7 ms·

The 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

The 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 ago
The 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 ago
  Yes, 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 ago
      What? Marlinspike's been an advisor to MobileCoin from like... the beginning. The article also notes that neither he nor Signal own any actual MobileCoins.
      - hn8788 6y ago
        Signal may not own any MobileCoins, but the CEO of MobileCoin said: > MobileCoin has not yet paid Signal anything for integrating MobileCoin. We intend to donate a great deal of money to Signal over the coming years.
        Klonoar 6y ago
        Yes, I've read that. I find it a stretch to draw that conclusion though, as if it's some back door deal for funding. For all the criticisms of cryptocurrency (and I have many...), I don't particularly see anything on MobileCoin's work that indicates the usual shady cryptocurrency stuff. I'm not sure it belongs in Signal, but I do think this stuff can be evaluated without people starting conspiracy theories.
        freeone3000 6y ago
        It's literally a quid pro quo? What conspiracy theory do you need here?
        Klonoar 6y ago
        I don't see how it's a quid pro quo for someone like Moxie, with his background, to advise a project for years and then work with them to integrate it given the alignment with regards to privacy initiatives. I find it conspiracy-theory in nature to assume otherwise; I think it could've been handled better from a server source code side but I don't really see why this has to be an assumed bad faith thing.
        tsimionescu 6y ago
        It's quid pro quo to include an obscure scam coin out of the blue into an entirely unrelated product, with a public promise from the scam club owners to donate their money to your business. The fact the the owner of signal had already been associated with MobileCoin for a long time makes it worse, not better.
- otoburb 6y ago
  The slashdot effect triggered Cloudflare’s DDoS protection and is returning errors for that page.
  - josh2600 6y ago
    No, this is just what happens when you try to hit the page from a US IP address.
    - Igelau 6y ago
      Why are you blocking the US?
      - marcinzm 6y ago
        I'm guessing because they don't want an SEC investigation into whatever they're running.
      - cwhiz 6y ago
        Don’t want to end up in a US prison for the obvious scam they’re running.
      - stjohnswarts 6y ago
        because the US has a long reach in the financial world even into Switzerland (these days). The IRS is on a war path against crypto currently and I think they believe 50% of it is something they can be taxing or is fraudulent. The US government doesn't like things that are hard to track.
- fblp 6y ago
  There is only a "contact us" link on that page.
- woobilicious 6y ago
  Will you buy my coins back at a fair price? What value do you provide? at least when I buy vbucks from Epic I know I'm getting fortnite skins with it. Why should we run a node free of charge when you extract all the profits of our efforts? When I see statements like "there's no economic incentive." I read "I want all the profits, and screw everyone else". If you genuinely wanted a decentralized network, then you would provide fair compensation for the added value the node provides against attacks on the network.
nullc 6y ago
Of course, it's totally centralized. The 'cryptocurrency' marketing just exists as a regulatory dodge. So far this scheme has worked out fine for the original creators of Ripple-- who've extracted hundreds of million selling their massive premine to an ignorant public, then abandoned the original and did it again. What we're seeing from signal now is just a third generation of the same scheme, preempting the ripple founders from doing it again (or maybe they're involved behind the scenes, who knows?). So long as there seems to be no consequence except a massive windfall (SEC fines against ICO/premines have tended to be a fraction of 1% of the funds raised), it's unsurprising to see them continue. The fact that it may kill one of the more useful secure messaging apps as a side effect? Welp. This is why we can't have nice things: Collectively, we're better at funding borderline scams than public goods.
- ChainOfFools 6y ago
  At least it's better than Bitcoin, since in this case it's well known who the whales are. If one wishes to subject their wealth to the whims of a massively centralized cartel of "rationally self interested" HOLDers, maybe it's better to deal with the devil(s) one knows.
  - SwimSwimHungry 6y ago
    Or better yet, don't use cryptocurrency at all. Then you can avoid all ethical dilemmas surrounding them. Problem solved.
    - flal_ 6y ago
      But then, you haven't solved the private electronic payment...
      - IshKebab 6y ago
        Most people don't want private electronic payments. In stable countries like the UK - where this is being launched - it's basically only useful for buying drugs and tax evasion.
ybalkind 6y ago
Can you spell out why is that fundamentally bad? I'm asking in good faith not to be oppositional, apologies if its a stupid question. But if you were buying shares in a company it would not matter if most the shares were held by the company (as long as there is enough liquidity to sell your shares in future). Why is it different with the currency? I get that its making the founders rich so perhaps they have greedy intentions, but why does this inherently undermine the validity of the currency?
- monokh 6y ago
  A cryptocurrency is generally more easily spendable in an open market. The sell potential that a founder has with 75% of the supply is massive. If I created a coin today and sold 1% of the supply to you alone, on what basis would you want to store any value in that currency? Given constant buy demand, The currency's market value is defined by what I do. This is why organic price discovery for a currency is important.

