Nope, only a UFO.
As a kid I lived near a military base here in Australia. One night me & a few mates were looking up into the sky, as we did back then, watching shooting stars & satellites, however this night we noticed a bright light stationary in the sky. I thought it was just another star, but a friend of mine pointed out it couldnt be as it was much brighter and looked a lot closer. A short time after we heard choppers starting up at the local RAAF base and saw them slowly move towards the light. As they got closer, the light moved horizontally in an instant (I suspect about 2-3 miles in a second), and at a right angle (without stopping) zoomed upwards and into the clouds in a split second. The choppers immediately turned around and headed back to base. This was in the 70's so it wasn't our technology.
oh come on, we *still* don't have the technology to do that sort of stuff. horizontal, at a right angle? u been watchin stories. unless Area 52 has already found out this technology  Agreed, there are already planes that can go into the high atmosphere, Blackbird SR-71.. If "aliens" did visit us, they're most likely so advanced that'd we never know they did. Traveling the millions, billions, trillions, and even beyond...light-years to reach Earth would mean there tech dwarfs ours by an extremely large margin. |
|
|
|
probably moderators are buddies with some exposed scammers or were invested in a scamcoin and you prevented them from finding the greater fool, so now you're offtopic  No...I think it's more that Spoetnik is leader of the troll army on Bitcointalk and 99% of his posts is total bullshit. |
|
|
|
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/13/world/meast/isis-currency/index.html?hpt=hp_c2ISIS is planning to mint its own currency in gold, silver and copper, the group said Thursday.
Its aim is to stay away from the "tyrant's financial system," ISIS said in a statement. It said it would issue another statement to explain the new currency's exchange rate, and where it can be found. Sounds like they are printing their own kind of FIAT. More scamcoin. I think this is a great opportunity to show them Bitcoin and get some users from the Middle East. The anonymity and low fees are sure to be a turn on. How can we spread the word and help Bitcoin go TO THE MOON!? You're a freaking retard of the highest proportions. Why the hell would you want ISIS to use Bitcoin? Hell no they shouldn't use Bitcoin. Stupid OP. |
|
|
|
|
Well, Bitcoin shot up 15% today. Good time to buy xc.
|
|
|
|
Counterparty is too slow. It's not smart to use btc's blockchain either way....BTC will eventually fall (to other cryptocurrencies), and so will the coins tied with it. |
|
|
|
|
IPO's should only be reserved for coins implementing outstanding/highly innovative features(Like Ethereum and the like).
Any other, then no.
|
|
|
|
Spoetnik, what have you cracked recently?
His IQ, in half. |
|
|
|
Easy. Because silver metal has unique properties that gold doesn't have, both are valued. Litecoin doesn't have unique properties compared to Bitcoin (no, tweaking a few parameters doesn't make it unique), it won't survive. "Litecoin is silver to Bitcoin's gold" was a short-term marketing ploy for the uneducated. Doge has a chance to gain some of Bitcoin's market share, because it has been unique in marketing, that is its non-technical unique property, but only if it persists in pushing itself to new markets. Then there is a bunch of crypto 2.0 technologies with unique to Bitcoin properties, but they are beyond the scope of this thread.  Interesting comparison, Lol |
|
|
|
Yeah that article been circulating on Reddit.
I don't think they understand that you can't FUD Litecoin in english language as most Litecoin users are people in China who don't even read Bitcointalk or english-speaking Reddit.
To be fair, that's not necessarily true. A lot of litecoin's volume on those Chinese exchanges are thought to be faked. I myself believe they are as well. For EX: Okcoin has 0 trading fees, so users may just put up bots and have them trade back and forth, thus creating fake volume for LTC markets. Litecoin's low marketcap and "high" trading volume just don't add up, especially since BTC is many times LTC's marketcap, but not near the same amount of volume, ratio wise. |
|
|
|
i thought there were real members in his group?
