Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - MaxPWR

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 15
MemoryCoin / Re: Memorycoin's Bull Run
« on: March 24, 2014, 07:27:51 am »
My advice:

1) Use other exchanges when possible.  Best for longer term standing limit orders / swing trades.

2) Bter dominates and has a large share of bot/arbitrage/hedging volume with MMC/CNY.  This seems to lead to some predictable market effects.  CNY has more volume due to it being more "certain" / stable to bots - these are open bot positions waiting to close...sell if MMC/CNY or MMC/BTC * BTC/CNY is greater than MMC/CNY when bought. 

3) Use MMC/CNY for market orders if possible, and MMC/BTC for limit buy orders. "Human" MMC/CNY orders only sell on a BTC/CNY decrease (hurry and buy BTC), and MMC/BTC only sells on a BTC/CNY increase (hurry and sell BTC).  Bots won't buy their own orders, which is why you sometimes see 0.2% spread on one market and 10% spread on another. 

4) Do not place limit sell orders on Bter - use alternate exchanges for that.  The bots on Bter will never execute them, except at a horrible price, and they'll only provide resistance (or worse, lead to gaps in bot orders and price jumps..).  Bots will arbitrage the two markets to give huge spreads, which will only slowly fill in with BTC/CNY volatility, so no human will buy with the huge spread...

5) Overall, the spreads slowly refill with VWAP bots and hedges in other markets, etc. It's important to keep buy support in MMC/BTC...but price won't move until bots re-value VWAP on MMC/CNY.  So, the best way to support price is in sets of three: Limit Bid MMC/BTC, Limit Bid MMC/CNY, Market Buy MMC/CNY

MemoryCoin / Re: MMCBANK - Max's MMC4USD
« on: March 18, 2014, 10:53:12 pm »
If it were a first-time test with a small-amount, I think there's an option to categorize without a fee, then the 10% would cover any paypal fee on my end for for regular / larger amounts...I think about 4%? May change if higher... Also covers any trading / timing / hedging / reserve risk I decide to take.  Structured ID requirements should be developed.  For example, let's say no ID / etc up to a monthly USD amount equal to the number of forum posts in your profile?

So, final cost to you is:

bter mmc/btc and bitstamp btc/usd + 10%
Spread will benefit me, so:

The 10% covers transfer fees (may change), and development.

MemoryCoin / Re: I, Operator: The DAO of Trading
« on: March 18, 2014, 10:38:18 pm »
Yes, it can be "weak-willed" as an advertising response / reflex to a meme...or it can be stronger if community led / developed. 

The officer election model provide an opportunity to provide an example / definition of MMC beyond just a logo / meme - if communicated.  Officers should have blogs / write articles / etc as part of campaigning that are more "where should we go" / "why you should vote for me".  The status threads are good, but those are "what we did" as sort of a "responsibility for getting paid" / etc.

Links to initial forum posts on .org are decent, but a info is a bit out of date / static maybe? (At least for mine...)

MemoryCoin / Re: Takeover?
« on: March 18, 2014, 10:32:04 pm »
MMC always had a different version of the 51% attack over new block awards via accumulation in the voting system and/or mud-slinging ("disliked" campaign promises / methods) in the voting system.  We saw this in the ugliness of the early elections.  In my opinion, this is mainly why Levine detests premining. (But, I believe FT held back on voting initialliy - admirable and not required, and dilution weakens that problem)...

I tried to pitch an initial "Charity for World Domination" was a misunderstood pitch for a sideways comic pitch for a "let's research / discuss in an academic sense" methods, processes, etc to "accumulate" or "threaten" this attack...

The "paid team of developers, marketers, etc" on the .org page isn't just the paid officers - It's anyone who receives praise or approval by the officers through votes, tips, donations, payments, etc traceable to an address owned by the community elected user / individual / screen name - i.e., MVTEcXo.  You can rank these payments - 1 vote per user, vote by balance, from officer personal through MVTE address, from MVTE new block awards, etc...

After all, I think the "new block awards" are really more "taxes for community project funding paid for by officers to MMC community members".

