How I Accumulated 2M Stellar in Less Than 24 Hours(medium.com)
medium.com
How I Accumulated 2M Stellar in Less Than 24 Hours
https://medium.com/@everettforth/how-i-accumulated-2-million-stellar-in-less-than-24-hours-98b89af934cb
13 comments
"interest in the coin is failing to pass on"
What makes you think it is failing? Literally all the indicators show that interest in Bitcoin is growing:
- Payment processors are growing very fast (eg. BitPay is signing up 500-1000 new merchants every week: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8YSivdLKf0 and see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7974197)
- Even very large companies began to accept Bitcoin: Dell, Expedia, Newegg, Dish Network, Overstock, TigerDirect...
- BTC continues to gain value --chaotically through bubbles but still gaining value overall: http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/bitstampUSD#rg730zigWeeklyzc...
- Bitcoin VC investment reached $158 million this year, and is on target to reach $200-300 million, approximately 2x-3x more than last year: http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-venture-capital/
What makes you think it is failing? Literally all the indicators show that interest in Bitcoin is growing:
- Payment processors are growing very fast (eg. BitPay is signing up 500-1000 new merchants every week: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8YSivdLKf0 and see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7974197)
- Even very large companies began to accept Bitcoin: Dell, Expedia, Newegg, Dish Network, Overstock, TigerDirect...
- BTC continues to gain value --chaotically through bubbles but still gaining value overall: http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/bitstampUSD#rg730zigWeeklyzc...
- Bitcoin VC investment reached $158 million this year, and is on target to reach $200-300 million, approximately 2x-3x more than last year: http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-venture-capital/
Interest among businesses and institutions has increased and to an impressive extent. Interest among users seems to have stagnated.
If you can show any metrics pointing to an increasing rate of adoption among users, I would be greatly heartened.
Instead, we seem to be reaching a wall between the early adopters and early majority. This is a well-known chasms in the technology adoption cycle, and I'm a bit concerned about Bitcoin's ability to jump it, particularly given the current "hodl" mentality of most users of the coin.
On the other hand, if there's another big jump in price (not unlikely), then there will likely be increased interest among users. So I'm not saying Bitcoin will never gain majority adoption. I'm just saying that at this point, things don't look as promising as they did a year ago.
If you can show any metrics pointing to an increasing rate of adoption among users, I would be greatly heartened.
Instead, we seem to be reaching a wall between the early adopters and early majority. This is a well-known chasms in the technology adoption cycle, and I'm a bit concerned about Bitcoin's ability to jump it, particularly given the current "hodl" mentality of most users of the coin.
On the other hand, if there's another big jump in price (not unlikely), then there will likely be increased interest among users. So I'm not saying Bitcoin will never gain majority adoption. I'm just saying that at this point, things don't look as promising as they did a year ago.
Ironically, a big jump in price is of of the negative things that can happen to Bitcoin. The best thing that could possibly happen to increase the utilization of Bitcoin as a medium for transaction, as has always been the case, is that Bitcoin gets pegged to normal a bucket of Fiat Currency, (USD, INR, EUR, GBP) and then flatlines.
And, I don't know how much you use Bitcoin to buy things, but Bitcoin is about 20x more useful this year than it was last year in terms of making purchases, particularly now that Apple lets you put a wallet on your iPhone. Purchasing from your smartphone is going to be the way 99%+ of people use bitcoins on a daily basis, so that change is huge.
The metrics that really need to be tracked are: What percentage of people have made a single, transaction from a wallet in the previous month, and, 2-5, 6-20, 21+ transactions a month. That will give us the best understanding of Bitcoins growth as a transaction medium.
And, of course, this all ignores other innovative uses of the Blockchain, upon which Bitcoin as a currency might have just been the Trojan horse in enabling.
And, I don't know how much you use Bitcoin to buy things, but Bitcoin is about 20x more useful this year than it was last year in terms of making purchases, particularly now that Apple lets you put a wallet on your iPhone. Purchasing from your smartphone is going to be the way 99%+ of people use bitcoins on a daily basis, so that change is huge.
