nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Weighing up IOTA

makeorbrake

Currently researching IOTA and have summarised it with the following advantages/disadvantages;

- No transaction fees
- No scaling issue (although I have read that latency may be an issue with IOTA, that it can order mulitples of transactions but to then validate them all transaction by transaction rather than block by block results in a latency issue. I'm unsure if this is the case and if it is, what the implications of it are??
- Ideal for IOT, machine to machine transactions and micro-transactions
- Smart contracts about to be facilitated through Qubic
- Claims to be quantum computer proof (although I'm unsure how exactly?)
- No miners, so no powerful stakeholder group to hold it back
- Seems like a strong development team?
- Based in Germany - and with that, its developing within a stringent regulatory environment
- Partnering with some strong players such as Bosch, VW & Fujitsu. However, some have speculated about the strength of such partnerships (IOTA was previously linked with microsoft but this was found to be tenuous).

Disadvantages

- Not decentralised right now until the coordinator roll is dropped. Some speculate that IOTA may not be able to drop the COO?? Naturally, if they can't then it's far from ideal....its effectively a centralised crypto and most people wont buy into that.
- Not interoperable with other crypto's
- Rolled their own hash function which seems to be a no-no in the crypto world. MIT found a vulernability which IOTA quickly patched. How long does it need to be out in the world to be tested and to assure people that it wont be broken/exploited??

How do folks critique IOTA and where it stands in relation to the above and any other factors you can think of?

It seems to me that it's main rivals in the race are EOS and Cardano. I have not researched these properly yet but how do you think it compares with these? Are there any other crypto's competing against it?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

JohnnyFlash

University College London statement on IOTA: http://blockchain.cs.ucl.ac.uk/2018/04/update-partnership-iota-foundation/

Seems IOTA threatened them with legal action for disclosing numerous security vulnerabilities they found in the code. Now I’m not up to much with the auld computers, but I’ve read this is considered a massive no-no in the industry. The legal action, not the revealing of the security bugs.

smacl

makeorbrake wrote: »

How do folks critique IOTA and where it stands in relation to the above and any other factors you can think of?

I suspect its final use cases will be slightly different to other blockchain technologies, with more focus on supply chain and asset management than financial transactions. Interesting article here on this. I personally think IOTA is likely to do very well in the long term as there is an ever increasing volume of data that we would like to be openly tracelable.

makeorbrake

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Seems IOTA threatened them with legal action for disclosing numerous security vulnerabilities they found in the code. Now I’m not up to much with the auld computers, but I’ve read this is considered a massive no-no in the industry. The legal action, not the revealing of the security bugs.

Looks like IOTA team a tad sensitive to criticism on this aspect of things. By all accounts, there was similar arguments with MIT.

That still begs the question...how long does their crypto have to be out in the world before it's likely that all vulnerabilities have been discovered?

smacl wrote:

I personally think IOTA is likely to do very well in the long term as there is an ever increasing volume of data that we would like to be openly tracelable.

Its certainly got my attention - enough to justify me now putting some time into investigating it a little further. Have to be mindful of critical flaws (IF that's what they're likely to be) and competition from other projects. If I can reconcile those, then I might take a punt (although I'd expect this to be a long term holding).

smacl

makeorbrake wrote: »

Its certainly got my attention - enough to justify me now putting some time into investigating it a little further. Have to be mindful of critical flaws (IF that's what they're likely to be) and competition from other projects. If I can reconcile those, then I might take a punt (although I'd expect this to be a long term holding).

I bought in last December, more because I like the idea than on the basis of serious research. I've read the white paper, and while I get the idea, it does seem reasonable that dealing in partial DAGs is liable to be more hackable than other blockchain technologies. That said, the value of much of the information likely to be travelling around tangle is likely to be limited to the owner and a few third parties, so for many use cases simply not worth hacking. I'd guess it would also become more robust over time, though nothing to say that. Interesting article here on hackernoon though does feel like a bit of a shill. As a punt, I wouldn't expect any return on IOTA over the next couple of years, so yeah, long term, high risk.

the butcher

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

The legal action, not the revealing of the security bugs.

That all has been dealt with in November last year.

