16 ms·
There are 250 million units of mobilecoin, and majority of them are owned by the founders. Only 37.5 million have been distributed. With current price ($65), th
by Geee 6y ago
There are 250 million units of mobilecoin, and majority of them are owned by the founders. Only 37.5 million have been distributed. With current price ($65), they're worth $14B already. This makes the project a scam and impossible for it to work as a reliable money that holds value. Bitcoin had no pre-mine and has been fairly distributed from the start.
- orph 6y agoEven UK-only release in Signal means more people with cryptocurrency wallets than all other cryptocurrencies combined.
- admax88q 6y agoIs the number of empty wallets of a cryptocurrency a useful metric in any way?
- mandelbrotwurst 6y agoI would say yes, at least to the extent that owners are aware that they exist and potentially become more likely to use.
- megameter 6y agoIt's roughly similar to Brave's userbase, though Brave is opt-in. Figures from 2020 put both in the low tens of millions.
- qertoip 6y agoMobileCoin is not a cryptocurrency.
- otoburb 6y agoThe Wired article that the CEO of Mobilecoin is implicitly endorsing in this thread specifically categorizes Mobilecoin as a cryptocurrency. At least, it doesn’t seem to be a distinction worth splitting hairs about (yet).
- tradertef 6y agoThanks. Honestly, not surprising..
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- rOOb85 6y agoCan you post your source for these claims?
- Geee 6y agoIt's in the whitepaper. There are 250 million coins in total, and 37.5 million were sold in the ICO. I couldn't find any information on further distribution or monetary policy, so I assume the founders still hold them.
- marcinzm 6y agoTheir own white paper (no longer hosted on their site it seems) says they created 250 million tokens and pre-sold 37.5 million. https://mixin.one/assets/MobileCoin-Whitepaper-EN_FINAL.pdf https://mixin.one/assets/MobileCoin-Whitepaper-EN_FINAL.pdf
- josh2600 6y agoThis whitepaper is not the whitepaper I wrote back in 2017. We took that down because it was ultimately not the design we implemented. The full system design can be found here: https://github.com/UkoeHB/Mechanics-of-MobileCoin/blob/master/Mechanics-of-MobileCoin-v0-0-39-preview-10-11.pdf https://github.com/UkoeHB/Mechanics-of-MobileCoin/blob/maste....
- opheliate 6y agoFyi, while the whitepaper marcinzm links to may not be the design you implemented, it is the first result (for me, at least, in the UK) when googling "MobileCoin Whitepaper", while the Mechanics of MobileCoin repo doesn't appear at all. Just in terms of avoiding confusion, you might want to reach out to mixin.one to try to replace that document with one that clarifies that the design outlined there was not used? Or publicise the actual design a bit better? (I couldn't find a link to this repo on the MobileCoin website, which is why I searched for the whitepaper elsewhere in the first place).
- lottin 6y agoBitcoin rates worse than North Korea in terms of wealth distribution as measured by the Gini coefficient. [1] [1] https://blog.dshr.org/2018/10/gini-coefficients-of-cryptocurrencies.html https://blog.dshr.org/2018/10/gini-coefficients-of-cryptocur...
- modeless 6y agoAll calculations of this sort are fatally flawed because they assume all the coins in one address are owned by one person. That would be like calculating the US Gini coefficient assuming that all bank accounts are owned by the CEO of the bank.
- warkdarrior 6y agoIf many coin owners share the same address, that is not very decentralized, is it?
- risho 6y agothat's like saying that the internet isn't decentralized because lots of people interact using facebook. that address isn't decentralized, much like facebook isn't. that doesn't mean that bitcoin or the internet aren't decentralized.
- lottin 6y ago"Decentralized" means little without more context. The issuance of bitcoins isn't a legal monopoly. In this sense Bitcoin is "decentralized". On the other hand the Bitcoin blockchain is a centralized ledger, which is distributed, but nonetheless centralized. So which one is it? Centralized or decentralized? It doesn't matter because at this stage "decentralized" is being used as a mere buzzword rather than to convey a precise meaning.
- creata 6y ago> that's like saying that the internet isn't decentralized because lots of people interact using facebook Yes, and I do say that. Decentralization is a lot less interesting if most people just end up centralizing anyway.
- CynicusRex 6y agoNo “pre-mine” doesn't mean fairly distributed. Bitcoin is a multi-level marketing pyramid scheme as well. Early adopters mine or buy large proportions at negligible prices while late adopters mine or buy negligible proportions at large prices.
- olah_1 6y agoThe gold and oil rushes weren't "fair" either. Fortune favors the bold, I guess. I was salty for a long time about bitcoin early buyers being filthy rich now. My saltiness clouded my vision of the real value there. Granted, I think there are better solutions than bitcoin now, but I respect it.
- anonporridge 6y agoBy this definition, every company stock is a multi-level marketing pyramid scheme. In fact, company stock is WAY worse, because the majority of people are legally prohibited from investing in private companies unless they're an accredited investor (already rich). So, only rich people (other than founders and early employees) are allowed to buy in at super low prices before handing off the bag to the public.
- PragmaticPulp 6y agoThis is incorrect. Stock represents actual ownership of a scarce resource (a company). That company would have value whether or not it was explicitly sold as a stock. The value doesn’t come from the stock. Cryptocurrency removes the underlying asset and simply sells shares of artificial scarcity. It’s only as valuable as what people decide to trade it at, because it doesn’t represent ownership of anything other than itself.
