Dear FAILers, We have noticed that EmpoEX exchange removed their tweet about selling it and it looks like they are listing new coins. Will try to contact them and see what happens. Stay FAILed! Cheers, Spartak |
|
|
|
|
magnific61,
You have no idea on what you are talking about.
P.S. ISIS is a "product" by the powerful countries... that's it.
|
|
|
|
Hehehe, Old school, I like it!  |
|
|
|
Btw, dev, You are now with Jr. Member rank, which now allows you to add graphics in the OP (and, of course, post graphics in the thread).  |
|
|
|
At the time of writing we are at block 55524.
Yes. Hard fork should become active within the next ~12-14 days. |
|
|
|
block 60000 was passed few days ago and there was no hard fork, so maybe the dev has left the boat
I'm not sure what you are asking for? I must say that I like how the dev is acting thus far! - He said that he does not want to rush things and that is how one true cryptocurrency should be developed. - He invested his own money (no matter how much), without asking you for anything. - He talks with kind and positive manner. - He obviously updated source on github and then posted here, on Twitter and on Facebook. And what is the support, which he receives from the community or "investors"? Here it is - plain and stupid decision! |
|
|
|
Dear FAILers, As some of you probably already know, EmpoEx exchange is for sale. We are constantly checking with them (though we haven't heard from them), because a large portion of FAILCoin is deposited there. Lately they seemed to have some issues (or maintenance), but currently I've managed to withdraw 1 FAIL coin (as I don't have much more deposited on the exchange). You can check the TxID here (please don't mind that the block explorer hasn't been paid. It is one of my responsibilities, but currently I am flat broke. I did asked CryptoID's owner fairglu to wait us for a bit and I believe that we will not have problem with that.)... PLEASE withdraw your FAIL coins from the exchange, because at the moment its future is uncertain!Try with smaller amounts first and let us know if you have experienced some issues. Best regards, Spartak Tomanov |
|
|
|
What some people here don't realise is that we are talking about money - not technology. That is a sociological phenomenon, not a technological one - a finely balanced mix of requirements that starts with having the right monetary properties (as opposed to technological ones).
Then you need a very, very long "rights of passage" phase where the asset basically gets kicked to death, challenged by competitors, FUDed left right & centre and generally proven (not as a technology, but as a monetary reserve).
The problems that bitcoin has right now are GOOD, not bad. Scaleability is a problem you DO want because it shows that despite all the adversity I listed above, adoption is happening. And I don't mean adoption in terms of retail use, I mean true adoption as a store of value - as a cryptocurrency reserve. (What do people do when they make profits ? - dump it into bitcoin. How do Ethereum holders measure the value of their asset ? = in bitcoin).
If Ethereum doesn't have the problems and crises that bitcoin has had, it's sure going to need them because otherwise it's just going to be seen as a ticking time bomb. Bitcoin has had early forks, Gox, a kicking in the media, malleability scares, double-spend scares, you name it.
It has survived all of these.
The people running round squeeling like hyenas that Ether is going to be the next crypto-reserve and that people should "buy their bags" are hoping in vain that bitcoin doesn't survive the current blocksize crises and governance crises. But it will - just as it has survived the previous ones. The reason it will is because it has options and the miners and stakeholders know that. Short term they have options and long term they do and the fact that it's taking time is simply because there's a lot at stake.