Nothing is real here Real, serious P&D groups dont advertise on threads in the altcoin section.....and don't have accept a measly .5 btc as payment to join. |
|
|
|
I don't think using multisig addresses for openbazaar donations is going to help anything. Anyone that facaliates the sale of illegal drugs (or any other illegal good for that matter) is risking apprehension by law enforcement as well as a lengthy jail/prison sentence OpenBazaar is a protocol, not a one stop shop for illegal drugs. Thus, governments probably can't stop development on it any moreso than they could on BitTorrent. If anything, a crackdown on the software would lead more people to using it and developing for it, e.g. PopcornTime. Exactly, I believe federal agencies are aware of that and that's why they don't just ban everything immediately. They're slowly taking their time as not to cause too much disruption(an outright ban on some services would lead to even more people doing things they don't want). All in all, their take your time approach is better than the outright ban approach and I think all bitcoiners would agree. |
|
|
|
Evidence? And what community is this? There's always people who accuse every market of being a honeypot usually just based on suspicion and paranoia. I don't doubt they try infiltrate them, but wouldn't setting up your own black market be entrapment or at the very least just plain illegal?
No, it won't be entrapment. But illegal yes(facilitating in drug trafficking). But, I believe it's common knowledge that a decent enough portion of those markets are run by law enforcement, or those connected to. I believe user's of those darknet sites are in trouble if they: a) Are Large vendors/sellers b) Are frequent Consumers c) Are staff/admins of said marketplace d) Use/Accept Bitcoin to buy goods or receive as payment(Blockchain Analysis Programs) |
|
|
|
Wisdom from cAPSLOCK here: It would be foolish not to consider the competitive danger of an "anonymous" cryptocurrency with both a network effect advantage as well as a sable codebase, a working disk based database and a user friendly front end at a time when dark markets are learning they are once again vulnerable because of public blockchains. 100% true. The NSA et all were momentarily confused by the tech behind Bitcoin, but that moment is way past over. I am not condoning the dark markets in any way, shape, or form..but XMR has a unique opportunity to be "that coin" due to the legitimacy of its devs. I agree but dark coin has a terrible distribution compared to xmr, with half of the currency controlled by duff. And the master nodes are a point of centralization. Both true. But Darkcoin excels on their marketing. As does Dogecoin. Shows that marketing plays a huge role in the success of cryptos, this goes for commercial products as well. Not speaking crypto here: Ever heard of the product, nono?, Well it's practically a "scam", being that it doesn't take your hair off at all, has a 2/5 star rating, and occasional burns it's users. But the marketing of that product has make it's owners millions. |
|
|
|
For the first time in can't remember how long (early in the history of this thread that's for sure), I exercised moderator power and deleted a post by "bagholder" (a newbie sock puppet, which is already a warning sign) that was one part trolling and one part promoting BBR.
I don't care if you are negative on Monero, or like another coin better, but I'm not interested in the trolling style of posting meme pictures and such on this thread. Nor obvious sock puppets.
Say what you want to say in a courteous respectful tone, even if you disagree, or say it elsewhere.
They did start with trolling for 80% of the space the post took up .. then made the 'rational' point, which easily could have been a troll point. Hard to tell when your post is 80% spiteful troll at least. Even if they did find a reason to stuff themself up a sock .. only 4-5 lines there even made sense at all .. the rest was just kinda lame. Admittedly though, I did chuckle for a second or two at at least one line. I'd agree that the post was prime for deletion. If the author came back and restated the last couple of lines .. then that would have been almost worthy of commenting on. I agree, that post was obvious trolling, coming from a ex troll Cpt himself. Also, the recent seizure of underground markets, primarily Silk Road 2, and the arrest of several vendors using those markets, should increase adoption with anonymity coins i.e Monero. |
|
|
|
Once again: Donīt point out the problem; present a solution, make a better Emission curve and back it up why its better, present the advantages and disadvantages etc. Thats simply what i expect from a discussion. Just changing the Emission to be only half as fast or whatever canīt be the holy grail.
The best suggestion I've seen, I think, is from BanditryAndLoot, who suggested to take the next 3.5 years (or pick some other such number) of rewards under the existing curve and flatten them. My rationale for this would be that: 1. BTC and LTC have done okay with keeping he emissions flat for a while and then cutting them. This is total speculation but I might guess that keeping them flat for a while encourages participation, since people do not feel disadvantaged for having arrived a bit later in each cycle. 2. 3.5 (or 2.5 or whatever) years should most certainly be enough time for build out of the technology and for adoption to start to occur if it ever will. I don't think the current 1-2 years before we are well over 50% mined and people start to look at the coin as mature but with little to show for it is enough. 3. This causes no permanent change so it has less "social contract" issues. Once the end of the flattening period is reached everything is just exactly as it always was. This is probably the positive action that can be taken with the least reputation harm. Not zero necessarily, but everything else is worse. I'm still undecided on whether anything should be changed. I think for several reasons that the emmission rate of xmr is close to perfect - the only thing i am unsure is if the price is probably to high. but we will see.
if you study the emmission rate in a greater detail you'll see the beauty. from an economics perspective it has quite a ton of very interesting implications.
this place is so used to pump and dump that it forgets where the true value of a decentralized currency can be found. its possibility to create network effects.
