5 ms·

How was this different from Bitcoin ?

by dotcoma 4y ago

Zenst 4y ago
Bitcoin is decentralised and Onecoin was centralised - enabling control and in the end abuse of the whole shebang.
- cma 4y ago
  A coin with a 5% premine to a single individual isn't completely decentralized.
  - xorcist 4y ago
    The pseudonymous creator of the Bitcoin blockchain made the effort to include a proof in the genesis block that the chain wasn't premined. That was before there was a word for it. Maybe you are thinking of Ethereum? It is currently at 60% premine, the target ratio has been changed a number of times, but the ratio should be lower in the future.
    - cma 4y ago
      I think I was mixing up sole-participant mining with pre-mining. Early sole-participant mining is still not very decentralized.
      - xorcist 4y ago
        Well, that lack of interest in the project in the beginning was certainly not for a lack of trying, and interest... well let's just say it picked up after a while. Still, hard to criticize the founder for mining when no one else had interest in it. That cryptographical proof against premining is quite interesting however. Someone must have thought the mere suspicion would have been enough to void any interest in the project. History suggests that wasn't the case, even if we can't know for sure. It might have been different. Anyway, for what it's worth, all evidence suggests that (almost) all of that solo mining was likely burnt. That too suggests the primary risk was thought to be people losing interest in the project.
- zik 4y ago
  It wasn't even a centralised coin. There was no coin at all - it was just a scam.
  - tasuki 4y ago
    Another comment mentioned they had a spreadsheet. That would qualify as a centralised coin.
- ncmncm 4y ago
EliRivers 4y ago
This was simply an explicit (although obviously not explicit enough to the people taken advantage of) scam from the start. There was no cryptocoin. No blockchain. There was just giving money to her and her associates.
- markdown 4y ago
  > There was no cryptocoin. No blockchain. There was just giving money to her and her associates. So why is she called "Cyryptoqueen"?
  - herbst 4y ago
    I never heard of her or her coin before everything went shit. Her product wasnt targetting actual crypto enthusiasts.
  - barrbid8 4y ago
    Because they claimed one coin was the new Bitcoin and that she and her associates took billions for “crypto”
  - WHA8m 4y ago
    It's quite common that crypto currencies have an almost religious following nowadays, but she was one of the first. Where bitcoin was propagated by tech savvy people, One Coin collected money from average Joes. They took the term 'crypto-queen' to the 'real-world'.
  - trompetenaccoun 4y ago
    Yes, good question and this is exactly why there are so many scams. There's such a hype that one can simply add crypto lingo to anything and people will buy into it. Not even the media bothers, once someone proclaims to be associated with "crypto" that's what they're labeled at.
yieldcrv 4y ago
OneCoin didn’t deliver anything, there was no technology, no coin Ironically this question is why so many people got scammed, they couldn’t tell the difference either, despite there being obvious and relevant differences
- ricardobayes 4y ago
  There are lots of people who 'almost made it', and desperately looking for a way to catch up.

How was this different from Bitcoin ?

Zenst 4y ago

Bitcoin is decentralised and Onecoin was centralised - enabling control and in the end abuse of the whole shebang.

cma 4y ago
A coin with a 5% premine to a single individual isn't completely decentralized.
- xorcist 4y ago
  The pseudonymous creator of the Bitcoin blockchain made the effort to include a proof in the genesis block that the chain wasn't premined. That was before there was a word for it. Maybe you are thinking of Ethereum? It is currently at 60% premine, the target ratio has been changed a number of times, but the ratio should be lower in the future.
  - cma 4y ago
    I think I was mixing up sole-participant mining with pre-mining. Early sole-participant mining is still not very decentralized.
    - xorcist 4y ago
      Well, that lack of interest in the project in the beginning was certainly not for a lack of trying, and interest... well let's just say it picked up after a while. Still, hard to criticize the founder for mining when no one else had interest in it. That cryptographical proof against premining is quite interesting however. Someone must have thought the mere suspicion would have been enough to void any interest in the project. History suggests that wasn't the case, even if we can't know for sure. It might have been different. Anyway, for what it's worth, all evidence suggests that (almost) all of that solo mining was likely burnt. That too suggests the primary risk was thought to be people losing interest in the project.
zik 4y ago
It wasn't even a centralised coin. There was no coin at all - it was just a scam.
- tasuki 4y ago
  Another comment mentioned they had a spreadsheet. That would qualify as a centralised coin.
ncmncm 4y ago

EliRivers 4y ago

This was simply an explicit (although obviously not explicit enough to the people taken advantage of) scam from the start. There was no cryptocoin. No blockchain. There was just giving money to her and her associates.

markdown 4y ago
> There was no cryptocoin. No blockchain. There was just giving money to her and her associates. So why is she called "Cyryptoqueen"?
- herbst 4y ago
  I never heard of her or her coin before everything went shit. Her product wasnt targetting actual crypto enthusiasts.
- barrbid8 4y ago
  Because they claimed one coin was the new Bitcoin and that she and her associates took billions for “crypto”
- WHA8m 4y ago
  It's quite common that crypto currencies have an almost religious following nowadays, but she was one of the first. Where bitcoin was propagated by tech savvy people, One Coin collected money from average Joes. They took the term 'crypto-queen' to the 'real-world'.
- trompetenaccoun 4y ago
  Yes, good question and this is exactly why there are so many scams. There's such a hype that one can simply add crypto lingo to anything and people will buy into it. Not even the media bothers, once someone proclaims to be associated with "crypto" that's what they're labeled at.

yieldcrv 4y ago

OneCoin didn’t deliver anything, there was no technology, no coin Ironically this question is why so many people got scammed, they couldn’t tell the difference either, despite there being obvious and relevant differences

ricardobayes 4y ago
There are lots of people who 'almost made it', and desperately looking for a way to catch up.