rule of the street, if you wont simply hand a stranger on the street $2400... dont do it online
I thought I had it down. It didn't occur to me that he was hacking other people's Paypal accounts to pay me. So I'm doing what's right and returning their money to them. no.. he is not hacking other peoples accounts.. thats what the chargeback kings always say to paypal "we have ben hacked" thats how they get their money back and keep the bitcoins if you been paypal scammed then keep the money and let paypal reimburse them from paypal profits. afterall paypal have insurance, paypal make profit and paypal should have better security.. its their fault not yours. unless your a scammer, never give back money to paypal.. let them lose out, not the honest people. Thanks, this helps. It helps to know the original guy wasn't hacking other people's accounts. I have emails out to the three other people. Maybe they were legit. I want to do what is right, even if I take a hit doing it. Yeah, be careful about this. I wouldn't be so fast about paying these people. They might just be the scammer and you'd end up getting scammed twice ! |
|
|
|
IMHO it is way too early to try and lure ordinary people into bitcoins. People with technical knowledge who have been into bitcoins for years still fail at keeping their coins secure. The technology simply isn't ready for the masses yet. If too many people bet burned by being pushed into this too early it will backfire on us all.
The only way it's ever going to be secure enough for regular people is through them trusting third parties. Something like Circle(if it ever comes) or Coinbase. Unless anyone is aware of decentralised ways to make bitcoin secure and easy to use for regular people? |
|
|
|
https://bitcoinstarter.com/Is one that has been around along time. The only problem with it is that people generally have very bad ideas. Other than that it's a good site.
|
|
|
|
|
What if ajareselde is right and anyone who was going to buy bitcoin has already bought? It's not like it's a secret anymore. And there's a huge group of people who are simply not capable of understanding or being able to use bitcoin. It's not easy or safe for the average person.
We've already hit China but maybe there's still more market there in China to reach.
The big one that we haven't hit yet is Wall St. so hopefully this ETF gets some action going.
|
|
|
|
What will the mining algo be? Isnt Scrypt PoW a lil outdated?
Scrypt, yes. Outdated not at all, perhaps mature and well supported are more descriptive of the algorithm. Remember "Our aim is to create a relatively stable, user focussed, crypto currency which refines and implements maturing innovations from the crypto currency sector" ... "no hype or gimmicks, just a project which focusses on becoming a stable every day currency". Rationale from https://github.com/project-bitmark/bitmark/wiki#proof-of-work : """Scrypt. A well balanced proof of work algorithm which is widely supported and for which hardware support is maturing. Large investment has been made by the mining community, and continues to be made. Whilst there are benefits to both Proof of Stake and multiple algorithm approaches, we feel that Scrypt PoW and the balanced coin release schedule which can be achieved with long term block rewards is the most suitable for this long term project. With an abundance of mining hardware available already it should also ensure a healthy network from the start.""" Has scrypt been proven to do the job we require? Yes. Is scrypt broadly supported? Yes. We don't want to reinvent the wheel here, rather we want to ensure the wheel is smooth, well oiled, and stable... fit for purpose. Thanks for your question danny, and please do review and question further, all input is most welcome. If your going to use an asic driven algo why not sha-256 then? I don't think anyone with gpu's is excited about scrypt, so it's hard to say using it would be done with gpu's in mind. If you want to go that route sha-256 can be mined with gpus too. I'd be a bit worried about someone running a >50% attack since people have massive farms that they use for Bitcoin already. Not that it's not a concern for Scrypt, but I don't think people have the same level of hashing power yet. |
|
|
|
There's nothing to "save." Litecoin is perfectly fine. Being so price-obsessed misses the point. Litecoin will rebound, skyrocket, and then wither again... rinse, repeat. Not an interest/investment for the faint of heart, or for short-term thinkers. Price matters, but we're in the early days of a paradigm-shifting technology – shit's going to be uncertain, and extremely volatile, for a long ass time.
