Yes, but there is something that is more interesting. I just really don't know how exactly it's meant and how to interpret it. At about 18.30 she speaks about Bitcoin first, 7 transactions per second and scaling problem. Than she speaks about Factom and says:

"But we have customers that come to us and say 'hey, we got a trillion transactions a day that we want to secure (...)'"



Question is if she just speaks more theoretically about what is theoretically possible or if they really talk to (potential) customers who have to think in that numbers. I don't know enough about all those things. I mean, Visa handles about 180 Mio transactions a day and there are services whit numbers in the billions. But what could be about a trillion?

Next question is if transactions in that example would be the same as entries.

But, if she doesn't make a mistake there and if it's about a real scenario and not just a theoretical example:
She also uses the word "customers" - Plural.

I really don't know how to interpret it, but in best case they talk to (potential?) customers, more than just one, who think in trillions. Again, I doubt that it means entries. That would be very high costs if the price for entry credits wouldn't be reduced - which is possible. But with more than just one "big-data-customer" it's most likely more than just possible that it could be about billions of entries for Factom - per day.

And what I sometimes used as kind of best-case-example is the dropbox-upload-number. Dropbox has about 1 bn uploads each day. Maybe even more now because that number is old. And it's just one cloud-service and uploads are slow. So, it might be possible. I really don't know.

But what I'm sure about since I began to understand what this is about: Factom won't be about something in the middle with 20 customers who have to handle just 10k entries each. I believe that Factom, if high quality and successful, will be about very large numbers and it can be used for everything, all kinds of data. And there is no lack of important and time dependent data in this world. 

For the Factoid-price there are "just" two important questions:

1. Quality of the system
2. Demand

But even if we can't know about how much demand it will be in future, I believe it's realistic to say: If point 1 will be positive, point 2 will be high.

Thing is: Factom won't give much if any informations about that until there is something safe to say. Every word would be hype. So we have to wait. But it won't be boring.

Until now and also for some time in the future, the price is just a result of that what I call a psychological market. It's betting on the future. Some bet for longterm, some for a week or just 24 hours. But with a longterm-focus it's possible to think in objective future scenarios from worst-case to very optimistic and to do that with different calculations about possible demand-scenarios.

But in any case the psychological market always will play a role. And for the past since launch and until now and also the next time, it's only about that. So it's always about the reactions of Investors/Speculators/Traders etc. Some of them, the minority, is longterm-focused. The minority already has made enough research to understand Factom. A minority understands that a lack of short-term-signals is not a bad sign if it's seen in the context of all the good signs we get for longterm. But to see that it also needs research, and to follow Factom.

Compared with other projects Factom did not get much attention etc. And exactly that is also seen as bad sign while it is in fact potential - room to grow if, again: focus on the context. Safe to say is: It won't be boring. We constantly got good news in the past. That also had an increasing dynamic and I believe it will continue to increase. But because there is not that much attention, the price doesn't react like a rocket how it would be in some other projects. Imagine Ethereum and DHS or Ethereum and Smart Cities. That would be like an explosion (subtract the DAO mess and the HF for now )

Will the increasing tendency stop? Just if Factom should fall into sleep - and that won't happen. It's much more likely that attention and identification will increase very sharp at some point - and the price would follow and hype.


The question than would be again: Is it overbought? In relation to demand at that time it's safe to say: yes. But for the future after M3 and when it gets traction? I don't believe that. The potential is extreme in my opinion.

 
And a few minutes ago I've started the new video with Tiana Laurence:

IDC Q2 2016 S4 Disruptive Infrastructure Solutions
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_gPYSaZAfE&feature=youtu.be&t=15m45s


After seeing the first minutes I believe it's damn cheap right now. I'm not sure how to interpret something she says there. That's why I won't make guesses here right now. But there is something that is interesting.

Oh wow! That's really great. It's a first sign for that what I believe will happen in big in future. Until now I believe that most if it is testing. But it seems that this could be more than that.

