As entertaining as all this is, I thought I'd click on a random page from this thread and pick out a few of your older prophecies. I firmly believe we will see a few countries fully back or switch to BTC and/or other cryptos before this year is over. So that's happening in less than 2 months now, right? Multiple nation states making that big ol' change from fiat over to crypto? Riiight. I am going to go on record and state what seems impossible right now - but I fully expect the price of iXcoin to rise 100-fold, to roughly $10 per coin in under 30 days.
If I prove correct, don't forget just how impossible this prediction seems to be today, cause after the fact, everyone likes to say: I knew it all along, it was obvious. Well, that sure as shit didn't happen. Buy all you can tomorrow if [Bitcoin] drops hard cause it's a ruse and within 2 weeks BTC will skyrocket, and soon after we'll know Wall Street is in and then $10,000 will come earlier this year than anyone realizes. Still waiting on those $10,000 bitcoins. From earlier this year. To be clear, these are all quotes from one page picked at random. Three separate predictions that are complete, demonstrable nonsense. So instead of pointing out the predictions you "got right" (the ebola one is a bit of a stretch if we're being serious, and bravo for predicting that a coin might fluctuate upwards in value and being right for once), how about owning up to the hundreds that you didn't? Edit: here's another corker all the other coins will wilt and die on the vine [Bitcoin included] and this will become very evident later this year, when iXcoin takes the second place position from LTC on CoinmarketCap. How much later should we expect this? November? Christmas, maybe? |
|
|
|
|
Earlier in the thread someone mentioned that after some optimisation they were able to get ~20MH/s from a PS3. Under load the PS3 uses in the range of 100-200W. To put that into perspective, an Antminer U1 has nearly 100 times the hashrate, consumes ~2.5W - and each is only worth a few dollars, because their hashrate is insignificant at this stage. It is a complete waste of time to talk about PS3s for bitcoin mining.
Any CPU coin miner for PCs would have to be rewritten specifically with the PS3 in mind, and nobody is going to bother because the Cell would be significantly outperformed by most modern CPUs.
|
|
|
|
You want to deprive them of income This isn't an advertising billboard, it's a discussion forum, and if posters want income they should do some actual work for it. I see reams of vapid single-line responses, which are only tangentially or superficially related to the topic title, and presumably only exist because of the ad sig beneath. It shouldn't be necessary for every member to have to block low-quality posters by hand; instead, the incentive for spamming low-quality posts should be removed. Nobody needs a signature, but the forum can benefit tangibly from their absence. |
|
|
|
It's the only viable solution. Removing signatures is totally viable. In practical terms, it's remarkably simple. Removing one of the major sources of noise in this forum isn't an overreaction at all; I'd argue it's necessary. Yes, a much smaller subset of the user base will still spam for post count prestige, but with the financial incentive removed the reduction in mindless shitposting would be significant. Signatures should be removed. |
|
|
|
do you remember when the rsa used to post the bounties for primes ??
then they just stopped, i often wondered if they came up with a much more advanced way of factoring and deriving primes that they never bothered to share with anyone else, probably far fetched but they did pay those bounties and some were for big money , yes, many of us still have this question... did they lost interest, or did they find a secret algorithm? probably they just knew the records would be broken soon and decided to use the money for other things... They have a page to address exactly this question but it's a bit vague. |
|
|
|
|
Threads like this make me shake my head in disbelief.
|
|
|
|
|
Man, this thread. Wall to wall confirmation bias; numerology, conspiracy symbolism, fortune telling, and a bit of Revelation thrown in for good measure. Top marks for picking "IX", by the way - a mere two characters, both of which can be read as Roman numerals as well. No end of potential conspiracy nonsense and "spooky" coincidences to "uncover"!
It's enjoyably imaginative, though, so please: keep it coming! I always have fun reading it.
|
|
|
|
If redefining the value of 1 BTC could help adoption even the tinniest bit, it is worth considering. Heck, mega-concerns, like Coca-Cola, are marketing their products in far more subtle ways than that. When you buy a can of coke, what does it say on the side? Around my parts, it says "330ml". I buy drill bits measured in millimetres, my national currency already has subunits, and so on. I guess I don't see the issue with mBTC - people will get used to it if they need to. Far from "helping adoption", the confusion introduced by changing the unit of denomination would almost certain hinder adoption. Moreover, the headaches would likely be felt most strongly by newcomers and those who are bad with numbers - precisely the crowd that find Bitcoin intimidating already. It is a bad idea. |
|
|
|
Bitcoinpro
Sr. Member
****
Activity: 420 Indeed. |
|
|
|
The poll found that the people who know the least about Bitcoin want to ban it the most. You don't say. I think the only thing this poll demonstrates is the strength of social pressure that we all feel against saying "I don't know". The vast majority of people taking part in this poll, I would assume well in excess of 90%, do not understand Bitcoin in any meaningful sense. They don't understand how it works, how it's different from regular currencies, and for that matter they don't understand money. But nobody likes to admit that they don't know something, or that they don't have an opinion, especially when they're being put on the spot, so presumably they just pick whichever they feel like. It's hard to care about results that are so meaningless. |
|
|
|
How much is the rewards actually ? 3.14 or ~9 ?