Why though? Why do you expect the same pattern to repeat? The evidence is suggesting that LTC is decoupling from BTC. The issue is now that Litecoin isn't the one shifting the paradigm anymore. So why should investors and users choose LTC over BTC even, let alone myriad competitors offing real advantages and improvements in technology. What is Litecoins sales pitch these days? Before it was ASIC resistance, faster confirms than bitcoin, and new development(3 years ago that is) that's an alternative to Bitcoin. Now it's just faster confirms pretty much. |
|
|
|
Yeah, but even just a public effort or something to voice concerns. But from what I've seen from the Litecoin community someone trying to voice honest concerns and push the coin forward would probably be labeled as a 'FUDder'.
I think even the idea that Litecoin should be improved is offensive to Litecoiners. Maybe their logic is: "we got this far doing nothing, it would be wrong to mess with a good thing!".
I concur. I was a very large LTC holder until a few days ago when I sold a sizeable onto BTC-E. I had lost my faith long ago in the coin but the last couple of weeks were the tipping point for me. I was holding out hoping that things would turn around until I realized this: LTC has ZERO advantages over BTC any longer since ASICS are in the wild. The entire point of LTC was that it offered the everyday person a way to attain coins via GPU mining. With that feature gone, what good is LTC?? BTC is gaining traction daily. It is being accepted by more and more merchants. If one mentions Bitcoin to the average Joe they probably couldn't tell you what it is but they have probably heard of it before. Not so with LTC or any of the other alts out there. LTC has a great Dev team along with a great community. But it has already peaked. I feel sorry for those that are blindly following the advice that some members of the LTC community are giving in so far as telling them that "it's the right time to buy now!" or "Your crazy if you sell now". I shake my head when I see stuff like this. There is no justifiable reason for LTC to go anywhere but down at this point. It's a sad thing to have to say as I put a ton of money/time into it but I have a pretty good history of being in business for myself and I know when enough is enough and it's time to cut my loses. This is one of those times. Yeah, there's no logical reason now why Litecoin should continue to be favored by the market. It had its place before for sure. But it would basically have to be a market failure if Litecoin continues to be the second place coin. That is of course unless the community does something about it. Which like I've said many times they should. All that money and dev talent that they could surely be putting to use is just wasting away unfortunately. Ignoring competition doesn't make it go away. Oh, and Bitcoin is competition too. This isn't even just all about other altcoins. When you lose your primary differentiating feature over Bitcoin, what sense does it make to continue to hold? Bitcoin is improving albeit slowly. But the third party support is on fire. Lots of exciting things are being built on Bitcoin. Litecoin supporters are exhibiting textbook cognitive dissonance. You seem to value your pocketbook over your emotions which is a good trait to have. |
|
|
|
Nice timing for this article to come out to add to the discussion: https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/07/05/stake/Reading things like this tends to me the main reason I'm not quite ready to invest in PoS just yet. I want to see the air cleared and the debates settle down, because right now it's quite heated with some big names on both sides making good arguments. Yes, and see the above link I posted, hopefully it will be discussed and debated the shit out of for everyone to come to conclusions and to make decisions on whether to invest in PoS. The good thing for NXT is that it sounds like there are viable solutions that can be implemented if it turns out to be a real issue. Also the fact that it's not a problem that affects NXT currently at all, just a theoretical future issue if people were forging with custom wallets that supported dishonest forging. |
|
|
|
Nice timing for this article to come out to add to the discussion: https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/07/05/stake/Reading things like this tends to me the main reason I'm not quite ready to invest in PoS just yet. I want to see the air cleared and the debates settle down, because right now it's quite heated with some big names on both sides making good arguments. |
|
|
|
yes ltc is the key to the rest of the alts staying afloat. ltc survived previous waves of alts which are dead or so close it isnt funny. it continued survival shows cryptos outside of btc can survive. if it was to die (which isnt going to happen) who'd invest in any alt? that's what the fools plugging their own shitcoin don't seem to get, they think they have to fud others to push their own crap (for which they'll dump anyways if they make enough fiat). none of the latest flavors of the month will survive outside of this forum....ltc would  There has never been previous alts that Litecoin has faced like there are now it 2014. It's not comparable at all. Since bitcoin peaked out around $1200 the game as changed and the market is now ultra competitive with new tech and code coming out all the time. That was never the case in the last three years where Litecoin sat virtually unopposed. competitive ? so saturating the scene with useless garbage scam coin clones is competitive ? hmm really go figure who knew ? You (and other Litecoiners) are misinformed if you think all the new coins are garbage scam coins. Some are truly innovative and that is why Litecoin is in the tank. Yeah, I find the complete disrespect and lack of regard for other technologies odd. I wonder if we ever see a time when Bitcoin itself is under threat from legitimate competition that we'll see Bitcoiners acting the same way. |
|
|
|
I don't own any PoS coins at the moment either btw.