If Factom will work how planned - and I really have no rational doubt - we'll see an explosion of entries. And that will be an ongoing buy-signal like increasing prices. But contrary to prices Entries won't go back down. In best case Factom can grow and grow for years. If that should happen nobody will know when to sell.

perfect!

I had the same problem, but this was a solution for me (from Brian Deery):

"yah, sorry about that. when you doubleclick on the program it opens a terminal window, generates a keypair then finishes and closes. We are very terminal oriented here at factom, doing development in linux, etc.
to use it, open a command prompt, navigate to where you saved the program, then run factoidpapermill.exe It will show the keys without exiting then."

https://www.reddit.com/r/factom/comments/49zf1x/setting_up_factom_wallet_without_koinify/

You can just drag and drop factoidpapermill.exe into the command-line. At least that works for me.

I'm not a big fan of technical-chart-analysis but this is at least a better one:


$FCT/BTC Technical Analysis "in the middle of difficulty lies opportunity"
https://steemit.com/factom/@ozchartart/usdfct-btc-technical-analysis-in-the-middle-of-difficulty-lies-opportunity

No problem!

Just theDAO could be a case for the SEC. That's not my opinion it's said here:

"However, based upon the structure of The DAO, it is foreseeable that the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) would view its tokens purchased by investors as a security or investment contract, subject to its jurisdiction.

The voting system implemented for The DAO is likewise problematic due to its mixed incentives and propensity to depress the value of ETH and its own tokens. Because investment in The DAO is laden with risk and seems to implicate SEC jurisdiction, The DAO may attract regulatory attention.

(...)

The sale of DAO tokens by The DAO in exchange for ETH carries all of the hallmarks of an investment contract or security, and under this analysis, the SEC could assume jurisdiction over The DAO. The DAO presents novel legal issues, both with respect to its ability to interact with the legal system, and as to the potential regulatory ramifications of investing in a new novel structure."
http://www.coindesk.com/the-law-of-the-dao/

We have add to this that a lot of the funds came from Ethereum-members.

And if we think about a scenario that there was...

1. TheDAO
2. A hack (and some believe it could have been an insider)
3. A hard fork to bail-out

...it's already interesting.

If then those who bailed themselves out dump their ETH, including premine, to join ETC - not sure how that would look. I'm not a lawyer, but this game already created some collateral damage (Investors and most likely also exchanges). To dump on their Investors to leave ETH and join ETC would lead into a lot of lawsuits. But that won't happen because they won't quiet ETH to get over to ETC.
 




Yes, we agree here. It's possible but not very likely that ETH-Dev's go to ETC. Maybe one or two but not sure. Not VB or the foundation.

And under the line, I believe that both have not that much chance in longterm. For the next weeks or months it will be a race between both and it will be about hashrate and the markets. But if we speak about business, customers - I don't believe that Ethereum will be used widely.

Das halte ich für einen Irrtum. Bevor es zu harten Problemen im Finanzsystem kommt flieht Geld in andere Werte. Genau das sehen wir schon, denn die hohen Aktienkurse z.B. sind im Grunde Inflation die den Real-Markt nicht erreicht. Wir sehen das auch an Immobilien-Preisen und auch der Goldpreis steigt seit Anfang des Jahres etc. Im Grunde kann man überall Vorboten erkennen.

Und Bitcoin - ich würde nicht behaupten dass der Kursanstieg auch eine Reaktion ist, aber ganz sicher würde einiges an Geld in Bitcoin gehen wenn es wirklich eng wird. Es ist unlogisch anzunehmen, dass Bitcoin als Counterpart zum Finanzsystem, nicht im Wert zulegen würde wie es eben auch andere Werte tun. Denn Bitcoin ist kein Parasit. Wie Gold hat Bitcoin das Potential als Wertspeicher zu fungieren und dazu noch einen Vorteil: Bitcoin ist viel praktischer und deutlich sicherer.


Natürlich würden Staaten das nicht gerne sehen und möglicherweise irgendetwas tun um das zu verhindern. Aber im Vergleich zu allem wohin Geld flieht ist Bitcoin nur eine Fliege um die sie sich daher noch nicht wirklich kümmern - und gleichzeitig ist Bitcoin kaum kleinzukriegen wenn die verschiedenen Staaten nicht zusammen arbeiten, von China über Europa bis in die USA.
 

