Whatever one paid Bittrex the most.

why?

Thats interesting, thanks I'll take a look into it. Sounds more or less like they were trying to accomplish a similar goal.

Either "very respectable" or a sign that people will throw their money at just about anything. Time will tell.

Remember when Keiser tried to do that in-show promotion of Darkcoin where he was gonna buy some Darkcoin live on his show to prove how easy and awesome it was, then Darkcoin crashed that day? Hilarious.

I'd like to believe you that NXT is still taking off, but the only thing actually worth believing is the price.

I dunno, it just seems that if you were right and I was wrong the price would be faring better than it currently is.

Oh man, I had to LOL when I read this.

Whats interesting is this same list of problems could be applied to a bunch of other decent coins right now. I think people are finally starting to figure out that the altcoin trend is unsustainable. Monero might have some genuinely interesting, novel features going for it that could be applicable to the real world some day, but so do about 20 other coins out there, and they are all going down in value.

As a matter of fact, the only coins that go up is whatever the Coin of the Week is, which Monero had a turn as last month.

Aren't you the one who likes to impress noobs with your deep, deep understanding of reason and philosophy by always undercutting their arguments on the grounds that they are logical fallacies?

Way to counter my argument. NXT price wasn't higher in its pre-exchange days, BTW, I don't know what reality you are remembering but its not this one.

So what point is it exactly that you think you are making when you cut down on NXT with each and every message you write?

For your information I did look. I did type the message into Google and nothing relevant to the current situation came up. There's a variety of different reasons why the error message could come up.

I don't know, that's why I asked if there was information I was missing out on. It would certainly make it harder for a miner to dominate a coin.

So why not solve for Sybil attacks? And how do you mean you wouldn't need mining? If you can prevent somebody from running a thousand miners with the same IP address, how does that mean you don't need mining?

Everything can't be done, until it can.

Have you taken a good look at a XMR chart recently?

It has the exact same pattern as any pump n dump coin: A stratospheric pump followed by a slow and neverending dump.

I didn't receive a satisfactory answer to my question.

Who the F is buying this S?

Turns out the only thing Monero actually did was destroy value and it actually _was_ one of the "hyped out pumps shit(s)."

Monero won't make it. The name is too silly and the coin is too unoriginal.

I guess the answer is "no"?

Wonder why nobody bothered to try this concept out. Is there some key piece of information I'm missing that would disallow for this experiment to happen? The idea seems entirely feasible.

You're absolutely wrong and you understand nothing about trends. NXT has barely even been a coin for 6 months.

Furthermore, I don't understand what good you think you are doing for your (apparently massive) NEM investment by constantly bashing NXT. NEM would be nothing without NXT. NEM is currently backed by nothing other than NXT and a bunch of promises.

You said NEM is working on some new features that distinguish it from being a NXT clone yet you don't bother to mention what they are.

I don't know what agenda you think you're promoting as you are all over the map with your viewpoints.

The thing about ShortNXT is there's frequently no asset-issuer buy orders which is worrisome to me. Why would you buy an asset that you can't sell? Purchasing the ShortNXT is only half of the formula of the gameplan. The other half is being able to sell it.

It seems like it would take far too long to play a hand, but I'm all for improvements in decentralized gambling. At the end of the day, there must be some sort of human hand in programming the decentralization, so it can never be truly "decentralized" or free of human bias. Any way to lessen reliance on user trust is probably beneficial.

Meaning, are there any coins out there that cap the effect that your hashrate has on your likelihood of successfully mining a block?

If the mining race were a bit more even I think this would lead to fairer distribution, as more people would be encouraged to mine and the network would grow stronger.

Has this ever been implemented in a coin design before?

I was just reading through the ANN section and I notice there's a new post every 8 seconds or so, most is talk about mining for coins with silly, silly names that are basically just replicas of other coins with a new twist. This new coin fights herpes, this other one was officially blessed by the Pope, etc.

So, my question is... WHO THE F IS BUYING THIS SHIT ??!!

I'll admit it was me, for about 2 weeks, when I first got started.

So whats the deal.. There's a constant new churn of fresh noobs that are feeding a neverending cycle?

People predicted that the altcoin world would be unsustainable as it would draw in too much BTC in order to keep growing, but what happens instead is the same BTC gets recycled over and over, put into one new coin after the next.

As a result we have hundreds of dying coins on our hands -- some have truly stand-out innovation compared to McShinyCoin of the Week.

Hopefully coins that are proven to have innovation and real-world potential will have a rising price through all the noise, but demand, regulation and a rapidly transforming field of study make the future of the entire scene somewhat uncertain.