Just some points ->

Doesn't seem to bother Robert Bosch Venture Capital who have invested heavily into IOTA.
Volkswagen - CDO is IOTA foundation member.
DXC Technology and Fujitsu presented their own separate first IOTA use cases at Hannover Messe 2018 along with ElaadNL who presented their IOTA charging station.

https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/azure-blockchain-update-5/

https://twitter.com/iotatoken/status/958315840641826817

https://blog.iota.org/iota-selected-by-tokyo-metropolitan-government-program-fde6b34ddc16

The IOTA foundation members list is very impressive. Some to note ->
Michael Nilles, Smart Cities & Infrastructure Advisor - CDO at Schindler Group, supervisory board of Deutsche Lufthansa AG

Oliver T. Bussmann, Financial Services Industry Advisor - former Global Chief Information Officer at SAP

Regine H. Helmer, Digital Transformation & Business Development Advisor

Dr. Richard Mark Soley, Supervisory Board Member and Advisor - Chairman and CEO of OMG, Executive Director of the Cloud Standards Customer Council and Executive Director at IIC

Dr. Rolf Werner, Supervisory Board Member and Advisor - Head of Central Europe at Fujitsu

Johann Jungwirth, Supervisory Board - CDO of Volkswagen Group

Julie Maupin currently sits on the Fintech advisory board of the German Ministry of Finance and the G20 Digital Economy Experts Task Force and is a resource person for the UN Internet Governance Forum.

They just recently released the Trinity wallet and a big announcement is due on the 3rd of June -> https://qubic.iota.org/

*Disclaimer I bought some IOTA & ETH in June last year*

makeorbrake

@the butcher/smacl (or anyone with a view) : How does IOTA deal with funding the project going forward? Some other coins at a (relatively) similar stage of development have a structure in place to allow for continuous funding. IOTA talk in terms of grants and donations from industry. I'm not sure if this cuts it OR if it is sufficient as other coins have bags full of money to throw at development.

I know that it should be the case that the fundamentals need to be right - and that will carry it through. However, there have been many instances where the faster mover got adoption rather than the technically superior option that was slower to develop.

What do you think of the interoperability issue - in terms of being able to exchange with other cryptos? Can this be overcome OR if it can't is it such a big disadvantage?

Which coins do you see as the major competitors to IOTA or do you think that they have defined a role in the crypto world in which other coins have yet to encroach?

Some are of the opinion that the COO will never be able to be turned off. I can't get my head around the likelihood or otherwise of this but clearly, its massive...the difference between centralised and decentralised. Any thoughts?

The big fat claim is that the network will get faster with more transactions. However, I've heard it mentioned that as the network grows, there will be a latency issue due to the nature of DAG. When individual transactions are verified rather than blocks. I guess there are aspects we won't fully understand until the network is large enough but if there was a lag in confirmation, could this have an implication for the practical application of the tech? ....bearing in mind it's supposed to be geared up for a gazillion machine to machine transactions..

(apologies for all the questions but trying to get into the nitty gritty of the tech and figure out it's value or otherwise).

smacl

makeorbrake wrote: »

What do you think of the interoperability issue - in terms of being able to exchange with other cryptos? Can this be overcome OR if it can't is it such a big disadvantage?

Which coins do you see as the major competitors to IOTA or do you think that they have defined a role in the crypto world in which other coins have yet to encroach?

I think that interoperability with other cryptos is only an issue when you think of IOTA in the context of financial transactions. I'm just back from a conference where one of the presentations was relevance of block-chain to the geospatial industry, which looks to lean heavily on IoT devices communicating across LORA. I think IOTA is well ahead of the field for this market and some of the use cases listed were really interesting, relating to micro-services such as drones purchasing air space, buying charge for electric cars using someone else's power outlet, etc... My thinking at this point is that different types of blockchain will have different use cases and market niches. I don't think financial transactions will necessarily be the biggest of these and reckon IOTA is sufficiently distinct that it may really thrive in the long term. I'm confident that there is going to be a large market for low power, large volume cryptos that support microtransactions (small value and small data) where security and privacy are less important than speed and cost. Whether or not this ends up being IOTA is anyone's guess.

Sorry, not really an answer to your questions, but that's about as far as I've looked at it.

the butcher

makeorbrake wrote: »

@the butcher/smacl (or anyone with a view) : How does IOTA deal with funding the project going forward? Some other coins at a (relatively) similar stage of development have a structure in place to allow for continuous funding. IOTA talk in terms of grants and donations from industry. I'm not sure if this cuts it OR if it is sufficient as other coins have bags full of money to throw at development.

One of the founders said that they have roughly 500 million euros. I know 5% of the total supply of IOTA was donated back to them originally a few years ago to start up the foundation (which has now become an actual legit foundation in Germany which is a country that is very heavy on red tape and bureaucracy.) That 5% is over 200 million at the moment. The investments from companies like Bosch are unknown and probably make up the rest of what they say they have.