My own conclusion for now is that it's possible that they've "lost" funds but I it would be too early for the bitcoin-market to react on those rumors. And for now I don't believe lost ETC-funds would lead into an insolvency.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4vl5gd/coinbase_has_all_funds_to_cover_user_deposits/


But, not sure - I would like to hear other opinions.

Is there any reason besides the more or less normal market for the price decline?

Could it be that the rumors about Coinbase have some impact on the price?

For those who don't know what I mean:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4ura14/is_coinbase_insolvent/

And this is highly biased, but gives a good overview about potential problems (I'm not saying that are facts):

https://bitflikz.com/blogs/news/critical-security-update-from-bitflikz-gdax-coinbase-may-be-insolvent




Edit, because actual: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4vouto/coinbase_blocked_my_withdrawl_even_after_i/?


Edit 2, statement after the ETH-HF: https://medium.com/the-coinbase-blog/on-the-ethereum-hard-fork-780f1577e986#.t5cmkg6la

Yes, right.

But, I believe to see a missed chance here.

Imagine it this way:

TheDAO is hacked --> a lot of trouble how it was.

The foundation needs some days to find a solution and they announce:

We need a hard fork anyway, because Casper won't be finished until the difficulty will increase sharp. So, why not do both. The Community won't vote if HF or not, because everybody understands that it needs one. But they'll vote if bail-out or not. But of course, they say yes. And the reason looks also much more technical than just like "bailing out buddies".

Than the HF:

- removing Time bomb (or delaying it)
- preventing replay attacks
- DAO-bail out.

The situation would be different now. Most likely ppl wouldn't see the HF differently and most likely nobody would touch ETC, because it would be really different - it would include the time-bomb. And without the replay attacks it's even more unlikely that exchanges would be forced to open markets for it.

Or do I miss something? Because if not - I believe that nobody would care about ETC and there wouldn't be an ideology-battle. 

That's a really interesting subject and it seems it will bring new trouble for ETH and ETC.

I don't know how to solve it if Casper won't be finished and I highly doubt that it will be finished until the difficulty goes up exponential.

I mean, since the DAO-Mess they've lost at least one month.

So, what will they do? Another Hard fork to remove the time-bomb? It's something that ETC also would have to do.

Are there any other solutions if Casper shouldn't be ready?


Edit: Why didn't they remove the time-bomb with the HF? That would have prevented ETC! ETC with time-bomb and ETH without it - the future would be clear.

Let's think about it: They bail out themselves with a hard-fork. Than the other chain, ETC, wins. And they announce they will support it and leave ETH? Or do they say they support both? And do they sell their holdings before the announcement or after?

The last question is the most important one. Their holdings on ETH will become worthless over time if they support ETC. No doubt about that.

If you think about it, it's a pretty unsolvable problem. If they should cash out to support ETC they are done and most likely that would not end well regarding legal consequences. If they announce it without cashing out - they will lose more than they've bailed out.

I see no way here. And besides that: The loss of credibility is already hard but would be tremendous.

Really folks, I was so bored because there is not one good show I don't already know (should say that I'm german) in the TV the last time. But since the DAO it's about drained out Mothers and their children and about the fight between black- and whitehats, about splitting vitaliks baby into twins and one will die and the other will suffer just longer.

And the newest episode is called "cease and desist". Really love it!

Several episodes per day and a whole season in two days - how it should be!

I would pay for it if needed!  


P.S.: The last Crypto-show I really enjoyed was "Craig Wright is Satoshi!".

But it was too short. Tthat's why I like the Game of clones more.

Same here. But it was and still is a gamble. I mean, it was not predictable if not large ETH-whales would dump their ETC's to damage the market. Or if ETH-pools wouldn't attack the chain with hash-power. And that's the plan - if it's still planned and it looks like that. There were and still are a lot of risks.

So yes - a missed opportunity, but I won't touch ETH or ETC any time soon, most likely never.

