Safety of NuBits currently?

Liquidity
#2

It has been perfectly stable at $1.00 since September 13th.

We depended on Bitcoin and NuShares being held at 3 of 5 or 5 of 8 multisig addresses. To my horror and contrary to their contract with shareholders, they locked down these funds used to support the peg in late May, refusing to spend them. This left us with no way to support the peg in the short term. Shareholders had to agree to give someone else NuShares that could be sold and used to support the peg. That took a few weeks. By the time we began offering support for NuBits most of our customers were understandably spooked. 84% of all NuBits in circulation were sold back to us, but our peg support has been so strong we have been able to keep the peg even with that huge percentage of NuBits coming back to us.

We have dramatically changed the way liquidity operations works to ensure this kind of failure won’t happen again. We aren’t using multisig funds and with the help of my department, we ensure funds needed to support the peg flow. Before we had amateurs being paid less than $150 per month responsible for the critical task of making sure our short term peg support was constant. They proved to be remarkably incompetent. We were probably asking too much of them. Now liquidity operations are run professionally by myself, and I am extremely knowledgeable and capable in my role. I have demonstrated a remarkable ability to support the peg, even under extremely adverse circumstances.

Changes in the Bitcoin price won’t have a major impact on our ability to keep the peg.

Now is a great time to buy NuBits because we are offering a 25% return on NuBits in just six months if you commit to park them, which prevents their transfer for the period of time you choose, then pays you interest when the time expires. It is very easy to do from our client using the Park tab. Give it a try! Terms are as short as 22 days if you want to give it a quick trial run.

1 Like
#3

I highly recommend spending some efforts on reading in the forum before you consider investing in Nu.

The picture @Phoenix tries to draw is subjective and there are a lot of differening views.
If you are interested in the security, you should throw a glance at the sustainability.

Nu has become highly centralized (former contributors have been chased away) with several single points of failure.
Nu has operational costs of unknown dimension from liquidity provision.
Other costs like development, hosting infrastructure are available, but not being reported transparently - and no, having transactions on a blockchain is no transparent reporting!
Nu has no revenue and can only survive as long as it’s able to sell tokens (NBT, NSR).

@Phoenix has a tendency to only report what he likes to.
There have been several requests to shed light on some of his actions, which he rigorously refuses to even notice.

1 Like
#4

It appears very likely @ConfusedObserver is essentially a disguntled former contractor for Nu, aka @masterOfDisaster. He once had a prominent role, but did a terrible job and was fired by shareholders. Now he is so bitter he has become our resident troll (and thief of 13 BTC), doing whatever he can to see Nu fail. He is extremely attached to the idea that he didn’t display marked incompetence and insubordination to shareholders, but rather the fault is in the system.

Actually, he is just a hateful thief and troll whose claims have no credibility once you understand who he is.

1 Like
#5

You really live in your own version of reality?
Then again, we all do.

You should overcome your obsession that I’m what you want to see in me.

is a harsh allegation.
Do you consider giving your audience a proof or should they just trust your word?
I personally demand a proof for that allegation or that you take it back!

#6

In addition to the wonderfully unprofessional chief of operations, Nu is also $50k in debt. The current method is to leverage the nsr price, which has a total of $5k in buy orders. That means Nu is on the hook for about $45k with no real dependable plan to make it back. That’s why Nu is offering the 25% return on investment, because it’s bankrupt.

#7

@Bepow: I’m currently the one who conducts liquidity operations at exchanges for Nu.

The direct risks for you as a customer are that I steal or lose Nu’s BTC reserves, that @Phoenix steals and trades the shareholder US NuBits he’s in control of for those BTC, or that the NuShare value falls too low for NuBit backing beyond the BTC reserves. Owners of US NuBits still in circulation may decide to withdraw them and consume the reserves. It appears we’ve reached the floor of exiting NuBits, but we can’t know. See the bottom of this post for our business model and how much of the NuBit supply Nu aims to immediately back with BTC. Current supply and reserves will be updated later today.

Our community has withdrawn, people I respect have gone silent, and critics speak most, while we’re few that continue operating with hope in the Nu model. I hold the view that FLOT (our previous multisig group for liquidity operations) failed Nu mid-2016, but that shareholders should have made sure the NuShare sale backing mechanism and how to execute it was better understood by FLOT.

The situation is as following: @Phoenix runs way more opaque operations than previously conducted by the community. He’s thought by many to be Nu’s architect @JordanLee who left Nu around the same time he appeared. Critics believe he pushed for NuShare buybacks to profit greatly, and then crashed Nu purposefully to buy NuShares cheaply, control the network, and recover it for another round of profits. I strongly believe the accusations are false, and have not been presented evidence for them (though some things are hard to prove).