I've seen you say that a few times already. Why? Do you prefer to give PoS more time to prove itself? Well, I guess one reason is that I'm not fully confident in my ability to analyse this generation of PoS coins in a technical sense. I remember PPcoin always had it's obvious problems and that was easy to see, but it's harder now to know for sure whether everything is sound yet. And I guess I just want the dust to settle a little more in the overall debate before I commit to anything. Just in relation to the current era of PoS tech, I definitely believe in it in an overall sense though. But with all these new codebases and new concepts being put in to use I'm a little cautious. It might be something I regret down the road, but we'll see. |
|
|
|
I find that arguments against PoS remind me of arguments made by people years ago against Bitcoin. A lot of people mainly focus on arguments that boil down to "PoS isn't backed by anything whereas PoW is backed by work". But that's pretty irrelevant when you look at the bigger picture.
I think PoS is inevitable and as the kinks in the system get worked out it will eventually become the standard in cryptocurrency. That might take a while though. But theoretically it's clearly superior in my opinion. It's even more so likely when you consider the state of PoW now with the problems that have arisen from mining pools. It makes PoS look like a better option without even having to really reach very far.
If the main argument against PoS comes down to the fact that someone could borrow the majority of the coins and attack the network, then that's pretty weak considering it relies something that stakeholders can control - lending their coins. Compare it with the same type of attack on PoW, where a malicious entity gaining majority control over the network is not something any coin holder as control over.
PoW is great for the time period where we don't have the technology to deploy a robust PoS system. Are we still in that time period? Maybe. But it's doubtful that the market will allow an inefficiency like that to last forever.
I agree with those points. The Main, Main, problem is, the distribution of purely PoS coins. No matter how I look at it, even if they distributed to 100,000 people, it's still unfair, simply because everyone else didnt get in on time and gets nothing, unlike PoW, where you can always mine and get coins yourself. I don't mine coins so I don't really see how PoW is more fair. Yes, I could buy hash from a 3rd party. But I could also buy coins from an IPO. What's the difference? I just don't see what's inherently unfair about it. People risk their capital just like they risk their capital mining through hardware and power costs. It's almost like arguing that capitalism is unfair. It's not like you can't buy the coins on the open market. They're available to anyone. I don't own any PoS coins at the moment either btw. |
|
|
|
|
I find that arguments against PoS remind me of arguments made by people years ago against Bitcoin. A lot of people mainly focus on arguments that boil down to "PoS isn't backed by anything whereas PoW is backed by work". But that's pretty irrelevant when you look at the bigger picture.
I think PoS is inevitable and as the kinks in the system get worked out it will eventually become the standard in cryptocurrency. That might take a while though. But theoretically it's clearly superior in my opinion. It's even more so likely when you consider the state of PoW now with the problems that have arisen from mining pools. It makes PoS look like a better option without even having to really reach very far.
If the main argument against PoS comes down to the fact that someone could borrow the majority of the coins and attack the network, then that's pretty weak considering it relies something that stakeholders can control - lending their coins. Compare it with the same type of attack on PoW, where a malicious entity gaining majority control over the network is not something any coin holder as control over.