As the price falls, these threats will rise again (accumulation will become easier)....or people will have real democratic campaigns, if you prefer.... but the threat of a robo-takeover rises with a non-engaged public...we need a MTV vote campaign, not a MVTE campaign...

But, the return on time / effort reduces twice as much as supply and price falls, so good luck, but maybe it can inspire the Officers. 

Also, if you "rank" the source of your payments ("new block awards from Freetrade" vs. "new block awards from some bot that had a short hostile takeover"), then maybe you can charge more in a person-to-person trade?  Or, maybe the opposite - charge more to new block awards traceable to certain takeover methods.  These are really financial social engineering maneuvers  / attacks against our community integrity that we need to protect against. Defense against this requires a "network security" consisting of user / voter account analysis combined with targeted marketing / etc...

If someone pulls off a political MMC version of Captain Kirk's Kobayashi Maryu maneuver...maybe those MMC are worth more :)

There are about 2500 MMC users with accounts over $1, and about 250 MMC users with accounts over $50:

Is the top 1% interested in a takeover?

Let's assume the top 5 are corporate. 25 seems like a decent range (1% of 2500 = 10% of 250 users).  Other funds are probably available on exchanges and /or other currencies...

So, anyone from # 5 to # 30 on this list interest in a takeover?

I can de-stablize about 25% of any cXo's current votes...

MemoryCoin / Re: New here, but wondering if this is fair?
« on: March 11, 2014, 08:08:55 pm »
If you've read my posts about mmc and bter...not a big fan of bters market share...something is rotten in the state of MMC...

But..I really do love the site and it's become my only site and they keep improving.  I wish cryptsy or others would cut into bter's mmc share, because 95% of the trading seems to be robo-hedging that just ratchets the price down.

So, if you mine MMC, keep it - don't auto-sell  it...

I feel like a good strategy may be to mine other coins (along with MMC).

Then, BUY MMC at BTER as follows:

1) Market buy in MMC/BTC or MMC/CNY depending on whichever has a lower spread and volume (walls vs action).  BTC preferred.

Robots will build up a CNY sell wall.  If you can take the BTC spread, best to do so for rising prices...

2) Limit buy in MMC/CNY.

This provides support in CNY ups and downs from MMC/BTC...which will take out your buy order...eventually when BTC/CNY moves...

MemoryCoin / Poll: DAO v2.0
« on: March 09, 2014, 09:57:23 pm »
Sigh - no replies, a few views:

I know I'm long-winded, and it's more blog-material...which I'm slowly building...but come on people! This is a forum! You know...discussion? Not just "help me! miner no digz!"  MMC should be econo-academic.

Here's an idea - make a support forum for MMC and crypto in general - submit question, receive "quote" to resolve issue in support for pay. Site requires new MMC wallet, which is used as "reputation" among sites...can adapt system to other cXo roles...MMC job board in / mentoring / tutoring for pay...starting with authors? hint, hint?

Vote above for my next long-winded chapter (up to 3)...

MemoryCoin / I, Operator: The DAO of Trading
« on: March 08, 2014, 10:25:06 pm »
Thread Intro:

So, Itsik and others have asked me to write an article for letstalkbitcoin or such...I don't know that site too well.  This is my home.  Plus, publishing instills a "what should i do" sense of anxiety. Instead, I'll ramble on in some posts here and someone else can base or edit a full article on this...

I've been in crypto for over a year.  IRL, a mechanical systems licensing regulatory economics training besides budgeting, but control volumes, systems, politics, and legalese combined with self-taught anarcho-capitalism.  My posts go on forever, and sometimes people miss the point...combined, these are meant to form the basis for a working philosophy / novel...we'll see.  A friend calls them "Shaggy Dog Stories":

I'll call them "Uncle Max's Fun-time Chat-a-longs".  First is based on Adam's great paper, specifically the paragraph:

Everybody Plays by the Rules, Even The Creator
Just like Bitcoin, DACs and DACPs are consensus driven, rules-based systems.  To be part of the system is to follow the rules, so there can be no pre-mining, no individuals with privileged status at all.  Privilege is the antithesis of efficiency, and these structures seek efficiency above all things.   