The metrics that really need to be tracked are: What percentage of people have made a single, transaction from a wallet in the previous month, and, 2-5, 6-20, 21+ transactions a month. That will give us the best understanding of Bitcoins growth as a transaction medium.
And, of course, this all ignores other innovative uses of the Blockchain, upon which Bitcoin as a currency might have just been the Trojan horse in enabling.
What's your indication that it's stagnated? Other than a guess?
I don't know if this is what jnbiche was referring to, but maybe the transaction volume isn't growing particularly fast. I don't know how useful/descriptive these numbers are, but from a quick look at blockchain.info's charts: the absolute number of transactions per day looks like it's only up by about 20% over the last year [1]. However, the USD value of transactions conducted is up by something like 200% [2]. I don't know how we could tell what fraction of these represent actual purchases, as opposed to individuals just moving their own coins around...
[1]: https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions?timespan=1year
[2]: https://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume-...
[1]: https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions?timespan=1year
[2]: https://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume-...
Actually the number of transactions grew +90% year-over-year, which is pretty fast growth! At +90% year-over-year, Bitcoin will reach 600k transfers/day in 3.5 years (what Western Union does today). Compare 2013Q2 with 2014Q2:
- 2013Q2: 3.0 million transactions
- 2013Q3: 3.8 million transactions
- 2013Q4: 4.8 million transactions
- 2014Q1: 5.7 million transactions
- 2014Q2: 5.7 million transactions
You can get these values from the graph at http://www.quandl.com/BCHAIN/NTRAN-Bitcoin-Number-of-Transac... (select QUARTERLY).
- 2013Q2: 3.0 million transactions
- 2013Q3: 3.8 million transactions
- 2013Q4: 4.8 million transactions
- 2014Q1: 5.7 million transactions
- 2014Q2: 5.7 million transactions
You can get these values from the graph at http://www.quandl.com/BCHAIN/NTRAN-Bitcoin-Number-of-Transac... (select QUARTERLY).
Sorry that wasn't clear. What she means is the amount given to each person. We are still and always will be committed to giving away the total 95B stellars.
I just edited her post to clarify what we were trying to say.
Thanks for the response. At the same time, I remained concerned by this idea that an increase in value of Stellars would slow down the rate of distribution.
After all, new users are a limited commodity (particularly after the honeymoon period). So almost by definition, if you chose to decrease the amount of Stellars distributed because the price is increasing, then you're slowing down the rate of distribution.
Which is exactly what Ripple has done.
I'd be happy to be proved wrong on this one, but I'm definitely taking a wait and see approach.
After all, new users are a limited commodity (particularly after the honeymoon period). So almost by definition, if you chose to decrease the amount of Stellars distributed because the price is increasing, then you're slowing down the rate of distribution.
Which is exactly what Ripple has done.
I'd be happy to be proved wrong on this one, but I'm definitely taking a wait and see approach.
Stripe paid $3000000 for 2000000000 stellars @$0.0015. He's paying up to $2 for 5000 stellars @$0.0004. So the MT are selling it at a 25% of the Stripe price.
IF stellar is a success, hoarding can be a good idea. But if this has a fate similar to to Auroracoin (also heavily premined, handed out for free to everybody) the price may drop 20 fold: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auroracoin
IF stellar is a success, hoarding can be a good idea. But if this has a fate similar to to Auroracoin (also heavily premined, handed out for free to everybody) the price may drop 20 fold: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auroracoin
And it will. There's nothing revolutionary about Stellar. It's a fork of Ripple (the founders of which already cashed out).
Instead of inventing yet another premined coin Stripe should have integrated Ripple.
Instead of inventing yet another premined coin Stripe should have integrated Ripple.
That seems like the market mechanism working as it should. It's a little tacky, but effectively the turkers are valuing their Stellars really low. I'm not sure it's a problem.
Arguably Bitcoin was the same initially, except in Bitcoin's case you paid CPU manufacturers and electrical utility companies who preferred to be paid cash than mine Bitcoin themselves. Division of labour in action.