I know that it should be the case that the fundamentals need to be right - and that will carry it through. However, there have been many instances where the faster mover got adoption rather than the technically superior option that was slower to develop.

This can be true alright. If you have time watch this video, this speaker touches on that point slightly ->
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KDRc23Vj7w

What do you think of the interoperability issue - in terms of being able to exchange with other cryptos? Can this be overcome OR if it can't is it such a big disadvantage?

The announcement on the 3rd of June should cover this issue. There's little known about this IOTA qubic project but they say it's all about ->

Oracles - basically an ability to receive outside data. This in turn will allow IOTA to become a cross platform transaction system by having this kind of interoperability between it and traditional blockchains. It enables a smart contracts layer to be built on top of the IOTA platform using the IXI module system. The modular potential of this is incredible. People thought IOTA was way behind on this compared to a coin like ETH.

Which coins do you see as the major competitors to IOTA or do you think that they have defined a role in the crypto world in which other coins have yet to encroach?

Look up Waltonchain and IOT Chain. Still early stages for this yet but same market segment. There's also 2 others implementations of DAG technology: Raiblocks(XRB) and Byteball(Bytes).

Some are of the opinion that the COO will never be able to be turned off. I can't get my head around the likelihood or otherwise of this but clearly, its massive...the difference between centralised and decentralised. Any thoughts?

The big fat claim is that the network will get faster with more transactions. However, I've heard it mentioned that as the network grows, there will be a latency issue due to the nature of DAG. When individual transactions are verified rather than blocks. I guess there are aspects we won't fully understand until the network is large enough but if there was a lag in confirmation, could this have an implication for the practical application of the tech? ....bearing in mind it's supposed to be geared up for a gazillion machine to machine transactions..

At the current state, IOTA is centralised alright no denying that. Guess you could say Bitcoin is as well considering the mining pools are dictating everything. The mining power is going against the whole idea of Bitcoin in the first place.

Right now, the Tangle network wouldn’t work without it. The coordinator will be removed when there are enough trusted nodes to support the Tangle without it.

The plan of removal is to first make the coordinator decentralised, then remove it gradually.

More and more nodes will choose to operate without it and in time no one will use it anymore.

This will be a process, not a one time event. First thing IOTA foundation needs to do is they should open-source the code of the coordinator and then everyone will be able to build and run their own coordinator. This will allow the existence of many coordinators, so the network will not depend on only one and will make it decentralised.

(apologies for all the questions but trying to get into the nitty gritty of the tech and figure out it's value or otherwise).

I know, there's a lot to thrash out. I'm in IT and when I read the whitepaper last year I knew that IOTA stood out compared to the other Bitcoin clones. Was just curious to see if there was a thread on boards about it. As you can see I hardly post. I'm not here to convince anymore, there's a risk with everything but when companies start to get behind something like this, I took more notice and researched this a lot. Very interesting times ahead - some use cases are mind bogglingly!!

smacl

@the butcher, great post.

the butcher wrote: »

Was just curious to see if there was a thread on boards about it. As you can see I hardly post.

From late last year; https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057814090

the butcher

smacl wrote: »

@the butcher, great post.

From late last year; https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057814090

Aye, I remember the frenzy coming up to Christmas. Not a fan of trying to figure out peaks and selling/buying back in. Always a misstep guaranteed with alt coins unless you are a seasoned trader.

I got it back when it was 27-40 cent per MIOTA. That's what got me into this area back in June/July last year. I got super excited about this coin and the potential. Holding long term myself (3-5 years).

I just don't how companies/countries will go and adopt traditional blockchain cryptocurrencies that take up a huge amount of power, just take a look at Iceland, way more electrical resources are dedicated towards mining rigs than residential homes. It's just not sustainable in the long term. Scaling and high transaction fees are an issue too. The power that the miners wield. The time it takes completing a transaction in Bitcoin for example. Can't buy a coffee etc.

Even the UN taking notice ->

https://www.unops.org/news-and-stories/news/unops-and-iota-collaborate-to-bring-transparency-and-efficiency-to-un-work

This guy was added to the foundation, very impressive, read the second paragraph ->
https://blog.iota.org/welcome-mark-sulavka-to-the-iota-foundation-f4d7172e5aa9

Again I'd recommend watching the youtube link I put into the previous post. Very hard not to shill for this as you can see

I won't comment again as I don't want to take over this discussion but I'll come back in a weeks time for my thoughts on their announcement on the 3rd of June.

makeorbrake

Interesting insights from you both. My main concern right now is the coordinator issue. To me it seems logical what David Sonstebo explained on this - that it's required until such time as the network gets big enough - so as a 51% attack can be fended off.
For some reason, there are a lot of people doubting that the COO can ever be removed. I'm struggling to understand the reason why - but given that there are multiple people claiming this to be an issue, it's making me second guess things.

