPayProCoj6ngcU

If you do not trust the block explorer, launch & sync the client and in the console use these commands: [these are from memory, might be slightly incorrect, I've never installed the PayProCon client so I can't check]

getblockhash 13636
getblock XXX  (hash from last command)
getrawtransaction YYY   (transaction from last command)
decoderawtransaction ZZZ   (transaction from last command)

If you don't trust the console interface, get the code audited, but a good audit is likely to cost far far more than your current or future PRO balance.

Is this address really unspendable?

Assuming there are no nasties in the code, then yes the address is effectively unspendable. The address was created as the string "PayProCoin" repeated as many times as allowed for an address ("PayProCoinPayProCoinPayProCo"), followed by a 6 character checksum which causes the address to be valid (j6ngcU). It is not practical to find a private key which matches this address. If you think you can find one, good luck, but I'd recommend you instead try to find a private key which matches the similar Counterparty burn address (1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr) which has over 2000 BTC waiting for you and is equally impractical to find.