This is just an FYI for anyone thinking about using Coinbase for their trades. Coinbase makes you periodically re-verify your identity. This process used to be manual. It is 100% automated now and it rarely works (look at Coinbase community forums for more on this). I've had a support ticket open regarding this issue for 3 weeks now and the only response I've gotten so far is "As we experience rapid growth, we are also experiencing a high volume of support requests and we regret not being able to answer your inquiry in a reasonable amount of time." I don't have any serious money tied up in Coinbase, but if i did I would be freaking the fuck out right now with this appalling support service.

As a data point, this seem to be the discussion area mentioned by avenoir:

https://community.coinbase.com/c/coinbase/id-verification

Periodically re-verify your identity? For what purpose?

Nice! A few comments...

I think XRP is down to about 60% founder control, they've been giving it away to strategic partners.

Ethereum Classic doesn't have anything to do with Cryptonote. It's a straight fork of Ethereum.

I don't think Golem or Augur are actually in production yet, they're just tokens on Ethereum that will play a role in the actual systems once those are live.

Yeah, XRP doesn't have much utility for the average user. Also noticed the gaping error citing that Ethereum Classic implements crypto-note.

If you want to look at a token that's about as close to a complete scam as tokenly possible, look no further than Gnosis. The GNO token doesn't actually directly translate to an asset that can be used on their prediction market come launch. Even more, investors only control 4.5% of the GNO tokens in existence, granted this was all done AFTER Gnosys had more than enough existing funding. Cash grab, plain and simple.

So did the investors sell their GNO tokens?

AFAIK, they can't for the first 12 months after the ICO sale (which happened a couple of weeks ago).

> Ethereum Classic doesn't have anything to do with Cryptonote. It's a straight fork of Ethereum.

Other way around. Ethereum is a fork of ETC ;-)

Thanks for the correction. I updated it. Feel free to make a pr if you see anything else that should be added or removed.

About instant transactions in Dash. They did not implement yet a critical feature which would make instant transactions useful for merchants.

Currently a merchant is not able to declare his receiving Dash address as "Instant transactions only". Without this feature merchant is forced to trust that his customers would always use instant transactions.

https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/we-need-merchants-using-d...

A comment regarding bytecoin: it was exploited with a double spend bug which allowed the unlimited minting of new coins, a lot of which I'm sure were dumped on poloniex. See some details here: https://getmonero.org/2017/05/17/disclosure-of-a-major-bug-i...

I'm surprised polo still has it listed

wow. Dashcoin seems to be affected too

You should consider differentiating "tokens" from crypto-currencies backed by their own unique blockchain implementation. For example, Golem is a token built on Ethereum, however, it's not really a true "crypto-currency", rather a payment layer for Golem's "fog" computing platform.

> Stellar Lumens Cons: "No mining available. 95% of Lumens were given out"

95% were given out? Maybe I'm misreading this but only 9.66B/102.94B XLM has been given out. (To people who own BTC or XRP. It's basically a living advertisement for XRP.)

The creators still own 93.28B XLM. They own approx. 90% of all XLM.

Feel free to make a pr correcting this. I was going off what they said on the website.

The stats are from their own website btw; https://dashboard.stellar.org/

Ethereum cons: smart contracts get hacked

Ethereum pros: security researchers who find bugs in smart contracts are rewarded handsomely and instantly

And if they reward themselves too much, the blockchain is forked again?

Developer Cons:

Some write shitty smart contracts.

A lot less often now that best practices are better understood, and people insist on public security audits.

Ethereum cons: when smart contracts do inevitably get hacked, founders pretty much force the community's hand when it comes to forking because they just lost their VC money. Code is law, except when it's not practical for them.

Why is "hacking a smart contract" OK but "hard forking in response" is not?

Because it is a matter of original message. The Ethereum devs have had one mantra from the start: code is law. What is written in the code is what the developer means. There's no room for interpretation.

But, somehow, when someone did something allowed by the code, it turns out it wasn't in the spirit of the law, and so should be forked.

> The Ethereum devs have had one mantra from the start: code is law.

Oh great, now I can actually say something to my ethereum loving brother in law, btw do you have a source for this? Because when I try to search for any resource on the internet from before 2016 where Ethereum developers said that "code is law" I can't find it.

"applications that run exactly as programmed without any possibility of downtime, censorship, fraud or third party interference."

https://www.ethereum.org/

Isn't the blockchain, and therefore the hard-forking mechanism, also code?

None of them can solve the micropayment problem.

GNU Taler can.

Fascinated by Golem (GNT) when coupled with an orchestration layer http://blog.streamr.com/2017/05/golem-plus-streamr-equals-he...

OP here, feel free to make a pr to correct any errors or if you want to add any new information.

This is not a Show HN. Please read the rules:

https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html