Technically, Nockchain seemed to be a very interesting project. This video provides a good summary (before the launch):
However, the project’s launch brought a highly negative surprise that left the community furious: the developers released a low-performance version for the community to mine with, reserving an optimized version for themselves and their partners/investors! As a consequence, nobody from the community managed to mine even a single block.
Zorp, the company behind Nockchain, insists this is just part of the game, as everyone can develop optimized versions of mining algorithms. Indeed, Zorp’s blog contained hints suggesting that Zorp might, at some point, leverage such advantages: https://forum.nockchain.org/t/how-is-this-a-fair-launch/451
In podcasts and some posts, there was talk about “competitiveness” in mining improvements. However, I found no specific information pointing to Zorp’s competitive advantage right at launch. Quite the opposite. The narrative always focused on terms like “fair launch,” “no pre-mine,” etc.
Therefore, my perception (and the community’s) is clear: there was a lack of transparency. When you explicitly proclaim a “fair launch,” as Zorp did, there’s a very clear concept in everyone’s mind.
Is it fair launch for the core team to mine all blocks due to having a superior mining algorithm? I guarantee 100% of people would answer NO.
If nobody else perceives this as a fair launch except Zorp, then every mention of “fair launch” during promotion should have explicitly noted that they would have a superior version at launch, making equal competition impossible. That would have been transparent. But it was not done, perhaps because it wouldn’t be attractive marketing?
Speaking of marketing, Zorp organically attracted thousands of people interested in this launch precisely because it was marketed as a fair launch. The sense of betrayal was enormous.
There are hundreds of reports from people on Telegram and Urbit groups who invested large amounts of money in hardware and server rentals, in addition to significant time and effort setting everything up, only to discover at the last moment that it was all in vain.
Zorp should be ashamed. My goal here isn’t to accuse anyone. I don’t believe the company acted in bad faith. But strategically, it was an extremely unfortunate decision to leave what Zorp defines as “fair launch” so obscure.
Zorp did the hardest part: developing the technology. They then managed to gain organic interest. They had everything needed to create a new paradigm and attract even more people. But a ridiculous decision jeopardized everything. I cannot understand how nobody within Zorp questioned whether this was a good approach. Nobody showed basic common sense.
It’s pointless to argue that Zorp needs sustainability. Clearly, that’s always a challenge, but there are numerous viable approaches. If Zorp truly believes in Nockchain, simply participating at launch with good infrastructure would already secure some NOCK tokens. Zorp could have also launched a mining pool, helpful for solo miners with limited hardware. Such a pool would have easily become the most popular, generating more NOCK tokens from fees.
Later, when launching applications on the network (the most important part), Zorp could create profitable apps, provide consultancy services to companies and developers, and so forth.
These are very fair and widely accepted organic approaches. Valid strategies that provide substantial returns if the project succeeds. Long-term contributions to improvements in efficient zk proof computation would garner significant attention. The motivations for such development would be numerous.
But who will want to contribute now? Obtain a useless token no one else cares about?
Imagine if Satoshi Nakamoto had launched Bitcoin stating he had a proprietary improved version. That’s not the Bitcoin philosophy you (Zorp) often referenced! It’s obvious; only Zorp fails to see this, having lived in a bubble, blind to extremely basic things.
Mining all NOCK tokens alone at launch is no different from pre-mining. It doesn’t matter that anyone can develop their mining algorithms; Zorp possesses significantly greater technical knowledge and advantage. It will take a long time before the community catches up, and we know the NOCK token distribution significantly favors early mining. Thus, Zorp structured Nockchain to unilaterally benefit from launch and was not transparent about this with the community, causing substantial losses to individuals.
If anyone from Zorp is reading this, please briefly reflect: “Did you genuinely believe people would see Zorp mining all blocks with an advantage and the community would view this positively, motivated to compete?” Are you serious? It feels like a joke.
I still can’t believe what happened. Within Urbit, disapproval was significant as well. What an enormous mistake.
Now you can keep accumulating a worthless token entirely for yourselves. Congratulations.
This article contains the personal opinions of someone who closely followed, participated, invested money and time in mining Nockchain, and lost everything invested.
Related articles: