Hi family, its a few days ago a pumping devotion arround proyects that join to microsoft azure stuff, really not understand too much or know azure, just looking that syndrome, each proyect that join azure is hardly pumped. Just rumors that stay there its like be legalizated or something.
just wanna know if DNotes has in his roadmap Microsoft azure listing ?
Why really a coin take profit by join there ?
Good to see you infovortice! Azure is Microsoft's cloud platform. Microsoft is trying to promote usage of this platform by 'partnering' with service providers, in this case blockchain data providers. The advantages for a blockchain provider include providing services for one looking to utilize blockchain for data purposes, opening themselves up to potentially a new user base on a nice and easy platform. This isn't something that is on the top of our priority list, but on our radar for future utilization of blockchain services. I can't explain the exact correlation to the price, other than potential higher utilization of that providers services, and excitement of a new technology venue. |
|
|
|
Very cool. That would be nice if we had this option locally too. Let us know how it goes! |
|
|
|
Actually, not so much the leaving of Hearn but the infighting and inability to come to a consensus since he stepped away. The industry is doing everything to prove him right while saying he was wrong. This needs to stop. We need a strong leader to step forward and put all this crap to bed before people get desensitized and move on to new things. You only have the public's attention for so long and it needs to be good attention in order to grow and thrive. "The industry is doing everything to prove him (Hearn) right while saying he was wrong." That, unfortunately is a very good point. However, we can always be hopeful, but no one seem to have sufficient motivation to step in as a strong leader to clearly represent the industry than their own self interest. That is indeed a tough nut to crack, we need Bitcoin to continue being successful and continue to solve industry problems for the time being. Maybe it's time the voting capabilities of blockchain were put to the test to start electing representatives and establishing a chain of command/leadership hierarchy. It's become quite clear that innovation and engineering will not solve all of the industry's problems unless people can be on the same page. My suggestion would be "weighted voting" based on the amount of hashing power you have, because a large mining operation has an arguably greater vested interest in the industry's future as opposed to bagholders who can sell their stake at any time to recover most of their capital investment. In the future when basic governance is established, switching to a system where every user gets a say would be more possible. Edit: I also think it's incredibly important to have a plethora of power checks in place, to ensure leadership can't abuse their power. It is an interesting proposal. One thing is clear, if people don't act quickly, the network will continue to grow and the problems we are seeing today will be compounded very quickly. The arguments for and against specific changes become irrelevant if the benefits of using bitcoin start to fade away. Once people begin to bail out, it will be very difficult to convince them to come back. Like merchants who can't process reliable transactions in a reasonable time frame. Will bitcoin have to go to the brink of destruction before everyone realizes it's all on the line? Will everyone be able to work together for what is good for bitcoin as a whole? What do you think is the most important thing average Bitcoin users can contribute to our industry? Sitting around idly waiting for the price to go up and for others to put in the work is a recipe for disaster. There must be some way even the inexperienced can contribute to success, and be left with a sense of accomplishment. Very good question and great discussion topic. I think we can pull from the DNotes philosophy to answer that question. Make sure you are fully informed on the issue is a great place to start. Help promote positive and constructive discussion. Help people to realize that taking action in the best interest of everyone as a whole will ultimately benefit everyone. |
|
|
|
Actually, not so much the leaving of Hearn but the infighting and inability to come to a consensus since he stepped away. The industry is doing everything to prove him right while saying he was wrong. This needs to stop. We need a strong leader to step forward and put all this crap to bed before people get desensitized and move on to new things. You only have the public's attention for so long and it needs to be good attention in order to grow and thrive. "The industry is doing everything to prove him (Hearn) right while saying he was wrong." That, unfortunately is a very good point. However, we can always be hopeful, but no one seem to have sufficient motivation to step in as a strong leader to clearly represent the industry than their own self interest. That is indeed a tough nut to crack, we need Bitcoin to continue being successful and continue to solve industry problems for the time being. Maybe it's time the voting capabilities of blockchain were put to the test to start electing representatives and establishing a chain of command/leadership hierarchy. It's become quite clear that innovation and engineering will not solve all of the industry's problems unless people can be on the same page. My suggestion would be "weighted voting" based on the amount of hashing power you have, because a large mining operation has an arguably greater vested interest in the industry's future as opposed to bagholders who can sell their stake at any time to recover most