After you vote comment your top 3 altcoins with reasons why they will be the future of online payments, or at least why they deserve to be.
If you take the best name (a name meaning 'value' to billions worldwide), then mix in a mad scientist that codes, and you have the beginning of an awesome future. Even if you don't make a lot of money, you still have a lot of fun! |
|
|
|
Daily updates on the future of digital currency: https://www.gldtalk.org/index.php?topic=3156.0On a side note, why do the people in the altcoin section seem so much more intelligent than the knuckleheads in the general forum? I think when Satoshi vanished, all the good coders came over here. 
|
|
|
|
 To the moon baby! |
|
|
|
the really interesting news here was that he expects that a single NYC bitlicense will be enough to operate in all other states.
I just hope Lawsky drafts a new "Satoshi License" before it's too late and we all get "the alert to ends all alerts."  |
|
|
|
 "In New Jersey, two legislators have brought a bill to the state legislature (A4478) that will create a regulatory framework for Bitcoin-related companies. Both the legislators and some in the Bitcoin community have touted the bill as a positive step towards bringing the cryptocurrency to the mainstream." A4478, alternatively titled the “Digital Currency Jobs Creation Act,” was introduced with the purpose of helping to create jobs within the state. The bill aims to achieve this goal by giving tax breaks to Bitcoin related companies located within New Jersey who reach a certain job creation threshold. In order for digital currency companies to enjoy this benefit, the bill states that a minimum of 10 to 25 people must be employed, which is a lower requirement than other businesses have to meet to reap the same benefits. In effect, giving tax breaks to “digital currency companies” should legally incentivize them to innovate further and allow them to prosper through the confines of New Jersey law. Full Story: http://insidebitcoins.com/news/legislators-to-introduce-pro-bitcoin-bill-in-new-jersey/32904 |
|
|
|
who controls the alert keys, just Gavin and Satoshi, or other devs too?
I found this today during my research ... not sure if its up-to-date. The "other people" part is a little unclear. lol "The known private key holders are Satoshi Nakamoto, Gavin Andresen and theymos. There are other people able to issue alerts in the event of the incapacitation of the aforementioned." https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/AlertsTo make Bitcoin a truly decentralized cryptocurrency, the alert system would need to be stripped from the publicly released client. Probably better to abandoned it altogether. Right now, Bitcoin is about as decentralized as Windows 10.  |
|
|
|
A loose cannon? Who would be considered the loose cannon? Satoshi? If he we even had proof he is still alive we would still have none proving he is demented or would do something bad to the coin.
By loose cannon I meant - an integral team member who disappears without warning, taking things like million(s) of bitcoins, and the all-important alert key. |
|
|
|
He should show some respect. Satoshi might be anonymous, but I don't believe he's ever been a recluse because his writing style suggests an academic background. Without his code and hard work MicroGuy could never have created Gold coin.
I didn't create Goldcoin and the catchy title was for emphasis. The question was research for a staff article being written. Having a "loose cannon" with the Alert Keys is a valid concern in my view. |
|
|
|
I don't want to click on the link to be honest, can somebody C&P the text into this thread please?
I would but its 44 pages long. lol |
|
|
|
Everyone repeats over and over again Gavin would be the successor of Satoshi but is there actually any evidence for that?
It's a ridiculous concept. There is nobody in charge of Bitcoin. There is no King of Bitcoin. There is no successor. It is sad that so many people need someone to tell them what to do and what to think. If anything kills Bitcoin, it will be that. Yeah it's pretty sad that people need a leader. People is free to run Core or run XT based on their prefered views on the software, not on who is proposing the changes on the software. ...but on what is proposed software does. According to the block size growth, we need to increase maximum block size and no, it won't lead to centralization. But I still don't know whether 20MB maximum block size is needed ATM or is it better to have a lower maximum block size and increase it later if needed. I am still thinking on it. Anybody? Why not start with 2MB size limit and when a certain threshhold is exceeded (2.8 for example) go up to 4 MB etc.? I think the reason Gavin has decided on 20MB is to avoid repeating the adversity of again forking the client. |
|
|
|
I just read through this post: http://www.finance-guy.net/finblog/bitcoin-vol-upif daily transactions are down 20%, then it makes sense that we are using Bitcoin less than we did 6 months ago. What do you guys think, is Bitcoin use falling? If so, what can we do to help increase it? The best thing that anyone can do for Bitcoin is to convince their employers to pay them with Bitcoin. If that doesn't work signup for Bitwage. |
|
|
|
|
Just curious if Gavin ever got around to changing the alert keys? Can Satoshi still push out update alerts to each client?
|
|
|
|
Made a video with some quotes from this forum and /r/Bitcoin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78ks2DscV-kI will qualify that only the first 2 quotes are MicroGuy, the rest are other various cheerleaders of centralization. At first I thought MicroGuy was being sarcastic, but after reading his post history it appears he is serious. Thanks for making this video. It's not that I'm against decentralization. I just don't think a decentralized digital currency has been invented. Anyone that thinks Bitcoin is decentralized doesn't understand the client distribution process or the Alert Key system. |
|
|
|
|
You're out in the woods with a group of friends sitting around the campfire (drinking bud lite swill), when a group member accidentally cuts off his hand with an axe while gathering wood. You'll notice that in these situations someone always rises up and takes command. If we wait on consensus, the guy bleeds to death. Gavin is stopping the blood - now, he's our designated driver, so let him navigate this ride - this is the natural way.
|
|
|
|
Bigger block size is the obvious solution. Higher fees might reduce congestion, but the fees would likely turn many off to bitcoin. Problem solved? Sort of but the goal should be more people using bitcoins not less. And higher fees only means one thing: less people using it and less people jumping on the bandwagon.
Yes. Anyone against the bigger blocks needs an ego adjustment. Gavin is our chosen leader, now let him do what leaders do -- Lead! |
|
|
|
Nothing to worry about imo, if it is mass adopted, transaction fees are enough. If not, it is still possible to fork easily. We should be fine  I think we'll see lots of forks over the years, including tweaks to the inflation rules and adjustments to the supply cap. It's basic development of the coin. |
|
|
|
I think it's important to consider who Satoshi entrusted with the Alert Keys. Basically, he was giving Gavin his full endorsement with that gesture. Gavin is like our Scotty, he's in charge of the Bitcoin engine room. Allow him to do his job and everything will be fine. Decentralization>Centralization. There should be a team making decisions, not a sole person. The only way to make Bitcoin purely decentralized would be to integrate a client voting mechanism. The system now requires a trusted developer with veto power. |
|
|
|
I think it's important to consider who Satoshi entrusted with the Alert Keys. Basically, he was giving Gavin his full endorsement with that gesture. Gavin is like our Scotty, he's in charge of the Bitcoin engine room. Allow him to do his job and everything will be fine. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