Arguably Bitcoin was the same initially, except in Bitcoin's case you paid CPU manufacturers and electrical utility companies who preferred to be paid cash than mine Bitcoin themselves. Division of labour in action.
I am the executive director of Stellar. Wanted to share my reply to the MTurk stuff: http://forum.stellar.org/t/stellar-updates/1026
On my laptop, I scroll the screen but cannot read all the text in the blue popup titled "Updates from Stellar HQ." It just scrolls the white page underneath, which is not what I'm trying to read.
Yeah I had a lot of problems with this on my iphone
I bet that the unsuspecting Mechanical Turk workers, who traded their 6000 Stellars, did not realize that this was a one-time deal, rather than a repeatable revenue opportunity.
Mechanical Turk workers are used to low-paying and high-volume jobs. The $1.00 fee is very attractive for the steps involved, if this was a repeatable job. It's only natural to assume that every worker would attempt to create another Stellar account and retry the steps anew, only to be confronted with a an error after the first attempt.
And, unbeknownst to them, if Stellar does become a success, those workers will forever be left on the sidelines. Considering that Stellar has the potential to include the world's underprivileged into the global economy, often without bank accounts or identities, it's a shame that we are the first to take advantage of them.
Mechanical Turk workers are used to low-paying and high-volume jobs. The $1.00 fee is very attractive for the steps involved, if this was a repeatable job. It's only natural to assume that every worker would attempt to create another Stellar account and retry the steps anew, only to be confronted with a an error after the first attempt.
And, unbeknownst to them, if Stellar does become a success, those workers will forever be left on the sidelines. Considering that Stellar has the potential to include the world's underprivileged into the global economy, often without bank accounts or identities, it's a shame that we are the first to take advantage of them.
Or Stellar flops and the guy just spent 24 hours of his life and $50 or so dollars to accumulate a bunch of useless not-even-paper. It could go either way. The mechanical turk workers implicitly made the bet that stellars will not be worth much more than they are worth today in the future - and were thus, reasonably, willing to trade nothing for real actual money that's there right now.
Those same workers could have traded in their 5000 Stellars for $50 on Stellar Forums. Everett was actively selling 5K Stellars at $50 [http://forum.stellar.org/t/i-want-to-buy-your-stellars-50-fo...], while buying them at $1 on Mechanical Turk.
Otherwise known as "Arbitrage" and something that any commodity, let alone currency faces in the first 30 seconds on the market.
If it wasn't Everett, there is a 100% guarantee that if there was money to be made, that any one of another 10,000 people would be immediately utilizing this mechanism.
If it wasn't Everett, there is a 100% guarantee that if there was money to be made, that any one of another 10,000 people would be immediately utilizing this mechanism.
Ok - think of $49 as the cost of not having to figure out what Stellar is and where the opportunity to sell them at a higher price exists.
They probably never would have heard of stellar in the first place, if not for this mechanical turk job.
Most people aren't even aware of Bitcoin, let alone all the random pump-and-dump schemes floating around.
Most people aren't even aware of Bitcoin, let alone all the random pump-and-dump schemes floating around.
Everett,
The cat was out of the bag before you even tried. The only difference is others showed restraint and didn't break Stellar's mechanism intentionally.
When I pointed out you could buy access to FB accounts, you weren't actually supposed to go out and do it, y'know?
Just because we can break dumb mechanisms like these just means we have to show restraint. :/
> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8115497
> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8115430
The cat was out of the bag before you even tried. The only difference is others showed restraint and didn't break Stellar's mechanism intentionally.
When I pointed out you could buy access to FB accounts, you weren't actually supposed to go out and do it, y'know?
Just because we can break dumb mechanisms like these just means we have to show restraint. :/
> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8115497
> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8115430
> Just because we can break dumb mechanisms like these just means we have to show restraint. :/
Dumb mechanisms inherent in a cryptocurrency should be broken early and often. This is just one inherent in Ripple/Stellar. Everett is a hacker hero.
Dumb mechanisms inherent in a cryptocurrency should be broken early and often. This is just one inherent in Ripple/Stellar. Everett is a hacker hero.
Why is it always necessary to demonstrate the obvious in a selfish way for gain? And how is that 'heroic'?
