But as cypherdoc pointed out this idea in the free market will be like a hammer to the scamcoins, alts will compete on innovation to succeed not cheap memes.
The free market has more of a sense of humor than you think. How much of GDP is represented by totally frivolous industries, or even harmful ones? I don't think anyone can prejudge what works in the market. That's why you need a market, and central planning (i.e. anointing which coins have "real" innovation) doesn't work. DOGE could "inexplicably" continue to grow on the strength of marketing and eventually eclipse BTC. It won't, but that doesn't mean it can't. |
|
|
|
I find the logic of the proposal a bit lacking though. Once you spin off an altcoin, calling it A, from bitcoin, why does the next one spin off bitcoin and not off A?
The premise is that to maximize the chance for adoption, the alt should always spin off the blockchain with the highest market cap at the time of launch. Cryptocurrency users get automatically piggybacked to the most liquid and valuable network (which I expect to remain "bitcoin as is" for the foreseeable future). I dunno, why not spin off all of them? That's the largest market cap, right? |
|
|
|
Yes, this applies only to coins that may potentially represent a useful technical innovation.
Innovation is in the eye of the beholder, and which innovations turn out to be important is ultimately often only recognizable in hindsight. Not sure your distinction is really sound. Like you said, the distinction can only be made with certainty in hindsight. The OP represents a market-based mechanism to value useful coins while facilitating the death of useless coins. I agree it discourages some useless coins (the ones motivated by a premine/IPO). I'm not convinced that it discourages all or even most useless coins. The other models (of useless coins) don't particularly seem affected. Certainly worth a try though. |
|
|
|
Yes, this applies only to coins that may potentially represent a useful technical innovation.
Innovation is in the eye of the beholder, and which innovations turn out to be important is ultimately often only recognizable in hindsight. Not sure your distinction is really sound. |
|
|
|
Therefore, someone's 10 Bitcoins will be cloned indefinitely into 10 aether1, aether2, ... , aether9999.
Isn't that inflationary?
I don't think this is inflationary in the usual sense because the value of any future altcoin using this model is already incorporated in the value of btc. Bitcoin becomes something of an inflation-indexed bond. I find the logic of the proposal a bit lacking though. Once you spin off an altcoin, calling it A, from bitcoin, why does the next one spin off bitcoin and not off A? |
|
|
|
- increase the pace of innovation without risking to make everything collaps
The risk is that the proposal could create gatekeepers to innovation via the big bitcoin mining pools, because only the "2.0" chains the big pools agree to merge mine (that may not quite be the right phrase) will get to participate in this two-way peg. If I had to guess I'd say that is somehow part of their business model, but we'll have to wait and see. |
|
|
|
Can you only order S1s with BTC? Is there a credit card option?
From Bitmain directly you can only use BTC. You can buy from resellers though. For example, last time I looked there were some for sale from third parties on amazon.com |
|
|
|
totally off-topic  I don't entirely agree. Given that the pre-order business model is at best a massive shifting of the manufacturer's business risks to the customers and at worst arguably fraudulent, it is on-topic to warn potential customers about it, and this is one place to do so. We likely can't get them to put any prominent warnings to that effect on the nice glossy web site but we can put them here (although we can't keep them from "solving" the issue by deleting them) |
|
|
|
2) What the hell is wrong with people who keep buying stuff that probably won't make money?
I do know that at least in the US they probably wouldn't be able to run this pre-order scam, because the FTC rules require a seller to give a refund if the promised ship date is missed, and accounting-wise they likely couldn't even book the revenue (or at least not all of it) until finishing the work. In that case they would probably just have to get $20 million of VC money instead of $5 million ($20 million is hardly unobtainable) and the VCs would have to settle for 2500% return in the event of a successful exit instead of 10000%.
But bottom line is that as long as people can't buy this (overpriced IMO) stuff fast enough, the market will find a way to stick it to them.
(All numbers hypothetical of course)
Now you just look foolish. BFL, Hashfast, Cointerra, Terrahash, VMC/AMC... Holy hell guy. Some of those have offered (and paid) refunds and some are facing legal trouble. Obviously there are always bad actors, and in a new industry more than usual. My bottom line comment still applies though. |
|
|
|
Hey guys,
Sorry if this was discussed already (it's a nuanced question, so it's hard to search for an answer)...
...is coin control really needed for the ZGL concept? I think from the IRS's perspective, you can use the ZGL concept even if your coins/stocks were fundamentally indistinguishable. For example, you can keep track of tax lots when you sell shares of a company, but it's just an accounting abstraction for tax purposes. The shares themselves are not marked in anyway.