I briefly looked into how much the buybacks could have netted someone and compared to the amount of NuBits we’ve paid back. Doesn’t seem viable or sensible to risk that amount of money necessary for the recovery. The shareholder support @Phoenix has seems to either come from his own funds supporting the network or passive (non-voting) shareholders that only support Nu with funds presumably for the future potential NuShare value.

I’m in most contact with @Phoenix than probably anyone else here, and I have really not gotten the vibe that he’s in to scam anyone. He’s a professional that cares immensely about this project, and is understandably angry about the attempts to bring it to a halt. He doesn’t know everything, he’s not an oracle, and sometimes perform misguided efforts in my opinion, but I do not believe he’s dishonest. He’s expensive, and I hope investors keep seeing the value nobody else has shown they can replace.

I believe @Phoenix and I (who execute @Phoenix’ policy) have done the only right thing. Yet to date I can’t imagine how Nu could have recovered without taking these actions or how the peg and confidence in it wasn’t ruined by FLOT’s failure to follow the model rather than the model being flawed (which it may be, but isn’t the cause of all this). I’m disappointed that much of the community has fallen to paranoid spite.

@masterOfDisaster is unarguably a thief, and it does feel to me @ConfusedObserver is his new account, but we can’t prove that (maybe the forum can, but that could be considered a privacy violation). Critics keep throwing unproven accusations about how Nu is run, though do ask a few questions which may be warranted. A recurring complaint is that Nu doesn’t have revenue. Nu does, but it’s arguably insignificant so far. I consider Nu a startup with incredible potential at scale, but it may fail to reach that point.

I welcome you to keep reading. Please really try to understand what’s going on.

2 Likes
#8

Nu isn’t profitable. Park rates, liquidity operations and other such expenses have been high, whilst revenue has been far too small. There has been next to zero transparency and it’s been difficult for Shareholders and NuBits holders from understanding what has been going on. There appears to be many doggy dealings. There is practically no confidence in Nu. It’s for all intents and purposes dead. It’s only being kept alive in a zombie state. When NSR goes to zero, it’s game over.

No point flogging a dead horse. It’s time that people went away and did something else more productive. Creating a dollar pegged currency can be done, but a new model has to be followed.

1 Like
#9

And @MatthewLM brings us another episode of Libel From Your Wanna-Be Competitors. Just wanted to point out that @MatthewLM has pushed starting a clone of Nu, with nearly the same plans for how to move forward as I have proposed for Nu. His perspective is as biased as it could be.

You know what they say:

Immitation is the sincerest form of flattery

Thank you @MatthewLM, I am flattered.

#10

Do you have a kind of persecution complex?

I am allegedly @masterOfDisaster and have been called a criminal, because he has embezzled BTC.
Btw. thank you for removing that allegation. You don’t feel the need to offer an excuse?

And you imply that @MatthewLM is pushing a clone, because he tries to learn lessons you are to stubborn to even admit their basic necessity.

1 Like
#11

I don’t think @MatthewLM deserves that. He’s indeed discussing improving Nu, perhaps by okay, by a new Nu, I have not kept track. He appears to me as a reasonable individual, critical but respectful.

The neglect of profitability was the downfall of Nu which has become nothing more than a ponzi scheme.

Eh. Never mind.

#12

@Bepow I think NuBits is not currently safe. In my opinion, it is under too much control by a single actor or single set of actors. You can learn more by reading various discussions here in these forums.

1 Like
#13

Except clearly not.

If I thought Nu had good chances left, I wouldn’t be critical. I’m not critical because I’m considering another solution, I’m considering another solution because I’m critical.

#14

Critics aren’t welcome by @Phoenix/@JordanLee.
They are ignored, despised or even insulted.
I appreciate your critical mind!

@JordanLee can easily have made hundreds of BTC during the buyback. It’s unclear how much of angel investor NSR have been in his pockets.

Not all of the

have been bought back by explicit NSR buys. A lot of them have been bought by Blocks&Chains:

No matter how you look at it - selling NSR at 1,500 Satoshis and buying them for 50 Satoshis provides a lot of room for gaining a lot of control over the network at a very cheap price.

Do I really have to explain (again) how easy it would have been to take the proceeds from the buybacks, buy NBT with them, dump them at the walls to receive the BTC back, wait until all collapses and buy very cheap NSR?

I’m just pointing to this, because it’s relevant for the security of the network.
It was in danger right from the start, because too much power was in the hands of few.
Now there’s even more power in the hands of even fewer.

Tether is often being mocked at, because it’s centralized.
Nu is very centralized, too, but in difference to Tether doesn’t have the same level of reserve.

1 Like
#15

@ConfusedObserver it is ironic that you, almost certainly also known as @masterOfDisaster, who is guilty of felony theft against Nu, would accuse the founder of Nu of conduct somewhat similar to your own. I think they call that projection, when you are so uncomfortable with your own flaws that you project them on to others.