PoW is great for the time period where we don't have the technology to deploy a robust PoS system. Are we still in that time period? Maybe. But it's doubtful that the market will allow an inefficiency like that to last forever.
|
|
|
|
Litecoin holders don't control anything. Miners are the ones who are in control in PoW cryptos. That's why PoS cryptos are above PoW, because in PoS users are the ones who are in control, not miners. I don't want to picture users and miners as two opposing groups, but often they act just like that.
Yeah, but even just a public effort or something to voice concerns. But from what I've seen from the Litecoin community someone trying to voice honest concerns and push the coin forward would probably be labeled as a 'FUDder'. I think even the idea that Litecoin should be improved is offensive to Litecoiners. Maybe their logic is: "we got this far doing nothing, it would be wrong to mess with a good thing!". |
|
|
|
Charlie Lee has worked for Coinbase over a year and he can't even convince his superiors to adopt Litecoin, what does that tell you.
It tells me they can't find a counterparty they trust enough to regularly supply them with enough litecoin to get that segment of their business running. Lee has openly admitted that they're still two years behind bitcoin, development-wise – obviously this includes exchange infrastructure. And yet a coin like Bitmark( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=660544.0) has managed to get an scrypt coin codebase going based off the latest version of Bitcoin in less than a month with one unfunded developer? Wow. 300 mil market cap sure bought a whole lot of nothing.  Why aren't Litecoin holders more angry at this point? Why hasn't there been a mutiny or something to save the coin? |
|
|
|
yes ltc is the key to the rest of the alts staying afloat. ltc survived previous waves of alts which are dead or so close it isnt funny. it continued survival shows cryptos outside of btc can survive. if it was to die (which isnt going to happen) who'd invest in any alt? that's what the fools plugging their own shitcoin don't seem to get, they think they have to fud others to push their own crap (for which they'll dump anyways if they make enough fiat). none of the latest flavors of the month will survive outside of this forum....ltc would There has never been previous alts that Litecoin has faced like there are now it 2014. It's not comparable at all. Since bitcoin peaked out around $1200 the game as changed and the market is now ultra competitive with new tech and code coming out all the time. That was never the case in the last three years where Litecoin sat virtually unopposed. |
|
|
|
Franko.
Yeah, I never liked this name either. More often than not it seems people choose to put bad names on their coins. I wonder if it's just the past success of Dogecoin that makes people think that they can just slap a stupid name on their coin and it's going to be alright. |
|
|
|
Given how mining work for bitcoin, I do not think the price will stable.
It has to keep going up so miners can have "profit" in either profit or transaction fee.
Well, it can still go up and be relatively stable as well. Generally speaking if something is rising in price at a rapid rate it will not be considered stable. Well it could be rising in price relative to the USD but still stable relative to gold and oil. I.e. the USD is going down instead of bitcoin going up. This would be unusual. The US dollar is a very stable currency and for all intensive purposes will not fall at the rate needed to make bitcoin go up substantially Yeah, I don't think that it is likely at all. I was just commenting on a hypothetical where the price could be rising and still be considered stable. |
|
|
|
Thank you for noticing Carboncoin. Forget the assholes
Sorry, your idea is good and has its merits. I didn't mean to say anything negative regarding your coin. |
|
|
|
I think many are speaking to soon on the "death" of litecoin. But hey....please drive the price down more. Thanks.
I'm not someone who hates Litecoin, but do you honestly think that Litecoin will continue to succeed in a competitive market with no innovation or improvement? It's been three years already. I'm not saying innovation is required for success, but in a free market where the incentives to be on top are very large and competitors are there, it would be odd if a stagnant product could out compete in a modern marketplace. I've been watching LTC from the beginning and it didn't have to innovate back then. It came along when the only competition was RealSolid's Solidcoin, lol. And then PPcoin which was laughable at the time(I guess less so now, but still). It came in at the right time and it was rewarded for it. Innovation didn't matter back then, but now I'm not so sure. And I don't own any altcoins at the moment and like I said, I have nothing against Litecoin. It pains me to watch a community with a coin with hundreds of millions of dollars in market cap ignore reality. It's illogical to me. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