You are generally right and I like how you are thinking, but Bitcoin must keep up with the adoption, and for that, it will need several hard forks. What if the core developers screw 1 of them? It will be major problem for many many people. So far it's not like a bank were money have insurance. And it is technology after all, but still a lot of people do not understand it. I have never ever looked @ the cryptocurrencies as a way to get rich in fiat. Probably that is why I am holding bags of dead coins. |
|
|
|
Guys, So far nobody mentioned some major (security) flaw in PoS coins. If you create enough demand on a PoS coin, nobody will care about people with larger wallets. Let's face it - most of the people are with weak hands. Example: There is a cryptocurrency with 20M in supply, 1-2% yearly interest and a guy who invested 5-10 BTC to buy 25-50% of the entire currency @ the price of ~50-100 satoshi. If that currency becomes viral, then the price may be 1k satoshi or even 100k. Do you think this guy will hold all of his coins? He will most likely sell them, when he sees x5 - x10 profit. Then you have another guy who bought the coins of the first guy, but the price is now 500-1000 satoshi and he invested 25-50 BTC. The currency becomes even more viral and the price is now 5k satoshi. Second guy sells half of his coins with profit and holds the rest. After some time, price is now 10-15k satoshi. Second guy is out and there is a 3rd guy (whale), but with less % of the currency. I think you guys get my idea. Most of the people are here for the fiat money they can earn and they don't care about the technology and about how cryptocurrencies may be used in the real world. If you manage to make a cryptocurrency viral (were 10s and even 100s of thousands people are using it), then you will not worry about N@S problems and such, because at this point, there will be not 100-500 wallets, but 10s of thousands. You still can buy bigger % of the currency, but at this point you will need millions of $ for that. That's something, which only serious investor can do and serious investors are not f*cking with their investments. |
|
|
|
Imagine,
Bulgaria has minority like turks. They want to have their own state in Bulgaria. Can you say that they are rightful to do that? There are almost 70 minorities in Turkey and if each of them would want to found own state Turkey would have 70 states. Ofcourse if you imagine it for yourself, it doesn't come logical
Turks in Bulgaria are recent immigrants from Turkey, who seized valuable farmland and real estate from the native inhabitants through ethnic cleansing and genocide (the same happened in Macedonia, Greece, Albania, Romania.etc). Rather than allowing them to have their own state in Bulgaria, I think that they should be deported to Turkey. No. Turks in Bulgaria lives here for many many years. One part of them is mix between turks and gypsies, and the other is mix between turks and bulgarians (we call them pomaks). Both of the "races" are not accepted by native turks as a turks, and we are not (generally) accepting them as bulgarians. You can't hate the pomaks for example. They are extremely hardworking people. There are villages in Bulgaria were only pomaks lives (with no single bulgarian, turk or gypsy). They are growing their own food and for them there is no such thing as a "weekend". No matter if it's Monday or Sunday - they are on the field to work. Many of them are also working in the construction. They listen every word you say and they are sharing everything they got. Personally I have nothing against gypsies, turks or pomaks. All I want is for them to pay their bills, work and stop f*cking each other that much. Gypsies are making 10s of children, without thinking how they will feed them and where they will live. Bulgarians are scared to make children, because generally it is extremely difficult to raise them. That's why we are dying nation... |
|
|
|
Is this the answer?  |
|
|
|
Why PoS is busted: For instance, you could remove mining to save energy and create a closed loop, recursive, PoS system, but without the external entropy of mining, you now have a permissioned ledger and not a real decentralized currency. It has no real fault or state recovery since it needs to reference the parts that have already failed in order to continue. With Bitcoin PoW, there really is no terminal failure unless the cryptography itself becomes compromised. That's why Bitcoin is more valuable than all the alternative methods you see. A global economy can't go from working to dead at the drop of a hat with no way to fix it.
What is your point exactly? Cryptocurrencies losing their "freedom" (being centralized)? |
|
|
|
In my opinion, PoS can work if the coins are well distributed. That would be the case in a "mature" stage of a PoS cryptocurrency, when it's used by a high number of people (I would say, the limit between a "nascent" and a "mature" cryptocurrency in this case is between 10.000 and 100.000 active (regularly using/investing/trading) users to achieve this, so no PoS coin is even close actually).
But when you have whales, then you will have always the "Nothing at stake problem" as a certain risk. Someone may be tempted to sell or lend (for the "shorting attack") an attacker a large portion of stake, and when distribution is unequal, even 2-3% are dangerous.
So my opinion is that a nascent cryptocurrency, until it reaches maturity (in the sense of my words above) should not rely on PoS alone. It could follow first a hybrid model with PoW mining like Peercoin or Decred.
An interesting model for the intermediate stage (when you have e.g. 1000 to 10000 users) is NEM's PoI ("Proof of Importance"), because this model encourages the creation of businesses like online wallets, exchanges etc.. because they can benefit from the PoI reward structure. But for a mature cryptocurrency, PoI encourages moving of coins too much to excel at scalability.
For now, my ideal cryptocurrency would start with a PoW/PoI hybrid model and then slowly switch to PoS with a peercoin-like reward structure (PoW being slowly phased out).
That's a good point and I must admit that I must think about it a bit more. Nevertheless, it's not answering on my question: Why prominent coders are thinking that PoS is more insecure than PoW? |
|
|
|
...
Forget the ICO's. My point was to secure the network in the future and people to accept cryptocurrencies as a way of payment. Agreed about PoW and electricity, but you are forgetting something. Back in May, 2014 , I paid 48,000 euros for combined 420MH scrypt ASICs and I was able to mine about $1000-$1300 worth of coins a day. My electricity costs were about $550/month. Nowadays you can't go even near to your electricity costs (if you are not lying your government)... ASICs are a different topic and issue entirely. Unfortunately every successful coin will face a degree of centralization, be it centralized mining mainly because not everyone have an ASIC or that a small amount of people holding the majority of coins to manipulate the market. Imagine if Bitcoin's algo would keep changing every few months... In PoS the rich gets richer and it incentivizes people to hold a lot of coins because then they earn more that way causing some centralization. I don't think coins should be held, they should be used. And when you realize that in crypto pretty much every coin can easily jump 10-20% up or down in value within just a single day, holding coins just for a couple of percentages a year I think is crazy. Maybe if a coin that would be successfully pegged to something might be worth it to safely stake. No. In PoW coins if you don't have miners - you don't have network, or if you have small amount of miners, someone can take over the network (i.e. mining more blocks & dump (for example)). For Bitcoin, that seems impossible, but we all know that chinese miners are controlling the mining part. What if they are a group of people acting together? I agree on centralization... it is somehow inevitable. There are a lot of coins bragging with anonymity and such, but they will adapt or die. In PoS, the rich can't get richer if the % of the yearly reward is reduced to acceptable minimum. What if you have $1Mn worth of coins in your wallet and your PoS reward is %1/year? Your profit will be like less than $1000/month just for holding them (and worry about the rest (i.e. someone can hack you and such...)). The story is different for the "ordinary" people. They can be satisfied with a $50/month profit. So once again low% PoS is pointless and high% PoS is a joke. There's no benefit to it. Stakers are basically just being paid a tiny bit so they're not dumping it on the market which is just a desperate attempt to reduce supply temporarily in the hopes of demand driving the price up. No, bud, please try to think a bit more. I was trying to say that 1% PoS interest (for example) is nothing for a guy who has $1Mn worth of coins (again, for example) in the wallet (given the fact that the price is not moving upwards), because he's stuck with that investment. That's a bad investment! But there are also thousands (if not millions) of people who can be satisfied with their $10/month profit. Those are the people who support the network while keeping their wallets open 24/7. The volatility of crypto is obvious, but my question was about the flaws in PoS coins. One is inflation, but that can be easily overcomed with low interest. |
|
|
|
Alanay,
I get your point, but I don't accept it. What is a terrorist to you? I won't say that I know more about them, but I am entitled of my own opinion, right? And my opinion is that terrorists are created by the governments of the powerful countries. Maybe sometimes there are suicide bombings in a desperate attempt to "change something" (whatever that they think is), or just because they feel powerless to do something else, but in general, most of the suicide bombings are organized by a 3rd party. During the years I have read some stuff about Turkish-Kurdish conflict, but I'm not that familiar with it. All I can say is that kurds are rightful owners of parts of these lands there. That again is just my opinion.
You are entitled to an opinion but this isn't about opinion. You can have an opinion if you think blue is a nice color or not but not whether someone is a terrorist or not. Kurds have no rightful owner to ANY of that land. They simply want it because there are a lot of Kurds and they think they know someone about politics and how to run a country but they don't know anything of the sort. They only know when to beg on the street when a tourist walks past. For them to kill innocent people just to get their own way is some really stupid shit, and you are basically supporting them. Not cool. PKK are terrorists, not peaceful people who simply want their own country. Drug dealers kill other drug dealers but we still have to arrest them. Do you understand? Imagine, Bulgaria has minority like turks. They want to have their own state in Bulgaria. Can you say that they are rightful to do that? There are almost 70 minorities in Turkey and if each of them would want to found own state Turkey would have 70 states. Ofcourse if you imagine it for yourself, it doesn't come logical Of course not! Our lands were inhabited from our ancestors thousands of years before even turks were mentioned in the history. So, then why do you claim that they are rightful on that land? Turkey has no problem with kurds but PKK, terrorist group. Not the entire land, just a parts of it (not sure which). I have asked you once and will try again: Where are you from? |
|
|
|
...