Did you change the reward structure AGAIN? It is SO FUNNY. Seems a lot of people are still not aware of changing the reward structure. Why don't the "devs" mention it in the OP? What are you hiding? Because they are the PANDA "devs"! After cheating some money in PANDA, now they have jumped here! Look at their 2nd version of reward structure: Tenfive Coin has the following attributes:
Total Supply of 10,500,000 Coins
The "Flat" Reward Scheme designed to reward for the majority duration:
First 1050 blocks: Payout of 1.57079632679 per block
Next 3150 blocks: Payout of 3.14159265359 per block
Next 6300 blocks: Payout of 9.8596 per block
Next 9450 blocks: Payout of 19.7192 per block
Next 18900 blocks: Payout of 25 per block
Next 37800 blocks: Payout of 50 per block
Next 75600 blocks: Payout of 25 per block
Next 151200 blocks: Payout of 19.7192 per block
Remaining blocks: Payout of 9.8596Now look at the 3rd version of reward structure (they changed it 1 day after release): The "Flat" Reward Scheme designed to reward for the majority duration: First 1050 blocks: Payout of 1.57079632679 per block Next 3150 blocks: Payout of 3.14159265359 per block Next 4000 blocks: Payout of 9.42477796077 per block Next 5150 blocks: Payout of 3.14159265359 per block Final value of 3.14159265359 per block for the remaining blocks. They intentionally lowered the reward structrue AFTER LAUNCH. The premine is 105,000. They claim it is 1%, is it 1%? Yes, it is 1%. But when it becomes 1%? Now let's calculate: After 1 month, the total mined coins is less than 100,000 by miners. so the premine is more than 50%. WOW! After 1 year, the total mined coins is is less than 1,200,000, that means the premine is more than 7.5% of the total coins! Would one of the developers like to address this? Why was the reward structure altered after launch? |
|
|
|
113.72 MH/s for a N factor coin so we are talking roughly 227.44 MH/S on this coin
everybody talks this coin down while stealth mining it
expect something soon i think..... So that's the equivalent of what, ~300 R9 290 cards still mining it? That makes a 51% attack possible with half of that, and there are no devs to address such problems (or any problems at all); they're now working on 10-5 coin. It's been a fun ride, and I dare say the coin will putter on for a while longer yet, but nothing short of a miracle will bring it back from the dead. It's probably wise to find a more productive way to use your hashes. |
|
|
|
A free market says the price will ultimately end up at mining price + the least amount of profit any miner is willing to take. A free market says the price will ultimately end up at whatever value people feel that Vertcoin's utility provides them. If it's lower than the cost of mining, so be it. Cryptocoins are not given value by mining cost; mining rewards are given value by the attractiveness of the currency. |
|
|
|
They are "highly technical" but also "highly dumb". Likely they're not "dumb" but simply misinformed. The question is, why would they be informed? Most people don't know what "fiat currency" means, but they use theirs fine without knowing. The Bitcoin protocol is not universally interesting. Irrespective of how big Bitcoin gets there will never come a day when you can stop the man in the street and ask a question about miners or the blockchain and expect a cogent, accurate response. If Bitcoin is ever going to gain a significant measure of adoption among regular folk then it is vital that a comprehensive systemic understanding not be a prerequisite to its use. This shit simply doesn't matter to most people, and it shouldn't need to. They should be able to just point their phone at the barcode thingie, press the button, and know that payment has been sent. The best we can do, in my opinion, is gently correct the major inaccuracies in simple terms (Bitcoin is a technology like email, not a company, and no one person or company controls it) and let people find out the details for themselves, if it interests them. |
|
|
|
you people allowed us to be eaten by craptsy whales The implication being that we would be better off if people with lots of money were somehow arbitrarily prevented from purchasing large amounts of Vertcoin..? |
|
|
|
For the last time I check, PND developers are gone. However, PANDA developers are still working on this coin. Is that correct? It's been a week since a dev posted here. The coin trades for 1 satoshi. Draw your own conclusion. |
|
|
|
When told by reporters that "the founder of Bitcoin says 'what'", Dorian is on record as having replied: "what?"
If that's not proof then I don't want to be right. The entire debacle in a nutshell. |
|
|
|
Yes, the thrust of my suggestion was that a p2p exchange could be purely crypto>>>crypto. Leave FIAT exchange and all the regulatory headaches that go with it to Bitstamp, BTC-E, Coinbase etc. Apologies, reading your other post back it's quite clear that's what you meant. My fault. |
|
|
|
Surely the next logical step for this coin is to explore the idea of p2p exchange? This has been discussed just a few pages ago. The notion of a p2p exchange only makes sense if what you're sharing between peers can be represented and exchanged digitally, without trust - physical dollars can't and the payment processors dealing in digital representations of the dollar are strictly regulated. At some point you need to bridge to the fiat world and at that point you must comply with their rules. This is one reason why the current exchanges are so shaky - their business model is entirely predicated on their ability to operate within the laws of whatever country they operate within, and legislation against cryptocurrency exchanges could arrive at any time. A decentralised cryptocurrency exchange is possible (a secure, trust-free exchange from one cryptocurrency into another), but payment out to fiat is a hard problem that is not limited by code, but rather by law. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