josh2600 6y ago

The 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 ago
Yes, 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 ago
    What? Marlinspike's been an advisor to MobileCoin from like... the beginning. The article also notes that neither he nor Signal own any actual MobileCoins.
    - hn8788 6y ago
      Signal may not own any MobileCoins, but the CEO of MobileCoin said: > MobileCoin has not yet paid Signal anything for integrating MobileCoin. We intend to donate a great deal of money to Signal over the coming years.
      - Klonoar 6y ago
        Yes, I've read that. I find it a stretch to draw that conclusion though, as if it's some back door deal for funding. For all the criticisms of cryptocurrency (and I have many...), I don't particularly see anything on MobileCoin's work that indicates the usual shady cryptocurrency stuff. I'm not sure it belongs in Signal, but I do think this stuff can be evaluated without people starting conspiracy theories.
        freeone3000 6y ago
        It's literally a quid pro quo? What conspiracy theory do you need here?
        Klonoar 6y ago
        I don't see how it's a quid pro quo for someone like Moxie, with his background, to advise a project for years and then work with them to integrate it given the alignment with regards to privacy initiatives. I find it conspiracy-theory in nature to assume otherwise; I think it could've been handled better from a server source code side but I don't really see why this has to be an assumed bad faith thing.
        tsimionescu 6y ago
        It's quid pro quo to include an obscure scam coin out of the blue into an entirely unrelated product, with a public promise from the scam club owners to donate their money to your business. The fact the the owner of signal had already been associated with MobileCoin for a long time makes it worse, not better.
otoburb 6y ago
The slashdot effect triggered Cloudflare’s DDoS protection and is returning errors for that page.
- josh2600 6y ago
  No, this is just what happens when you try to hit the page from a US IP address.
  - Igelau 6y ago
    Why are you blocking the US?
    - marcinzm 6y ago
      I'm guessing because they don't want an SEC investigation into whatever they're running.
    - cwhiz 6y ago
      Don’t want to end up in a US prison for the obvious scam they’re running.
    - stjohnswarts 6y ago
      because the US has a long reach in the financial world even into Switzerland (these days). The IRS is on a war path against crypto currently and I think they believe 50% of it is something they can be taxing or is fraudulent. The US government doesn't like things that are hard to track.
fblp 6y ago
There is only a "contact us" link on that page.
woobilicious 6y ago
Will you buy my coins back at a fair price? What value do you provide? at least when I buy vbucks from Epic I know I'm getting fortnite skins with it. Why should we run a node free of charge when you extract all the profits of our efforts? When I see statements like "there's no economic incentive." I read "I want all the profits, and screw everyone else". If you genuinely wanted a decentralized network, then you would provide fair compensation for the added value the node provides against attacks on the network.

nullc 6y ago

Of course, it's totally centralized. The 'cryptocurrency' marketing just exists as a regulatory dodge. So far this scheme has worked out fine for the original creators of Ripple-- who've extracted hundreds of million selling their massive premine to an ignorant public, then abandoned the original and did it again. What we're seeing from signal now is just a third generation of the same scheme, preempting the ripple founders from doing it again (or maybe they're involved behind the scenes, who knows?). So long as there seems to be no consequence except a massive windfall (SEC fines against ICO/premines have tended to be a fraction of 1% of the funds raised), it's unsurprising to see them continue. The fact that it may kill one of the more useful secure messaging apps as a side effect? Welp. This is why we can't have nice things: Collectively, we're better at funding borderline scams than public goods.

ChainOfFools 6y ago
At least it's better than Bitcoin, since in this case it's well known who the whales are. If one wishes to subject their wealth to the whims of a massively centralized cartel of "rationally self interested" HOLDers, maybe it's better to deal with the devil(s) one knows.
- SwimSwimHungry 6y ago
  Or better yet, don't use cryptocurrency at all. Then you can avoid all ethical dilemmas surrounding them. Problem solved.
  - flal_ 6y ago
    But then, you haven't solved the private electronic payment...
    - IshKebab 6y ago
      Most people don't want private electronic payments. In stable countries like the UK - where this is being launched - it's basically only useful for buying drugs and tax evasion.

ybalkind 6y ago

Can you spell out why is that fundamentally bad? I'm asking in good faith not to be oppositional, apologies if its a stupid question. But if you were buying shares in a company it would not matter if most the shares were held by the company (as long as there is enough liquidity to sell your shares in future). Why is it different with the currency? I get that its making the founders rich so perhaps they have greedy intentions, but why does this inherently undermine the validity of the currency?

monokh 6y ago
A cryptocurrency is generally more easily spendable in an open market. The sell potential that a founder has with 75% of the supply is massive. If I created a coin today and sold 1% of the supply to you alone, on what basis would you want to store any value in that currency? Given constant buy demand, The currency's market value is defined by what I do. This is why organic price discovery for a currency is important.