If your assertion is correct that Everett truly "broke" Stellar, than they will be worthless and he will have gained nothing. Your logic is contradictory.
You make 0 sense. I'm not sure if you just have trouble following what I wrote or what the issue is.
> If your assertion is correct that Everett truly "broke" Stellar
1) That is not what I said. Much like the person who doesn't understand what "farming" means in context, I'm just going to assume poor comprehension on your part.
2) Even if that is what I said, he gained internet points and attention. That is still technically speaking "gain", at which point...you are still wrong.
So, I think the issue here is:
1) You can't understand what I wrote either due to me or your poor reading comprehension.
2) You don't realize what you said is inherently false, regardless.
---
At this point, I'm mainly just amused by how everyone leaps up to defend a guy who basically stole Stellars and then waited until he was called out to say anything.
I wonder how well that would work at a bank. Care to try it for me?
> If your assertion is correct that Everett truly "broke" Stellar
1) That is not what I said. Much like the person who doesn't understand what "farming" means in context, I'm just going to assume poor comprehension on your part.
2) Even if that is what I said, he gained internet points and attention. That is still technically speaking "gain", at which point...you are still wrong.
So, I think the issue here is:
1) You can't understand what I wrote either due to me or your poor reading comprehension.
2) You don't realize what you said is inherently false, regardless.
---
At this point, I'm mainly just amused by how everyone leaps up to defend a guy who basically stole Stellars and then waited until he was called out to say anything.
I wonder how well that would work at a bank. Care to try it for me?
He didn't steal them. He bought them from others. Meaning that he valued them more than the others. Welcome to economics.
Also, you very clearly used the words "break the system".
Also, you very clearly used the words "break the system".
Please use ctrl+f if you believe I said that. The only one that comes up is you.
I'm done talking to you.
I'm done talking to you.
Sorry, "break [the] mechanisms", of which the system is composed. Also, nice dodge on the other point.
So far your only arguments are that he got "internet cool points" by gaming a broken mechanism, even if Stellar turns out worthless, and... Oh, that looks like it.
So far your only arguments are that he got "internet cool points" by gaming a broken mechanism, even if Stellar turns out worthless, and... Oh, that looks like it.
[deleted]
I know there are clever people working on this, but I can't see how any system based on handing out free money can really work.
"Since we decided a few weeks ago to adopt leaves as legal tender, we have, of course all become immensely rich."
"Since we decided a few weeks ago to adopt leaves as legal tender, we have, of course all become immensely rich."
Systems of great value based on requiring voluntary restraint will always fail. If there's a particularly dumb mechanism that can easily break a system, then the entire system should fail, the sooner the better.
Credit cards work out just fine.
Note that Everett was paying Mechanical Turks to auth their legitimate/existing Facebook accounts — not to go and fill out a bunch of captchas to farm new ones.
Yes. That is farming Facebook accounts. :/
If I had meant "creating Facebook accounts", I'd have stated that. This is a technique that has been used before on various blackhat forums.
Generally farming is getting people in countries with cheap labor to go out and perform the action for you. Mechanical Turk is one way to do that.
e.g. Term in a different way: http://www.blackhat-seo.com/2009/captcha-farms/
Captcha Farms do the same thing but with a private pool of cheap labor.
Gdb, I was trying to be circumspect and not spelling it out so some script kiddie didn't go and immediately use the technique.
If I had meant "creating Facebook accounts", I'd have stated that. This is a technique that has been used before on various blackhat forums.
Generally farming is getting people in countries with cheap labor to go out and perform the action for you. Mechanical Turk is one way to do that.
e.g. Term in a different way: http://www.blackhat-seo.com/2009/captcha-farms/
Captcha Farms do the same thing but with a private pool of cheap labor.
Gdb, I was trying to be circumspect and not spelling it out so some script kiddie didn't go and immediately use the technique.
>Just because we can break dumb mechanisms like these just means we have to show restraint.
Why the flying fuck would I show restraint towards a system that claims to be designed for the safe storage and transport of money?