Forget the ICO's. My point was to secure the network in the future and people to accept cryptocurrencies as a way of payment. Agreed about PoW and electricity, but you are forgetting something. Back in May, 2014 , I paid 48,000 euros for combined 420MH scrypt ASICs and I was able to mine about $1000-$1300 worth of coins a day. My electricity costs were about $550/month. Nowadays you can't go even near to your electricity costs (if you are not lying your government)... ASICs are a different topic and issue entirely. Unfortunately every successful coin will face a degree of centralization, be it centralized mining mainly because not everyone have an ASIC or that a small amount of people holding the majority of coins to manipulate the market. Imagine if Bitcoin's algo would keep changing every few months... In PoS the rich gets richer and it incentivizes people to hold a lot of coins because then they earn more that way causing some centralization. I don't think coins should be held, they should be used. And when you realize that in crypto pretty much every coin can easily jump 10-20% up or down in value within just a single day, holding coins just for a couple of percentages a year I think is crazy. Maybe if a coin that would be successfully pegged to something might be worth it to safely stake. No. In PoW coins if you don't have miners - you don't have network, or if you have small amount of miners, someone can take over the network (i.e. mining more blocks & dump (for example)). For Bitcoin, that seems impossible, but we all know that chinese miners are controlling the mining part. What if they are a group of people acting together? I agree on centralization... it is somehow inevitable. There are a lot of coins bragging with anonymity and such, but they will adapt or die. In PoS, the rich can't get richer if the % of the yearly reward is reduced to acceptable minimum. What if you have $1Mn worth of coins in your wallet and your PoS reward is %1/year? Your profit will be like less than $1000/month just for holding them (and worry about the rest (i.e. someone can hack you and such...)). The story is different for the "ordinary" people. They can be satisfied with a $50/month profit. |
|
|
|
Alanay,
I get your point, but I don't accept it. What is a terrorist to you? I won't say that I know more about them, but I am entitled of my own opinion, right? And my opinion is that terrorists are created by the governments of the powerful countries. Maybe sometimes there are suicide bombings in a desperate attempt to "change something" (whatever that they think is), or just because they feel powerless to do something else, but in general, most of the suicide bombings are organized by a 3rd party. During the years I have read some stuff about Turkish-Kurdish conflict, but I'm not that familiar with it. All I can say is that kurds are rightful owners of parts of these lands there. That again is just my opinion.
You are entitled to an opinion but this isn't about opinion. You can have an opinion if you think blue is a nice color or not but not whether someone is a terrorist or not. Kurds have no rightful owner to ANY of that land. They simply want it because there are a lot of Kurds and they think they know someone about politics and how to run a country but they don't know anything of the sort. They only know when to beg on the street when a tourist walks past. For them to kill innocent people just to get their own way is some really stupid shit, and you are basically supporting them. Not cool. PKK are terrorists, not peaceful people who simply want their own country. Drug dealers kill other drug dealers but we still have to arrest them. Do you understand? Imagine, Bulgaria has minority like turks. They want to have their own state in Bulgaria. Can you say that they are rightful to do that? There are almost 70 minorities in Turkey and if each of them would want to found own state Turkey would have 70 states. Ofcourse if you imagine it for yourself, it doesn't come logical Of course not! Our lands were inhabited from our ancestors thousands of years before even turks were mentioned in the history. |
|
|
|
As a user I like them because you essentially get to earn some interest on your holding without dealing with banks.
They also solve one big point of failure in BTC. All bitcoin mining is now centralised in China behind the firewall. At present those miners are allowed to mine. But as the Chinese recession has been deepening their govt has been getting more authoritarian. What is to say they won't reach the point Venezuela has got to, where they start arresting miners?
With proof of stake, the stakes are distributed across the world, so the work of validating the network is also evenly spread and there is no single point of failure.
Chinese miners are in control of Bitcoin's mining/price (i.e. securing the network, and of course, they have some influence on price). If they start arresting miners nothing will happen imho. Of course, Bitcoin's network will be less secure, but the bigger problem is if the chinese start to panic sale. |
|
|
|
...
Forget the ICO's. My point was to secure the network in the future and people to accept cryptocurrencies as a way of payment. Agreed about PoW and electricity, but you are forgetting something. Back in May, 2014 , I paid 48,000 euros for combined 420MH scrypt ASICs and I was able to mine about $1000-$1300 worth of coins a day. My electricity costs were about $550/month. Nowadays you can't go even near to your electricity costs (if you are not lying your government)... |
|
|
|
Some of you don't have a clue on what you are talking about. Ethereum was crowdfunded with about $18,5 million! What was the situation with Bitcoin (despite the premine, which can be evaluated nowdays, and as far as I know, it is still intact)? You can't compare Ethereum with Bitcoin, because of 1 simple reason (not 10): One is revolution, and the other is a paid project. Period.
I don't think thats true with Premine cause it will be the same "share for the developers" type of thing but it would be more risky than ICO for sure. However,Bitcoin has its worth and was very creative at first but that doesn't means something new with much better features cannot surpass it and with the sense less drama we are seeing since months people might get more inclined towards a switch but it is not that easy how people think anyways.Agreed! The majority of the world still don't understand Bitcoin. Ethereum is even more sophisticated, but that doesn't mean it will surpass Bitcoin. Sometimes simplicity is better. Like the money. You have $100 and you know how much they worth. You go to the bank, make a deposit, receive a receipt for it and you go home. Or buy something... whatever. It's not your problem (or job) to understand how those $100 will go from your account to another. Try to explain that to "ordinary" people, but use Ethereum instead. There are bunch of people who are yelling: "Ethereum this, Ethereum that" (applies to all of the cryptocurrencies they are interested in), but at the end, technology can become great if majority of people accept it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