@the butcher : Had watched that youtube video previously - although gave it a second watch...quite insightful.

Will be interesting to see what next weeks announcement brings.

On bitcoin, I think that it may have made such a name for itself that it continues to maintain some sort of relevance. We may not be able to afford more than one energy intensive immutable ledger - but it does have certain qualities that other blockchains dont or wont have. Meanwhile, bitcoin cash seems to be gaining credibility in recent weeks - with many suggesting not to hold one without the other as we can't possibly foresee how it will play out. In any event - for the purposes of this discussion - I don't think we need to take btc into account when assessing iota as they are in different spheres by and large.

the butcher

makeorbrake wrote: »

My main concern right now is the coordinator issue. To me it seems logical what David Sonstebo explained on this - that it's required until such time as the network gets big enough - so as a 51% attack can be fended off.

David on coordinator : "There is no fixed number, however, we are doing a lot of research together with several universities with supercomputers and professors from all across the globe to get a better idea. That being said we will phase out the current Coordinator model in favor of a distributed one soonish, then finally the Tangle will be 100% independent."

What soonish means is anyones guess. But from the talk I've seen the distributed model could be end of this year.

makeorbrake

the butcher wrote: »

David on coordinator : "There is no fixed number, however, we are doing a lot of research together with several universities with supercomputers and professors from all across the globe to get a better idea. That being said we will phase out the current Coordinator model in favor of a distributed one soonish, then finally the Tangle will be 100% independent."

What soonish means is anyones guess. But from the talk I've seen the distributed model could be end of this year.

Yes, and that all seems logical to me. I just can't fathom why there are people coming out and speculating that technically, it may not be possible to remove ...but then they're not clarifying precisely how or why. I'll dig into it some more.

makeorbrake

Any thoughts on the Qubic announcement? I read through it last night - I'm not a techie so difficult to get the head round. I've also read some interpretations of it. It seems like if all is realised that the implications are massive. However, implementation is likely to take some time.

All the stuff I've read has been from guys with a vested interest in IOTA. Would be good to see some review of it from less partisan corners.

smacl

makeorbrake wrote: »

Any thoughts on the Qubic announcement? I read through it last night - I'm not a techie so difficult to get the head round. I've also read some interpretations of it. It seems like if all is realised that the implications are massive. However, implementation is likely to take some time.

All the stuff I've read has been from guys with a vested interest in IOTA. Would be good to see some review of it from less partisan corners.

Looks very much like it is the virtual machine running the IOTA equivalent of smart contracts and handling consensus. My reading of the website description is that it is very ambitious which is good and bad. Good in that once fully implemented, tested and adopted, it would be an exceptionally powerful platform for all kinds of secure, energy efficient, distributed computing. Bad in that this could take many years to come to fruition and may never do so. Personally, I'm still very enthused by IOTA, but more as a platform than a coin. One thing that struck me about the ABRA functional language and use of trits over bits is that it is may not run optimally on existing IoT devices which are unlikely to implement trits in hardware. In favouring the longer term efficiency, this seems like a potential stumbling block for adoption.

makeorbrake

I guess this was always going to be a slow burner. Of course, the problem with that is that you wonder where it's going to be in relation to all other projects in terms of timeline and the race towards actual adoption. I think it's simply impossible to determine that right now.

One good thing that I like is that they are focusing on industry collaboration.....or at least, that's the perception - I hope there's substance to it and that it's not just perception. Without Bosch, Fujitsu and VW in the picture, it makes for a different proposition. Other projects are building in isolation - and I think these types of projects have been around long enough now that they need to be looking at ...or at least actively working towards - real world application in a more meaningful way.