You bet your ass I, along with ten thousand others, tried to find ways to game/break Bitcoin. And guess what? We can't, because it's well designed.
If Ripple/Stellar are gameable, they deserve to be gamed.
Why the flying fuck would I show restraint towards a system that claims to be designed for the safe storage and transport of money?
You bet your ass I, along with ten thousand others, tried to find ways to game/break Bitcoin. And guess what? We can't, because it's well designed.
If Ripple/Stellar are gameable, they deserve to be gamed.
> You bet your ass I, along with ten thousand others, tried to find ways to game/break Bitcoin. And guess what? We can't, because it's well designed.
51% attacks? http://www.coindesk.com/ghash-io-never-launch-51-attack/ ?
Etc.
Please don't tell me you can't game/break Bitcoin. With enough capital, you can. Just no one has bothered.
Please don't make obviously false statements in defense of your position.
> Why the flying fuck would I show restraint towards a system that claims to be designed for the safe storage and transport of money?
I could steal people's credit card information and use it without triggering the fraud alert until after I get the goods. I could flee the country to a place that wouldn't extradite me for such behavior before anyone was the wiser.
I don't because I have no desire to abuse breakable systems just because I can.
I guess I just have more restraint than most people.
51% attacks? http://www.coindesk.com/ghash-io-never-launch-51-attack/ ?
Etc.
Please don't tell me you can't game/break Bitcoin. With enough capital, you can. Just no one has bothered.
Please don't make obviously false statements in defense of your position.
> Why the flying fuck would I show restraint towards a system that claims to be designed for the safe storage and transport of money?
I could steal people's credit card information and use it without triggering the fraud alert until after I get the goods. I could flee the country to a place that wouldn't extradite me for such behavior before anyone was the wiser.
I don't because I have no desire to abuse breakable systems just because I can.
I guess I just have more restraint than most people.
>51% attacks?
People have tried and failed to pull them off. Preventing 51% attacks doesn't rely on goodwill. It just relies on people being either semi-rational or not sufficiently rich and motivated (one must be very rich and very motivated).
>Please don't tell me you can't game/break Bitcoin. With enough capital, you can.
I am telling you right now: I cannot game or break Bitcoin. With enough capital, anyone can do just about anything. The important thing is that no one who wants to has enough capital.
>I don't because I have no desire to abuse breakable systems just because I can.
You're conflating stealing money with breaking shitty systems. You can (and should) break shitty systems without stealing money from people.
People have tried and failed to pull them off. Preventing 51% attacks doesn't rely on goodwill. It just relies on people being either semi-rational or not sufficiently rich and motivated (one must be very rich and very motivated).
>Please don't tell me you can't game/break Bitcoin. With enough capital, you can.
I am telling you right now: I cannot game or break Bitcoin. With enough capital, anyone can do just about anything. The important thing is that no one who wants to has enough capital.
>I don't because I have no desire to abuse breakable systems just because I can.
You're conflating stealing money with breaking shitty systems. You can (and should) break shitty systems without stealing money from people.
> People have tried and failed to pull them off.
Evidence? None? Oh you poor dear.
If I had 51% of the Bitcoin network, I could break it. You are once again relying on willful restraint.
The fact you don't realize its the same concept makes me not care what you think, honestly.
I'm not going to bother to reply further.
> You're conflating stealing money with breaking shitty systems. You can (and should) break shitty systems without stealing money from people.
You stated: > Why the flying fuck would I show restraint towards a system that claims to be designed for the safe storage and transport of money? You bet your ass I, along with ten thousand others, tried to find ways to game/break Bitcoin. And guess what? We can't, because it's well designed.
If you had gamed Bitcoin, you'd steal real money. Much like the person that claims something exists that can't be found except in his posts...ya, best of luck to you but this is a waste of my time.
Evidence? None? Oh you poor dear.
If I had 51% of the Bitcoin network, I could break it. You are once again relying on willful restraint.
The fact you don't realize its the same concept makes me not care what you think, honestly.
I'm not going to bother to reply further.
> You're conflating stealing money with breaking shitty systems. You can (and should) break shitty systems without stealing money from people.