So, more concretely, even if you took all of your unspent outputs in your wallet and combined them into a single unspent output, I think you could still apply the ZGL principle for tax purposes... as long as you kept a table of your cost basis for every coin you purchased. This might simplify the design of such a wallet considerably.
Please forgive me in advance if you guys discussed this ages ago.
Good point. You can use specific lots on book entry shares that are all part of a large pool held by the broker, in fact in some cases for short periods of time the broker may be short shares and "your shares" don't even exist. No matter, as long as you keep track of your trades you can use specific lots. Using coin control for ZGL seems like overkill. A transaction history by itself might well be enough. |
|
|
|
The other thing is like Spondoolies-Tech said: however many they make, they'll probably SELL OUT immediately they get any stock
1) This is the real issue. and 2) What the hell is wrong with people who keep buying stuff that probably won't make money? I do know that at least in the US they probably wouldn't be able to run this pre-order scam, because the FTC rules require a seller to give a refund if the promised ship date is missed, and accounting-wise they likely couldn't even book the revenue (or at least not all of it) until finishing the work. In that case they would probably just have to get $20 million of VC money instead of $5 million ($20 million is hardly unobtainable) and the VCs would have to settle for 2500% return in the event of a successful exit instead of 10000%. But bottom line is that as long as people can't buy this (overpriced IMO) stuff fast enough, the market will find a way to stick it to them. (All numbers hypothetical of course) |
|
|
|
I bought a put right?  you said, that you were headging something. Atleast there you made some good profit right? More like neutral. I stood to lose a lot on the other deal if btc went up a lot, although even then like everyone here I'm still long enough bitcoin that I'd be happiest about seeing it increase. |
|
|
|
I bought a put right? |
|
|
|
It also influences the chance to get block in solomining: with the same total hashrate it's twice easier to find block with 60 sec block target than with 120 secs. Solo mining gives decentralization. This way faster blocks lead to more decentralized network in the beginning.
From another point of view faster block are smaller (less transactions per block). Small blocks are easier to propagate through network.
You raise an interesting question. I've seen the argument that faster block times increase centralization because of orphans. But it is true that the blocks will be smaller so the correct comparison is orphans with twice the block time and double the block size (plus header) versus half the block time and half the block size (plus header). I don't think I've seen that comparison. Also, any coin that is successful wont be feasible to solo mine eventually. The orphan effect has to dominate. |
|
|
|
I wonder if this thread and spreadsheet are even legit, or some kind of sham to manipulate the price.
I've done few trades but right now there are supposedly buy orders on the sheet for 120 million coins, most at prices above my posted offer, yet no one ever actually buys my coins. I've PM'd several of the buyers, most of them don't even reply.
Even ignoring the questionable 100m coin buy from someone with a brand new account and zero post count, that 20m coins people allegedly want.
I'm suspicious.
Maybe people are busy atm? Don't jump to conclusions too fast and after all, you did some trades  Also, about that guy he IS questionable. Nobody know who he is and what why is he buying all BCN he can reach. I never jump to conclusions, I just said suspicious is all. Anyway, I did some more legit trades after posting that, so I have to retract my comments to some degree. The alleged 100m buyer I haven't heard from at all, which is definitely odd. More trades done for the record: 2m to whatsthestory for 0.4 btc (who by the way seems to have overpaid and I owe btc back -- PM sent) 800k for 0.22 btc to someone who I didn't get permission to post his name, but come forward to confirm if desired. |
|
|
|
|
Sold 500k BCN to Bitcoin Fiction for 0.2 BTC
|
|
|
|
Time to buy before it's going up to $900 again this summer!
You know how it works bro. People won't buy until after it goes up to $900 |
|
|
|
To save me from signing up. How much are these currently going for?
Thanks
You don't need to sign up to buy them any more. https://nastyfans.org/mint |
|
|
|
|
I guess one thing useful you could do is search for a transaction (by hash) to see if it is getting confirmed. Not much of an explorer, and possibly easy to do in the client (haven't looked).
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder if this thread and spreadsheet are even legit, or some kind of sham to manipulate the price.
I've done few trades but right now there are supposedly buy orders on the sheet for 120 million coins, most at prices above my posted offer, yet no one ever actually buys my coins. I've PM'd several of the buyers, most of them don't even reply.
Even ignoring the questionable 100m coin buy from someone with a brand new account and zero post count, that 20m coins people allegedly want.
I'm suspicious.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