My thoughts in response:

I, Operator: The DAO of Trading

For all intents and purposes, bitcoin is a commercial failure and has only risen on the waves of being the first popular cryptocurrency.  But the real value is not BTC/USD, but in the unrecognized potential of distrubuted accounting system technology in general - i.e., the altcoins. 

There is "what a coin does" and "what a coin is used" for.  There is also "who uses the coin".  Bitcoin is just a general system of account - who transferred what to who.  We use it for financial value transmission...but it doesn't "do" much else, besides control the money supply.  Namecoin was the first "functional" altcoin.  All this is the software, or "DAC" realm.

The DACP realm - Adam describes as "a sense of permanence"...which is close.  I'd say more an evolving "objective truth" sense to it.  That's "what it the coin is (intended to be) used for" - bitcoin is value transmission, so is LTC and FTC on a faster scale.  NMC and XPM are intended for something else by their users - promote uncensored DNS and prime number search.  Beyond just the "network code" of the DAC, there's the "network objective" - the goal of its users.

In the example of Protoshares, their DACP starts with their SCSL license - 10% of future spinoffs.  It's community goal is more value - profitz.  For MMC, it starts with the Manifesto - 5% for elected nonprofit charities and community projects.  Sure, one affects future stock price, but which is easier for accounting / commercial separation of transactions? 

No one seems to care about anything about a coin besides ticker...but not all are equal.  BTC was a...mistake.  Meant as, probably, a demo concept and not even proof of concept...Grand success for crypto, but time to move on...How do we do that?

BTC's value grew over started from nothing, really - just volunteer labor.  Pretty much all coins start with some value injection nowadays - labor, private capital...or "premining".  In what I would call "headless" coins - it's the intangible developer and community labor.  In DACs, it's an IPO, initial project funding, blockchain spinoff / dividend / etc.  A 100% premined coin is called a "private corporation"...or, "my wallet".

So, skip the premine stuff.  Yes, an initial distortion, but important part is how it was used, not where it came from / etc...Let's move on.

Back to DACP - it starts with a "mission statement" that the community uses to guide its general operations.  In a corporation - this is the departments and procedures / etc.  But neither the DAC nor DACP are...people.  So how can they be an economic system?

The last part of the system, what is missing from adam's paper - is the user.  At various levels - developer, miner, merchant, trader, consumer, outsider.  I call this the operator of the corporation - who it markets to - the Distributed Autonomous Operator.

That is, essentially, all of us in various degrees.  Anyone doing this for a while has performed in each role.  Anyone trying commercially has to balance all roles.  MMC has done a pretty good job classifying the different "professional" roles that each of us play...although their descriptions are kind of sparse.

But, I think we've also created a new discipline.  Professionally, we have to balance a number of existing disciplines.  But, just like in other sciences like math and physics, the rules change as you approach limits - i.e., distributed economic system management. Each DAO performs many different tasks, in many disciplines, with many different demands begging to be the most profitable...ADHD with 20 part-time jobs...

So, for a DAO / DACP to be has to "engage" it's DAOs...  Each coin is a pachinko machine with flashing lights and whistles trying to attract new money from passers-by...including the MMC officers and their employees / etc.  Everyone is free and autonomous with no repercussions - you have to beg, trust, and hope in the markets and the person on the other end of the transaction...

I believe that, in the end, every cryptocurrency transaction should come down to a peer-to-peer transfer between trusted individuals.  Not all...just the system or chain of transfers.  That's the only way to safely exchange funds in such a wild west system.  I've lost funds so many ways...the only times I've gotten them back was face-to-face, or from good people with good community reps.

Which brings me to the MMC officer positions as an example of a "trust schema" in a coin system...but first - systems.

Talking systems will drive you crazy.  I was mechanical systems, not general "systems engineering" more common in IT / software (b/c of more complex supplier / client webs).  But, everything is related, and word meanings change everywhere depending on who you are or what system you are sound crazy to everyone.  But, every Supersystem has a System with Subsystems and all are Super/subsystems of others / etc...  "Safety" in one department means "under budget" in another department, etc... So, you need to think in basic units / building blocks and extend up to full macro-network. 

Anyways, MMC Officers as part of DACP - the election process is much more than a "free coinz" scramble that it was in the beginning.  That was ugly, but needed, kinda like any IPO.  I do regret that it "spoiled" some interest in voting.  You'd think CMO would make a website with simple "make a blockchain poll" features, but...only so much time.

Another sidenote: I loathe the "community development" and "paid development" terms...we're an elected development team trying to support and build a community.  It's not a "give us your code / money", it should be a "give us your idea and we'll help you build it" - an MMC Academy...

Aside from personal politics, voting in a general coding sense is the first thing you need for an altchain - "I am different".  Namecoin / etc, are forks in the code.  MMC 2.0, BTS, etc are both code forks, and "funding forks".  I can make a similar spin-off / fork by voting within the MMC addresses to form a "closed" network.  Can also use voting for basic selection and rank algorithms - user preferences, blockchain cookies, community ratings, etc.

But in politics, it focuses the DACP.  It's an evolving "what is this coin used for" by the example set by the officers.  I'd prefer it to be more evolving, and treated as "running / funding programs" vs. people - even if it's the same person's programs...think of them as terms.

But, it's better than BTC - money laundering, drugs, etc...all that can be done in the shadows of the "unlicensed" non-DACP-approved MMC network.  But, we also have the approved / licensed uses supported by the officers (and those who follow / run / support the elections).

So, there you have it:


Client software, user license and community practices, community of users.

Any questions?

MemoryCoin / Re: Market Price Poll
« on: March 08, 2014, 09:19:45 pm »
So far, poll says "Buy"

Remember: Limit orders in CNY, market orders in BTC

MemoryCoin / Re: MMC Ubuntu compile error
« on: March 08, 2014, 12:24:25 am »
Looks like you got past the qt errors and now onto wallet errors?

Do you have bitcoin-qt installed on that machine?

I've found on re-installs some coins need bitcoin installed first...

MemoryCoin / Custom MMC addresses
« on: March 08, 2014, 12:20:59 am »
For custom vanity addresses, download vanitygen and run:

vanitygen64 -X 50 -k -o output.txt Mprefix

Where this will search for addresses with that prefix


vanitygen64 -X 50 -k -o max.txt MAX

You should then get a "found pattern" message with the address and private key.


1) I've never gotten oclvanitygen to work...just spits out GPU Hash / CPU Hash / found delta strings and keeps going...suggestions?

2) The -v option gives the public keys and a longer private key in "ASN1" format?? What are these for?

3) Can pool mining an address be combined with coin mining somehow?  Not sure how that would be useful, really...

could also try to boot into command prompt (hold F8 while booting? not sure for your model...) and navigate to the wallet.dat directory and backup.

your MMC aren't "lost" - their still in the chain...only a question of whether you're access to them is lost...

MemoryCoin / Re: recovering balance in wallet
« on: March 08, 2014, 12:09:50 am »
If it's important / large balance...

Stop everything, power down - check for data recovery / undelete program or company and send to them...then pray...

MemoryCoin / Re: Problems with wallet
« on: March 08, 2014, 12:07:49 am »
Not sure I got that with the binary...

(I got a "no permission" after downloading / saving that needed a chmod +x)...

Check in the bitcoin-qt forums...

I think there may be an rpc username or something in .bitcoin?

did you use a similar username in .memorycoin?

MemoryCoin / Market Price Poll
« on: March 07, 2014, 07:44:49 pm »
Survey of market prices.

5 votes per users.

A mix of some movie metaphors...

MemoryCoin / MMCBANK - Max's MMC4USD
« on: March 07, 2014, 05:57:54 pm »
To help me fund other evil plans:

I will buy MMC for Paypal.

My reserves / stocks are limited - so priority goes to officers first, then miners of If people are interested, PM me for personal payment details or reply with general questions.

US only.

This is "person-to-person"...not a full-time we can negotiate.  I think BTER/Bitstamp bid prices + 10% for development is fair...

Large orders may require ID / etc verification in a tiered approach by either me or another customer / officer I trust.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 15