- doggosphere 6y agoStock represents actual ownership of a scarce resource (a company). Is there a limit to how many shares a company can issue? No, a board can technically issue shares unto infinity. There is no guarantee of scarcity, no guarantee they will not raise more money. That company would have value whether or not it was explicitly sold as a stock. The value doesn’t come from the stock. So when a company has no profit but a high valuation, is this the market correctly discounting future predicted cashflows and giving a company fair value, or is it some sort of scam? Ex: Is NKLA actually a $5.2b electric vehicle company? How about the spade of Chinese IPOs that ended up being vaporware? Cryptocurrency removes the underlying asset and simply sells shares of artificial scarcity. The scarcity isn't artificial. It's mathematically provable, open source and auditable. If you think you can manufacture "fake" btc on the blockchain, feel free to try. If you think you can successfully fork and create a whole new chain, you're also welcome to try. It’s only as valuable as what people decide to trade it at, because it doesn’t represent ownership of anything other than itself. This is actually factual for anything in existence. A piece of bread. A $100m painting. You're starting to figure out what peculiar creatures humans are.
- PragmaticPulp 6y agoThe founding organization owns 85% of the total market cap of a coin? That should be raising red flags for everyone involved. There is no valid reason for the vast majority of what is supposedly a currency to be owned by the company that created it. Imagine if PayPal launched but required everyone to transact in fractional shares of PayPal to get anything done. Oh and by the way, those shares are majority owned by the founders, but they’ll sell you some so you can send them to your friends. This is ridiculous.
- josh2600 6y agoThe majority of the MobileCoins are available for purchase for non-us persons at https://www.buymobilecoin.com https://www.buymobilecoin.com right now.
- PragmaticPulp 6y agoYes, we’re well aware that you would love to sell us those coins you pre-mined. That’s the problem. If Signal was serious about this they would have launched their own fork instead of pitching a pre-mined coin to their users.
- xur17 6y ago> If Signal was serious about this they would have launched their own fork instead of pitching a pre-mined coin to their users. Agreed. They either would have launched their own fork and distributed the vast majority to their users, or at the very least chosen an existing project that was fairly well distributed. This makes me believe they primarily did this in return for an incentive from Mobilecoin.
- Klonoar 6y agoWhat? Marlinspike's been an advisor to MobileCoin from like... the beginning. The article also notes that neither he nor Signal own any actual MobileCoins.
- MithrilTuxedo 6y agoAgreed. I was half expecting this was going to be using Monero, one of the more popular privacy-oriented cryptocurrencies I know of that's already being used. E.g. the only cryptos I've seen people accepting on dark web markets are Bitcoin and Monero.
- akvadrako 6y agoMonero is clearly the most practical secure coin as evidenced by it's popularity on the darknet. But I think what MobileCoin offers is speed.
- qqii 6y agoAs a tradeoff for decentralisation. Currently nodes are run by "trusted companies" and it doesn't look like you can run your own as an individual.
- hjek 6y agoAnd way less energy consumption, according to their website.
- fX0rObfoMN4 6y agoThat is because there is no mining. A proof of stake coin would also use electricity but MobileCoin doesn't even do that.
- woobilicious 6y agoPoS and MobileCoin validator nodes use about the same amount of electricity. I'm not a fan of PoS because it looks like a ponzie scheme (unless it's done like eth where initial distribution is done via mining) This is actually worse than PoS, because PoS uses standard public key cryptographic to validate ownership of coin in the chain to stake, it at least in theory can achieve "trustless" validation. This on the other hand is just a shitty attempt to outsource database maintenance to untrusted 3rd parties, using SGX, while forcing them to pay for S3 hosting because they can't implement a DHT to do proper decentralized file transfers.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- bigiain 6y ago> Bitcoin had no pre-mine /me glances at the great big pile of Satoshi coins...
- gruez 6y agolarge stash =/= premine
- ChainOfFools 6y ago> There are 250 million units of mobilecoin, and majority of them are owned by the founders. Only 37.5 million have been distributed. more of the same cryptocurrency themes: 1. decentralization for Thee and not for Me 2. regulated by math.... aaand the developers' / founders enormous, unaccountable and unilateral leverage over liquidity.
- guidingtunnel 6y ago> Bitcoin had no pre-mine and has been fairly distributed from the start. Except for that small initial 1 million that stayed with Adam
- gruez 6y agoThat's not what pre-mine means. As for "fairly", that's debatable because it's unclear what "fair" means. Should everyone on earth get the same amount? That would be the most "fair". How would the logistics of that work, for a cryptocurrency? What about all the people born after 2009?
- midmagico 6y agoPretty easy to risk someone else's safety with lies from behind that alias, isn't it
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- MichaelMoser123 6y agolook at the chart: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/mobilecoin/ https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/mobilecoin/ the integration with signal made the valuation of mobilecoint jump from around zero to 65$. I hope the signal team got some mobilecoins in return for the favor.
- thiagocsf 6y agoIt was $6 two weeks ago. Still a big jump but hardly “zero”.
- MichaelMoser123 6y agomy initial thought was: why didn't they choose monero (another coin that is privacy-focused but sort of more established). However monero is already much higher than that mark, in its valuation.
- xvector 6y agoThey didn’t choose Monero because it wouldn’t make them filthy rich.
- MichaelMoser123 6y agostill, i think that's a better way to get rich than by tracking/snooping on your customers.
- Hbruz0 6y agoWtf is that dip to $33 ?
- sschueller 6y agoIt also paints a giant target on them for the feds to come down on.
- m463 6y ago> and has been fairly distributed from the start. except for that giant cache of untouched (so far) bitcoins from the start. > Blockchain analysts estimate that Nakamoto had mined about one million bitcoins before disappearing in 2010 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin#Creation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin#Creation
- stjohnswarts 6y agoIf true then that's a huge minus. I would suspect they will "make it available" for "the low low price of ________" over time.