Could you share more details? 1.) if only the the design of inflation would matter, the price will be an inverse function of supply 2.) given the high amount of daily produced coins it is almost impossible to pump the coin or to keep a the pump for a long time 3.) given the high amount of daily produced coins it is almost impossible to become a super whale and keep this status for a long period of time - if this would be the case it would hinder network effects 4.) given the design of inflation it is still more rational to buy today than tommorow, but if you fail to buy today the costs will be minimal 5.) the effects of this can already be seen: most of time the coin was traded in a range between 0.002 and 0.0045, this probably gives a lot of people the feeling that they "have not missed the train already" 6.) if only the design of inflation matters: investors assume an appreciation of xmr in the long run, which leads to the incentive to hold 7.) all that said: the design leads to a situation, where mining is rational, where holding is rational and where buying is rational. given situations of bubbles it is rational to sell and buy back lower - this leads to a stabilisation of the system compare this to other designs of emmission. I still have some concerns but compared to other designs they are minor my own disclaimer is probably that I am a post-keynesian institutional economist  but when this looks convincing to someone with this background it will probably convince guys on the other side of the guild much more  I posted that back in august I guess - still think it is true - but there are issues which we could not see back then You make good points in favor of high emissions really. I guess that is why I'm undecided and why I also agree with othe that nobody really knows what the hell is right. Then how about what is Better. A slower emission may not be what's "perfect", but it sure is better than a higher one. |
|
|
|
Is anyone proposing that Bitcoin change emission? I mean seriously. Well, actually a lot of people are awaiting the next halving, as clearly the market canīt take the sold coins per day; So we can rule out that the Bitcoin emission makes sense, because it doesnīt as we see from the price charts. Everyone who invested in 2014 pretty much has lost money on Bitcoin. BTC price is down 4x from the last high. BTC Emission is slower than ours. Litecoin is down 10x from the high. Litecoin issues a lot more coins per day than us, but there shedule is like Bitcoin. NXT, BTCD have been issued instantly, they are also down; they have no emission so to say. Boolberry has half of our Emission and its down way more than us, so clearly that Emission is also wrong. The problem isn't miners abandoning. Botnets mine a good proportion and sell their coins accordingly, contributing to the price decline. By launch a new coin, I mean something similar to what canth proposed and what I've seen other altcoins do. Create a new blockchain and have user's "transfer" their coins on the original blockchain to the new one based on the # of coins they hold in their wallet. So like starting a new beginning with a new, much better emission and keeping everything else that everyone loves(the logo, name, website, the ideals) and throwing away the thing that hurts the coin the most(the emission) Buhh oh god, to change the emission we need maybe 10 lines of code why the fuck do we need to move coins to a new blockchain?!?!?! Till block XXXX use Emission_old if above block XXXX use Emission_new. DONE. You want us to waste another month just to code something fancy that allows us moving coins to a new blockchain for no reason?! I was thinking aesthetically and how a new blockchain with the emission change might look better but yea I see your point lol. |
|
|
|
I somewhat now see some arguments for changing the emission - best would be if could change the emission and adapt the current amount of coins accordingly, but I think this is really impossible.
maybe I am wrong and the social contract is less important than the fixing - I am really really unsure about this.