You stated: > Why the flying fuck would I show restraint towards a system that claims to be designed for the safe storage and transport of money? You bet your ass I, along with ten thousand others, tried to find ways to game/break Bitcoin. And guess what? We can't, because it's well designed.
If you had gamed Bitcoin, you'd steal real money. Much like the person that claims something exists that can't be found except in his posts...ya, best of luck to you but this is a waste of my time.
>Evidence? None? Oh you poor dear.
Evidence is abundant. It would be immediately obvious if someone pulled off a 51% attack, because somehow service would be tangibly disrupted. That's the definition of a 51% attack. Otherwise it's just mining as usual.
>If I had 51% of the Bitcoin network, I could break it.
No, you can't. You can prevent transactions from going through, double spend, and cause mischief in a few other ways, but you can't steal other people's Bitcoins or anything of that magnitude.
Evidence is abundant. It would be immediately obvious if someone pulled off a 51% attack, because somehow service would be tangibly disrupted. That's the definition of a 51% attack. Otherwise it's just mining as usual.
>If I had 51% of the Bitcoin network, I could break it.
No, you can't. You can prevent transactions from going through, double spend, and cause mischief in a few other ways, but you can't steal other people's Bitcoins or anything of that magnitude.
Am surprised no one with the coding skills has put up a graph showing the value of a Stellar over time. A rudimentary beginning could be a derivative of these values: http://bit.ly/1o2eBJl
Which is currently around $0.000353USD/STR ($2.05/5800)
Which is currently around $0.000353USD/STR ($2.05/5800)
Is USD 1.00-2.00 really enough of an incentive for people to do this (instead of keeping the Stellars), considering they (normally) can do this only once (b/c 1 FB account)?
(Edit: it seems more likely to me that, if this was done over MT, the people working on MT were in turn using botnets for scale.)
(Edit: it seems more likely to me that, if this was done over MT, the people working on MT were in turn using botnets for scale.)
I actually thought it is way too much. People are filling surveys for cents there, after all.
Yes or just human spammers in low labor cost countries.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVfHeWTKjag
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVfHeWTKjag
Why would you tell people this?
For some reason the link to the other HN thread got downvoted so:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8124119
He got outed.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8124119
He got outed.
hey everett, just because you are so ahead of the curve i used my "send 1000, receive 1000" new stellar account promo on you..well deserved, spend wisely...
Not only is he arguably violating Mechanical Turk's terms of service by simple asking people to sign up for this in the first place, he's even gaming MTurk itself by creating multiple Amazon accounts with pseudonyms and spamming the marketplace with requests. Cute, Mr. Forth, really, really cute.
Update: If you don't believe it, here's a screenshot straight from HIT Scraper, a Greasemonkey script MTurk workers often use to display job listings on Mechanical Turk in a more easily parsable fashion: http://imgur.com/DOAIuy3
Not sure how he pulled this one off, considering Amazon is now requiring a verified SSN or tax ID for requesters to purchase money to post HITs, but there you have it.
Update: If you don't believe it, here's a screenshot straight from HIT Scraper, a Greasemonkey script MTurk workers often use to display job listings on Mechanical Turk in a more easily parsable fashion: http://imgur.com/DOAIuy3
Not sure how he pulled this one off, considering Amazon is now requiring a verified SSN or tax ID for requesters to purchase money to post HITs, but there you have it.
Everett's response is much appreciated.
Per my original HN post last night which broke the story [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8124119], I still think that he gamed the system. If I remember correctly, he asked mTurkers to create a Stellar account _without_ an identifiable account name so the transaction couldn't be easily backtracked. Also, he did not use his real name in mTurk and impersonated someone else. Not sure if his actions violated the ToS.
It was right for Everett to have come forward and disclose his means. His suggestions to improve the system are excellent. It will improve the Stellar system for everyone involved. Nevertheless, I believe that he should donate his balance to a charity. It will be an honorable thing to do.
Sandro
Per my original HN post last night which broke the story [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8124119], I still think that he gamed the system. If I remember correctly, he asked mTurkers to create a Stellar account _without_ an identifiable account name so the transaction couldn't be easily backtracked. Also, he did not use his real name in mTurk and impersonated someone else. Not sure if his actions violated the ToS.