of their capital investment. In the future when basic governance is established, switching to a system where every user gets a say would be more possible. Edit: I also think it's incredibly important to have a plethora of power checks in place, to ensure leadership can't abuse their power. It is an interesting proposal. One thing is clear, if people don't act quickly, the network will continue to grow and the problems we are seeing today will be compounded very quickly. The arguments for and against specific changes become irrelevant if the benefits of using bitcoin start to fade away. Once people begin to bail out, it will be very difficult to convince them to come back. Like merchants who can't process reliable transactions in a reasonable time frame. Will bitcoin have to go to the brink of destruction before everyone realizes it's all on the line? Will everyone be able to work together for what is good for bitcoin as a whole? |
|
|
|
Actually, not so much the leaving of Hearn but the infighting and inability to come to a consensus since he stepped away. The industry is doing everything to prove him right while saying he was wrong. This needs to stop. We need a strong leader to step forward and put all this crap to bed before people get desensitized and move on to new things. You only have the public's attention for so long and it needs to be good attention in order to grow and thrive. "The industry is doing everything to prove him (Hearn) right while saying he was wrong." That, unfortunately is a very good point. However, we can always be hopeful, but no one seem to have sufficient motivation to step in as a strong leader to clearly represent the industry than their own self interest. That is indeed a tough nut to crack, we need Bitcoin to continue being successful and continue to solve industry problems for the time being. |
|
|
|
Great title on this article, but it came up short on the proof. It sounds like they are saying the reduced fees of using Bitcoin in cross border transfers will result in greater profits for banks. These outrageous fees are how the banks have remained profitable for so long, so I can't imagine they are in any hurry to get rid of them. In order to stay competitive, they would have to eventually pass any savings on to customers (or the consumer will turn to Bitcoin themselves). It would have been interesting to have some sound arguments and / or better explanation of how banks could profit. Cashing in on Bitcoin: How banks can turn a profit on the cryptocurrencyhttp://www.cbronline.com/news/verticals/finance/cashing-in-on-bitcoin-how-banks-can-turn-a-profit-on-the-cryptocurrency-4831672?Yep, let's talk about it. I struggle with it because I can only assume what costs banks actually have and where their income comes from. I assume most people will want an entity like a bank, even if we are majorly on digital currency, for insurance and potentially ease of use among other services a bank provides. I mean, even here, how many people would run there own wallet over using coinbase? DNotesVault is another good example, I'm sure the majority prefer to store their coins at DNotesVault. Banking won't really go away. I think we start by reducing cost as part of the profit model. Banks have a cost to pay in order process transactions. There are servers, storage, databases, security, software, maintenance, compliance, & employees to keep it all running. Most of these functions are not necessary when transacting in digital currency because it is built in. On top of this, they can batch transaction to reduce blockchain fees. Banks also have to cover things like fraud and security breaches, that they pay hefty premiums for in insurance. If done correctly, there could be much less fraud and security risks when using digital currency. Especially where each transaction doesn't require personal information. So even if fees were lower for the consumer, I assume the banks will make more money than previously (on fees). What banks won't be able to do with digital currency is lend out and only keep 20% in reserves, or whatever that ratio is, and then charge the consumer interest on borrowed money (rinse and repeat the same money). Seems to me this is where all the money is made and where the problem for banks comes into play. In order to survive they will have to become much much leaner. |
|
|
|
Good job Thomas, though I believe the banks will benefit from digital currency and they should be looking at how they can be involved. It may be disruptive to existing models, and I understand they don't want to change... People will still need services whether they use digital currency or not. Smart banks will be looking at new profit models, new ways to meet customer needs, and new services they can provide, while reducing their costs and better serving the customers. It was a great article, and I agree kanus. Though I tend to believe FinTech will be taking on a larger role in providing banking services in the future. |
|
|
|
Check this out, physical cryptocurrency in the form of polymer banknotes. I think this is a very cool idea that could help bridge the "fintech generation gap". http://www.polymerbit.com/Pretty interesting, I wonder how they are preventing fraud. My guess is they'll be keeping the private address to themselves, while displaying the public address on their bills so the balance can be verified. This would require trusting the company issuing the bills and anyone else with access to the private keys (staff, etc). Yeah, like a closed system that uses digital currency, I just wonder if someone get's your ID number or whatever QR code represents if they can just print a copy of your bill. Sort of like how registers and atms need to ask for a pin, because the card number isn't very well protected. That's a good point. It will be interesting to see what safeguards they can put in place to prevent QR forgery. I'd assume the forger would need sophisticated counterfeiting equipment in order to replicate the UV watermarks. This may not be economically viable for isolated thefts, however if they had means to obtain QR codes for numerous bills, it could be worthwhile. To correct what I said earlier, here is how the public/private keys work: "The private key can be used to take the balance from the banknote, Please note that the note becomes void if the key is exposed (you need to peel the public key off to see this key)." Ahh, that makes sense. So in that regard, it's more like those digital coins and such (a paper wallet), it just looks like a bill. |