There's confusion over what IOTA/Qubic is. In trying to get up to speed on it, I have never been able to determine what exactly it is in the race with - in terms of other projects. It has been compared with other supply-chain related coins (WaltonChain, VeChain, etc.) given that supply chain related application is central to what IOTA offers. However, these coins seem very specific in their application area.
Some still think in terms of it being an alternative to Bitcoin - so I guess use as a coin itself. I guess that can happen but they stand to make in-roads in other ways first before that happens. If they were to make an impact elsewhere, perhaps the momentum of that could bring this about too??
Then as a platform - and particularly so in light of the Qubic announcement - it's being touted as an ethereum killer (yet another one!) - based on smart contracting ability.
The foundation itself has always homed in on m2m and IoT but Qubic seems to broaden it out.
EOS seems to be flavour of the month - but already there are some question marks arising on that ref. centralisation related issues.
Is there any other Quorum based crypto in the market??

I guess there are aspects about it that set it out from other projects for sure. If my understanding is correct, then it's also difficult to copy due to the way they've gone about things. It's certainly not a case that someone can simply make a couple of changes and roll out the exact same thing.

The hardware thing is exciting. By all accounts, it's a major deal that they can save 35% power consumption - in that it validates that IoT devices will have the power to run IOTA/Qubic. However, bringing that on-stream in isolation is a major undertaking and adds heaps of complexity.

I'm getting closer to opting in - I think at this point (once I get a few personal arrangements tidied up), I'll probably take a punt at it. However, it's such a big undertaking now - offering so many avenues in terms of application - and it's so far from being the finished article that it's incredibly hard to determine how things will pan out.

Of course, it will take time to complete - 2019 before we can see any substance to it. And then you have to wonder about what real world snags they will hit along the way - a massive variable (as it is for every project).

smacl

makeorbrake wrote: »

I'm getting closer to opting in - I think at this point (once I get a few personal arrangements tidied up), I'll probably take a punt at it. However, it's such a big undertaking now - offering so many avenues in terms of application - and it's so far from being the finished article that it's incredibly hard to determine how things will pan out.

Also worth considering whether the technology will tend to get used in a manner similar to private and/or federated blockchains rather than public ones. I'm guessing the former, which eliminates very many of the security concerns but also makes the IOTA token far less valuable. While I hold a certain amount of IOTA, I'm not expecting it to moon any time soon if ever. That would probably be my bigger concern with regards to taking a more significant punt.

makeorbrake

smacl wrote: »

Also worth considering whether the technology will tend to get used in a manner similar to private and/or federated blockchains rather than public ones. I'm guessing the former, which eliminates very many of the security concerns but also makes the IOTA token far less valuable. While I hold a certain amount of IOTA, I'm not expecting it to moon any time soon if ever. That would probably be my bigger concern with regards to taking a more significant punt.

How would that work exactly? Can you have a private subset on the tangle? Is the data private? Presumably, node to node, machine to machine - iota can be exchanged but if fully controlled by whomever runs the subset, then there doesn't have to be any significant token use.

Is that how that works?

Wouldn't that just involve one entity then? Say you had data coming from different sources. Lets use a supply chain as an example. There are different actors in that chain. Wouldn't there be a need to use iota as an exchange for the various data? I guess main component companies in the supply chain collaborate so there may not be a need to affix costs but presumably there would also be occasion to use data from sources that are less aligned?

smacl

Just guesswork, but if you consider tangle to be a distributed operating system running across multiple connected devices, there is no reason that you can't have multiple tangles running across separate and distinct networks once you have enough connected devices involved. If you look at the likes of EWF, it is a federated blockchain for the energy industry. IOTA could have many similar use cases.

sodom2000

anyone heard about PMNT ?? they try to create IOTA 2.0 ,whats your opinions ??

makeorbrake

sodom2000 wrote: »

anyone heard about PMNT ?? they try to create IOTA 2.0 ,whats your opinions ??

I struggle to get to grips properly with the top 10 cryptos - let alone going much further down the line. I quickly checked the premise of it. So it's DAG based - presumably they're copying IOTA. What does it bring to the table that's different?

makeorbrake

smacl wrote: »

Just guesswork, but if you consider tangle to be a distributed operating system running across multiple connected devices, there is no reason that you can't have multiple tangles running across separate and distinct networks once you have enough connected devices involved. If you look at the likes of EWF, it is a federated blockchain for the energy industry. IOTA could have many similar use cases.

Came across a similar point raised by others. Dominik Shiener allegedly has insisted that corporate partners use IOTA tokens on seperate or sub-tangles. Is that just a request or can it be insisted upon...? No idea.

the butcher

I applaud the overly ambitious idea to realise a full parallel/scalable distributed computing network.

Q is what Ethereum, EOS and Cardano (along with Golem and ChainLink coins) are all trying to be but, this time, with correct fundamentals.