It was right for Everett to have come forward and disclose his means. His suggestions to improve the system are excellent. It will improve the Stellar system for everyone involved. Nevertheless, I believe that he should donate his balance to a charity. It will be an honorable thing to do.
Sandro
It makes no sense to suggest he donate it to charity. He found a pile of people willing to sell him the goods at a price both they and he were happy with. If something like Stellar is to succeed you can't put limits on the free market and the transactions that are allowed to take place using them.
Just because he didn't use his real name doesn't make the transaction less valid. And just because the task didn't use an identifiable account name doesn't make the transaction less valid.
What you're insisting is that you can't buy something from someone on Craigslist using a fake name and meeting in a place that nobody else can tell where you made the transaction. In other words, 99% of Craiglist transactions.
Just because he didn't use his real name doesn't make the transaction less valid. And just because the task didn't use an identifiable account name doesn't make the transaction less valid.
What you're insisting is that you can't buy something from someone on Craigslist using a fake name and meeting in a place that nobody else can tell where you made the transaction. In other words, 99% of Craiglist transactions.
He found a pile of people looking for a job, and willing to perform a set of tasks for a certain price. Nowhere was it disclosed that this was a one-time deal, and by proceeding they would be forever limiting the upside of their personal economic prosperity.
If you disclosed to these people that this is a one-time transaction, and that they will forever be parting ways with their only allotment of currency which might appreciate in the future, and which is currently valued 50X higher, I bet you wouldn't get as many takers.
If you disclosed to these people that this is a one-time transaction, and that they will forever be parting ways with their only allotment of currency which might appreciate in the future, and which is currently valued 50X higher, I bet you wouldn't get as many takers.
I think most people are aware you're only allowed one Facebook account thus the fact that it's a one-time deal is implied.
I also think most of the turks probably thought it a good trade: $1-2 USD for 5000 funny money. I imagine most turks, like most people, aren't familiar with cryptocurrencies and the only way they will ever hear of Stellar again is if it becomes so commonplace that the giveaways are long a thing of the past.
Compared to the rates that the other MT tasks pay, I think they made out pretty good.
I also think most of the turks probably thought it a good trade: $1-2 USD for 5000 funny money. I imagine most turks, like most people, aren't familiar with cryptocurrencies and the only way they will ever hear of Stellar again is if it becomes so commonplace that the giveaways are long a thing of the past.
Compared to the rates that the other MT tasks pay, I think they made out pretty good.
That it's a one-time deal sounds like a failure on Stellar's part.
>We expect that as a price for stellar becomes more established, we'll have to continually adjust the total amount of the giveaway to make sure it keeps making sense.
So they're already dialing back their distribution promise. This is exactly what happened with Ripple. When Ripple first started, there were assurances that all but 20% of Ripples would be distributed "as quickly as possible".
That didn't happen.
Several years later now, Ripple has decided to basically keep as many ripples as they can, which is supposedly part of what led to the split between Jed and the Ripple leadership/owners.
All this is a funny commentary on human nature. As an outsider, it's as clear as day to me that in order to succeed, Ripple needed to rapidly distribute as many XRP as possible. After all, 5% of a lot of money is worth much more than 50% of nothing. The only other missing ingredient for Ripple was community engagement.
And with Stellar I fear we'll see the same thing (at least with respect to a rapidly decreasing distribution rate).
These issues are exactly why Bitcoiners are so scornful of "pre-mined" coins. All things considered, proof-of-work and proof-of-burn are still by far the fairest and most successful currency bootstrapping methods. Stellar uses neither.
Bootstrapping a currency is the ultimate Zen undertaking: in order to make money as a crypto-bootstrapper, you must find ways to distribute it, either by giving it away or (preferably) by fostering entrepreneurship and spending it on those merchants who take a chance on accepting it.
A lesson much of the Bitcoin community still hasn't taken to heart, which is likely the only reason why interest in the coin is failing to pass on from the early adopter to the early majority.