|
|
|
Check this out, physical cryptocurrency in the form of polymer banknotes. I think this is a very cool idea that could help bridge the "fintech generation gap". http://www.polymerbit.com/Pretty interesting, I wonder how they are preventing fraud. My guess is they'll be keeping the private address to themselves, while displaying the public address on their bills so the balance can be verified. This would require trusting the company issuing the bills and anyone else with access to the private keys (staff, etc). Yeah, like a closed system that uses digital currency, I just wonder if someone get's your ID number or whatever QR code represents if they can just print a copy of your bill. Sort of like how registers and atms need to ask for a pin, because the card number isn't very well protected. |
|
|
|
Check this out, physical cryptocurrency in the form of polymer banknotes. I think this is a very cool idea that could help bridge the "fintech generation gap". http://www.polymerbit.com/Pretty interesting, I wonder how they are preventing fraud. |
|
|
|
This article raises some important points, good work Chase. I wholeheartedly agree, excellent article and thank you Chase! |
|
|
|
247Exchange Now Serving Canada Very impressive! I haven't tried this exchange yet, but I like the fact that they use INTERAC Online, which means I can pay the same way I would using online banking, except the exchange is never given access to my bank info. Coinbase requires bank branch, account #, and if you want to increase your daily limits you have to supply your credit card # (unless it has changed??). Very nice. I think coinbase does require a credit card to raise your limits still. https://support.coinbase.com/customer/en/portal/articles/2108820-coinbase-account-limits |
|
|
|
Going to have a designer work on the cover for the book. For your reference, here is the mock design. We have changed a few things since, like the title Improve Your Odds: The Four Pillars of Business Success. If anyone has any ideas, or is interested in participating in the design, now would be a good time. We are getting closer by the day, so we want to get everything ready. A local DNotes stakeholder has shown some interest in the book and had a couple questions: Will physical copies be available or is it an e-book, and what retailers might we expect to carry it? The current plan is to have it available in all formats, Paperback, Hardcover, Ebook, Kindle, and the apple format. Available everywhere. We are planning to have it available in all the major book stores, Barnes & Nobles, etc... We can't say for sure before we actually work through the publishing process, as I'm sure there will be a lot of hurdles along the way. There will be a lot of work involved, as we intend to self publish and self promote for the most part, and we are doing everything we can to prepare for it. We are considering launching a kickstarter project prior to it's release to help the marketing process and get the word out. |
|
|
|
Enjoy this article, Why Bitcoin Startups Have the Right to Innovate,published on Coindesk from Mark Toohey. "Mark Toohey is a commercial lawyer who has worked as general counsel in the media, telecommunications, software and IT industries. At Adroit Lawyers, his clients include bitcoin and blockchain firms that have had difficulties securing bank accounts."In the article he discusses the shutting down of digital currency business bank accounts. Then proceeds: "The banks do have a serious role to play. Any reasonable person accepts we live in a perilous era when preventing money laundering or terrorism financing is important.""A far more important issue should have been considered by the regulators. How will the important and legitimate rights of smaller FinTech businesses be protected?""If Australia is to be an innovative nation, this imbalance must be addressed. It is absolutely crucial that FinTech businesses have a right to compete"There are huge lessons here for the banking industry. It is quite possibly in the bank’s own best interests that they be restrained from any ‘inadvertent’ or indiscriminate retaliation when business threats emerge in the near future. The power of a bank to arbitrarily close the accounts of competing businesses must be limited. There is a clear case for a swift and effective review process when closures occur. A bank account is central to any FinTech business. It is their oxygen. There must be swift and effective ways to resolve issues. They can’t survive weeks or months. They need a way to have an account closure independently and immediately considered and adjudicated. When warranted, the account must be promptly reactivated. The time for government action is now.
|
|
|
|
‘Alt-cap-to-total-crypto-cap ratio.’ My mistake – right maths, wrong label. Anyway, it just hit 20%:
one if five of all dollars in cryptos is now in altcoins.
At this rate Bergman will get his wish, 50% in 2016, this year for sure. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