No one ought to take this felonious troll seriously. He is a bitter former contractor for Nu who seeks to destroy the wonderful work we have done here because he is mad at shareholders’ complete rejection of him.

If you are not @masterOfDisaster, then how about you reveal your identity to @jooize or I, so we can compare it with what is known about the felon @masterOfDisaster.

#16

Here i thought Nu was a blockchain experiment, or at least an economic one. Turns out it’s just a stupid pop-psych experiment. What a waste of taxpayer, i mean shareholder money. You’re getting paid $90/hr for these posts right?

1 Like
#17

Indeed it’d be a great gain, assuming it succeeds, that’s to say the network recovers and thrives again. That’s a lot of risk, no? It is to me far from an obvious gamble to take.

Yes, and do it well this time. Write an article comprehensively describing how it was or could be done, with numbers backing the economic rationality, why it made sense to take that risk, and specifics of how small or big that risk was. Pin on a timeline where the events occurred. Then we’ll talk.

I’d like to go through it all myself to get this over with, but I don’t have time for that. I find it unacceptable to have you roaming around discrediting our project on our forum as you do. I think @Phoenix’ retorts also make us look bad, even when they’re correct.

Your paranoia is damaging the perception of the project I still believe in and see no scam within. I don’t fear the actual narrative and a discussion toward truth. I fear that the project will fail because people like you spread FUD making Nu unattractive to partner with. I’m currently in an important talk with an exchange, and even though I’m able to explain all of what I believe is the truth about these events, this no doubt has a negative effect in our chances.

Whether you are whom I accuse you to be is irrelevant to your current conduct, but the allegation stands from me. You break paragraphs with one line break. You use semicolons. Similar to how @JordanLee left and @Phoenix appeared you and @masterOfDisaster did around the same time. At least twice you’ve accused him of sock puppet accounts, and most of them have later appeared not to be.

None of that matters really. You’re damaging to Nu. You defend your behaviour saying you’re just spreading the truth? Prove your truth then. What are your motives? To protect potential customers of Nu? You keep attacking Nu in any way possible and waste our time having to disprove you (by going back to 2014).

If you have no interest in Nu beyond harming it, why should we let you be here? If you are @masterOfDisaster, you definitely shouldn’t be here.

Stop it with the insults. All of you. That’s unprofessional and doesn’t get us anywhere.

Buy orders keep coming in over time. As long as they do, Nu will recover. Most importantly, the peg is not broken.

I think park rates can easily be seen as trying to lure customers in, and I’m hesitant to promote and advertise them mostly for that reason. They seem not worth that risk and the costs when we’re now quite stable and approaching target reserve levels. Park rates are not evil, however, and they may be useful in the future.

1 Like
#18

Any comment about the motion in question that made Nu provide liquidity with own funds?
Any comment about the motion that changed Nu’s business from NBT/USD to BTC/NBT?
You try to put up smoke grenades instead of dealing with what matters.

I understand that I’m a pain in the ass for you. But I don’t have a problem with that.

The master of complaining about TOR issues wants to know about others’ identity?
I defer to you revealing your identity :wink:

Nice point of view!
Now I understand what @Phoenix is trying to do.
He is trying to imply that I am @masterOfDisaster just because I’m reluctant to reveal my identity. There are lots of reasons for not revealing my identity. Not revealing my identity allows no conclusion apart from the fact that I’m not revealing my identity.

#19

Same here. No time for that. May those who are interested make their own calculation.

Can you please point me to the motions that changed liquidity provision from done with liquidity provider owned funds to Nu owned funds?
Or the motion which decided that BTC/NBT would replace NBT/USD?
You can call that FUD or provide information which reveals that I’m wrong when I say that @JordanLee changed important parts of Nu without permission from shareholders.
@JordanLee or @Phoenix don’t have the clean record they claim to have.
For the record:


Future investors should know that.

My keyboard supports that! And I eat bread. What does that prove?

You already suspected that when asking

That’s indeed the reason I ask so many questions.

Where’s the insult?
If you want to see insults, look here to the version before @Phoenix edited it, where he called me “a hateful criminal”:

If the Chief were professional, he’d answer important questions.
Not answering the questions is what’s unprofessional.

You really don’t see how Nu can’t afford park rates as long as Nu has no revenue?
You really don’t see how Nu can only exist by feasting on future customers and shareholders?
Revenue is the key to Nu’s success. I wrote an extended post in which I showed Nu how to make revenue with an advanced product. Nu isn’t interested in revenue. Customers and shareholders should know that.

#20

Unlike you and phoenix, im not getting paid and so have no expectation of professionalism.

#21

As long as NSR can be sold the peg can be maintained. The question is how long the selling can continue as there are no other income streams at the moment other than selling more NBT. I don’t consider that a profit that can be used to maintain the cost of keeping up the network, but there are different opinions about that.

3 Likes