We may need a new CN coin to implement the thoughts here. Apologies if someone else has brought this up, but has the idea of re-launching a new Monero or other CN coin and then burning Monero to transfer value been floated? The idea of burning coins to start a project is in general a bad idea, since it leaves the project without funding. However, for the purpose of transferring value aka, going from coin 1.0 to coin 2.0, it's a valid tool. Launch XMR 2.0, allow a 30 day period of burn/conversion and then there's no need to mess with XMR 1.0. This^ I think Monero is pretty "brandable" or at least well known as an altcoin. If there's a way to change the emission to something much more reasonable and have user's balances also converted into the new blockchain, then I say, Go for it. The current emission(especially given that Monero is tied to Bitcoin atm and Bitcoin's a bit bearish along with the high emission rate atm) is going to Kill this coin. My opinion is that high adoption comes after a decent enough investor base. And investors don't come in where when they're investments are just going to fade away with continious price dropping from high emission. As I think about it, the current emission entirely benefits selfish miners at this point, this can be fixed completely now as Monero is still very young, but wait any longer(months from now) and this coin will be dead by then. Wtf? Whats the point of this... u guys really have some weird ass ideas, its unbelieveable Thereīs no need to launch a new coin to just change the emission but i say it once again i want someone to proof to me that Emission XYZ is good for us and donīt come here and write 10 lines on a forum. If we change it we have to make it "perfect" or we cry in 1 year again. Feel free to fork Monero and do your own coin but then you can do the dev work the whole fucking day instead of us. Feel free to make fancy sidechains and whatever you had in mind but prepare to code that all alone. Its for me pretty simple: NO ONE HERE knows whats the best way to do, its all speculation and we will not find out until the years will pass by, its the same with bitcoins and mining only mining fees - NO ONE knows if thatīs going to work out in 100 years or so. And its pretty clear that the community canīt find a consensus so far? Selfish miners wtf? They secure our fucking network and thatīs why they get rewarded, mining is pretty much +-0 profit atm anyway... monero's deflationary characteristic (~18M coins in short time) might cause miners gradualy to abandon the ship when the reward starts to get low (happening soon with current emission) and not enough adoption takes place.
Monero hashrate is trending lower for almost 3 months now and we are still in the inflationary stage!! What will happen in a year or two? Is the adoption going to be so big in a year to drive the price up even when there are so many coins mined already and compensate miners for low reward And they wont just LEAVE NOW IF WE CUT THE EMISSION?!?! There are shitton of PoS coins like NXT who donīt have inflation and still their marketcap shrinks and shrinks - can you explain me that?? Why do u think new users are worse off?! Please explain me that they can prolly buy cheap coins even in a year or two...Arenīt they worse off if we artificially higher the price now? I throw something else in the round now: Maybe this bullshit ongoing emission talk is the real reason of the price decline? PS: i am generally open to tweak the Emission if we reach a consensus. PS2: This is my personal opinion and yeah, i am getting tired from this shit. The problem isn't miners abandoning. Botnets mine a good proportion and sell their coins accordingly, contributing to the price decline. By launch a new coin, I mean something similar to what canth proposed and what I've seen other altcoins do. Create a new blockchain and have user's "transfer" their coins on the original blockchain to the new one based on the # of coins they hold in their wallet. So like starting a new beginning with a new, much better emission and keeping everything else that everyone loves(the logo, name, website, the ideals) and throwing away the thing that hurts the coin the most(the emission) |
|
|
|
I somewhat now see some arguments for changing the emission - best would be if could change the emission and adapt the current amount of coins accordingly, but I think this is really impossible.
maybe I am wrong and the social contract is less important than the fixing - I am really really unsure about this.
We may need a new CN coin to implement the thoughts here. Apologies if someone else has brought this up, but has the idea of re-launching a new Monero or other CN coin and then burning Monero to transfer value been floated? The idea of burning coins to start a project is in general a bad idea, since it leaves the project without funding. However, for the purpose of transferring value aka, going from coin 1.0 to coin 2.0, it's a valid tool. Launch XMR 2.0, allow a 30 day period of burn/conversion and then there's no need to mess with XMR 1.0. This^ Monero is very brandable and well known as an altcoin here. If there's a way to change the emission to something much more reasonable and have user's balances also converted into the new blockchain, then I say, Go for it. The current emission(especially given that Monero is tied to Bitcoin atm and Bitcoin's a bit bearish) is going to Kill this coin. My opinion is that high adoption comes after a decent enough investor base. And investors don't come in when there investments are just going to fade away with continuous price dropping from high emission. As I think about it, the current emission entirely benefits selfish miners at this point, this can be fixed completely now as Monero is still very young and the coins already out give large enough liquidity to attract investors, but wait any longer(months from now) and this coin will be dead by then from the constant high emission. |
|
|
|
|
I think it's been made pretty clear: A change to slow down emission(even if temporarily) is needed. Without it....... death. After really considering it, It's only been 6 months so it's not too late to change the emission, yes some people may view it negatively, but if Monero's intended goal is to become the leader of the Anonymity niche, then a reasonable emission is needed so investors dont see their holdings slowly fade away. In a year-few years, it probably wouldn't matter.
|
|
|
|
|
I was never really into anime/comics. But hearing this has actually saddened me. Naruto truly was a great anime.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
