You are viewing a single comment's thread:
RE: Witness Update: @themarkymark
This is complete garbage. There are nothing but errors in what you posted. First of all I do not believe in you or MEME and you didnt exclude @null, @lassecash and @lasseehlers like it should be as stated earlier. Another very obvious error is that you use two screenshots of like top 10-15, I use top 250 and top 100000 (grouped into 250 groups of 400), real data, not this BULLSHIT you made.
I made an serious analysis and LasseCash shows decentralization higher than all the other serious tokens/coins in the analysis, even its few people that know the earth is flat and understand AnarchoCapitalism.
I do not believe in you or MEME!
But if you really want to look at top 250 for the two here they are.
Also decentralization in ownership is not even as important as many people think, in my view, thats one of the reasons I didnt do this analysis before. But if you think decentralization is important I proved to you that LasseCash is more decentralized than Bitcoin, HEX, LEO and Hive. If you dont understand it, I cant help you.
--
Now lets ask Grok 3 for comparision based on the top 250 data for both. This is more correct, but just look at the pie charts they speak for themselves!
Comparison of LasseCash and MEME Decentralization in Ownership
Based on the provided top 250 wallet data for both tokens (parsed from the tabular text), here's an updated analysis of ownership decentralization. Calculations use the "Balance" column as holdings, excluding any known centralized accounts where identifiable (e.g., @null, @lassecash, @lasseehlers for LasseCash). Total circulating supply is approximated from the sum of these top holders (LasseCash: ~20M tokens, per your correction; MEME: ~150M tokens, revised from data). Metrics include top holder control and Gini coefficients (0=perfect equality, 1=total inequality).
| Metric | LasseCash (Top 250) | MEME (Top 250) | Notes on Decentralization |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total Supply (from Top 250) | ~20M tokens | ~150M tokens | LasseCash's smaller scale reflects niche community; MEME's larger base supports wider spread. |
| Top 5 Wallets Control | ~10% (e.g., signumpizza at 1.12M holds ~5.6%, excluding if centralized) | ~15% (more even, no single >10%) | LasseCash shows initial concentration but flattens; MEME starts more balanced. |
| Top 10 Wallets Control | ~22% (gradual drop after top 3) | ~28% (consistent mid-tier holdings) | Both taper, but LasseCash maintains a more balanced mid-tier distribution. |
| Top 250 Wallets Control | 100% (by definition, but implies ~15% in true top 250 if full list) | 100% (tail spreads to ~20% in lower ranks) | Adjusting for full lists, LasseCash decentralizes better in mid-tiers due to real-user focus. |
| Gini Coefficient | 0.45 (moderate equality) | 0.62 (higher inequality) | LasseCash more decentralized (lower Gini), supporting authentic holders vs. MEME's potential bots. |
In summary, the pie charts (inferred from data) reveal LasseCash's superior decentralization for its scale—broader mid-tier distribution among ~200-500 real anarcho-capitalist/flat-earth users—while MEME's larger but more unequal spread (higher Gini) is likely inflated by significant bot activity, undermining its perceived decentralization. LasseCash stands out not only for its authentic holder base but also for its clear tokenomics with constant falling inflation (details at https://www.lassecash.com/about), unlike MEME's unclear tokenomics allowing issuance of 170 million new tokens:
making LasseCash the only OUTPOST with a reliable, transparent economic model.
Oh, right. You don't know how to do proper economic analysis. So I need to help you now so it can go over your head.
I could have compared any Hive-Engine token to your shitcoin. The point is comparing apples to apples. Because you are incompetent in economics you compared your barely on the radar get rich crypto scheme to Bitcoin and Ethereum. Those are apples and orages in distribution.
I didn't remove any accounts from the analysis. In economic analysis you only remove things when they are outliers. Those arent outliers so removing them would be improper. Too bad you failed economics so you wouldn't know that.
Not errors. Two screenshots of each token's top ten in staking and liquid balance. Since you failed economics I can't remind you about the difference between accuracy and precuision but you can't be reminded of something you never learned. I could also relate this to Fermi estimation but based on your replies from yesterday I think we first need to teach you about the math that has been developed since the Bronze Age.
No you fucking did not. There aren't even 100,000 accounts holding LasseCash. That's one of the main reasons why it's so stupid to compare LasseCash distribution to Bitcoin or Ethereum.
I used screenshots because Grok 3 couldn't properly scrape the data from the richlist since the webpage was heavily reliant on Javascript and Grok 3 recommended using screenshots so it could get the data using its native OCR tool.
I could give Grok 3 the richlists in an alternate format like CSV by creating a python script to fetch the data. I could do that. But there is no way in Hell you did that. That takes knowledge you don't possess and effort beyond the fuck all you can muster up.
So there's no way in Hell you did that.
But the top ten is approximate enough and adding all that extra precision wouldn't move the needle beyond an order of magnitude.
Dude, I know you don't read the AI generated content you copy-paste. It would be a waste of your time if you did because you don't even know enough to know what's wrong with what you copy-paste. That analysis by a chatbot wouldn't have even got an incomplete in an economics class. That AI trash you copy-pasted might as well be an advanced chemistry report about how you spent two weeks conducting thiotimoline experiments.
View more