Fundamentals - IOTA - distributed ledger that is feeless, scales well and now quorum based local computation as opposed to blockchain based global consensus for each computing task. So the qubic protocol sits on top of IOTA, using iota to package instructions (qubics) written in a functional language (ABRA) to be processed by entities wanting to make money from their idle computing devices (Oracles).

Exactly what IoT needs and in time to come (decades let's be honest) smart-cities, transportation, supply chain, energy/power grid management, fog/mist computing. All this is looking for a much cheaper, secure and low-latency alternative to cloud computing using amazon aws or Microsoft azure for solving real-time computation tasks in a trust-less environment.

The reduced power consumption is actually one of the major points for me here. That is huge if realised.

The thoughts of Qubic and the Forex/global derivatives market are mindblowing and something I haven't got my head around yet.

Disappointed to see no roadmap or where they are currently at with the project. I know Sergey Ivancheglo has been working on this since 2012 -> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=112676.0

Went onto discord where he stated "most part is ready". This is a very important year for IOTA to get out of beta stage and into a production ready state by 2019.

As long as they focus on industry use-cases and adoption, give us a clear roadmap and tracking progress while building up the foundation for the next while I'd be happy enough with that. Industry use-cases and adoption is key for me and has been previously. This is a 5-8 year hold for me personally. I'm still pissed off I never went with my gut in 2012 with Bitcoin (and stock for that matter) so I'm not letting that happen again.

makeorbrake

the butcher wrote: »

Disappointed to see no roadmap or where they are currently at with the project.

A few days ago, David Sonstebo stated that the roadmap will follow in the next few weeks.

the butcher wrote: »

Q is what Ethereum, EOS and Cardano (along with Golem and ChainLink coins) are all trying to be but, this time, with correct fundamentals.

One of the main items for me - is that IOTA continue to partner with industry. ETH, EOS and Cardano are further down the roadmap in varying ways. I'd just be concerned that the best project doesn't always end up being the one that gets adopted. Nothing to confirm that at the moment - but something to monitor for definite.

the butcher wrote: »

This is a 5-8 year hold for me personally. I'm still pissed off I never went with my gut in 2012 with Bitcoin (and stock for that matter) so I'm not letting that happen again.

BTC was a 5 year hold for me. I'm all out now. Had thought that I'd go back in sometime this year with a % of what I allocate towards crypto but the way things are shaping up btc v bch, I'm no longer happy to do so.
Close to pulling the trigger on IOTA...just need to spend a little bit more time on it.

sodom2000

makeorbrake wrote: »

I struggle to get to grips properly with the top 10 cryptos - let alone going much further down the line. I quickly checked the premise of it. So it's DAG based - presumably they're copying IOTA. What does it bring to the table that's different?

You can read more here:

Coinidol.com/what-is-paymon/

makeorbrake

sodom2000 wrote: »

You can read more here:

Coinidol.com/what-is-paymon/

Nope - you brought it up - presumably you found something of interest in it!?

I gave it a cursory glance and couldnt see what the attraction was. Surely if it has an advantage, then that's going to be pimped right up front and centre?

smacl

sodom2000 wrote: »

anyone heard about PMNT ?? they try to create IOTA 2.0 ,whats your opinions ??

Paymon (PMNT) seems to be built on Hive, more discussion on this thread but the verdict so far does not seem that positive. Seems a long way behind IOTA in terms of progression and adoption.

makeorbrake

Excellent post on the risks involved in getting the IOTA project to a successful outcome here.

sodom2000

makeorbrake wrote: »

Nope - you brought it up - presumably you found something of interest in it!?

I gave it a cursory glance and couldnt see what the attraction was. Surely if it has an advantage, then that's going to be pimped right up front and centre?

Paymon's EcoSystem offer's,

Text & Crypto Message in App
Atomic Swap Currency's
Totally New Blockchain HIVE
Smart Contracts & Scaleability
'Profit' Platform for Businesses
Play Games (& later trade them)
Commission Free
Launch your own Token Sale (ICO)
Decentralized Escrow
Plastic Charge Cards

Sorry admin I won't be writhing anymore here

the butcher

makeorbrake wrote: »

Excellent post on the risks involved in getting the IOTA project to a successful outcome here.

Very reasonable points made. I think the fact that the foundation has been setup in Germany as a non-profit organisation could be key for them in a lot of these areas (funding/adoption etc).

The next 2 years are crucial for them - that's enough time to tease out all the use-cases, to see if adoption continues and for their modules/layers on top of IOTA (like Qubic/IXI) become production-ready.

The roadmap should hopefully make things clearer.