What I mean is: If we look at Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain-projects in general, we just see the first steps. If we focus on the really innovative projects and forget all the scams and shit, it's still unsure which one will find it's way into real use and real business. My Nr. 1 is Factom, because it's the only project I know of, that already has deals and companies and institutions and even governments already seem to be very interested. But it's use case is about data. It's an ambitious project but in comparison to smart contracts it's kind of simple.

Ethereum gets a lot of attention and smart contracts will most likely be part of our future life. But it's very early. And if we think in years, I don't believe that Ethereum has chances. There will be much more competition on that field. And Ethereum has a lot of weaknesses. The DAO-Hack wasn't just a result of a buggy smart contract. Or, more precise: That the DAO turned out to be buggy is a result of Ethereums design itself. Some Coders say Solidity is deeply flawed and some go even beyond that.

And even if there wouldn't be a problem: The eco-system is very risky in my opinion. They want to switch to PoS and I have some doubts that it's possible to be on the safe side with that over years. PoS means that the rich become richer and poor poorer. It's a one-way-ticket into a centralization. But maybe I'm wrong with that because it needs a lot of time to get into problems.

But: While Factom for example found a way to have a system-currency that is a crypto-currency, it also found a way for potential customers to use the system without touching a Cryptocurrency - Entry Credits for access.

That is important because banks and other companies don't like volatile Cryptocurrencies including all the regulatory issues. And the price to use the system is not dependent on the price of Factoids. FCT's are just to pay the servers to keep the system decentralized and are converted into Entry Credits for it's customers/users.

In Ethereum it's all about Ether. The costs to use Ethereum are dependent on the market. That's not optimal.

Plus: How to trust it after the HF? Will companies just don't care about the HF or maybe say: Naah... little risky to trust a Blockchain that goes through a hard fork to bail out an application if needed?


Under the line I believe to see problems on all important fields:

1. Code
2. Eco-system
3. Trust

And that in mind - plus: more competition. I believe it's very unlikely that ETH or ETC will be on top in years. I'm very unsure about the next months to be honest. Of course they will keep on with Ethereum. It's also possible that the price will see new ATH's in future. But I've never understood why it's so expensive. I believe it's more a hype without the base ppl believe to see in it.

I would add this to start with Factom:


Paul Snow explains Factom
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPQMosvjz88

It's from early 2015 but a good one to start with to understand Factom and the vision behind.



How Factom is Bringing Digital Currencies To Business & Governments With Paul Snow
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1noFK6M8ktU

One of the best interviews in my opinion.

I'm not sure honestly how to backup the wallet. Never did it because I just use it to import a private key and make a transaction. I don't store Factoids with it. For now it's not possible to decrypt it.

But it's possible to be on the safe side with the combination of the Wallet and the papermill.

What I do is:

1. Generating addresses on an offline computer--> papermill
2. I send FCT's I want to store in longterm (from the wallet or an exchange) to those addresses
3. Wallet for importing private keys if needed

But they've said that there will be a improved wallet in future. Not sure if after M2 or M3.


https://www.factom.com/howto/

Many questions. For Ethereum and the foundation it's of course not a success that ETC is not dead but on it's way to get some respect and solidarity. But I wouldn't say in general that it's bad if a hard fork results in competition.

And I don't believe that the foundation-guys already sold their ETC's. It's possible that there is still some risk of a crash if they do it. But it's also possible that it would result in legal problems, because Ethereum started with a CFC and premine. To cash out on one chain, to make money and to damage the ETC-market - I don't know if that would be accepted.

ETC is stronger than expected because there is a market at least since Poloniex decided to add it. And ppl and miners saw it as opportunity. It's a wild mix of capitalism, idealism and crypto-war. I also believe that ETC is used by those who would like to see ETH in a bad position. With other words: Most likely not everybody who supports ETC believes in Ethereum in general. In my opinion we will find out in 1-3 years that both are without chance.

If ETH should lose this fight Vitalik and most of his guys will most likely be out of the Ethereum-game. It could be seen as take-over but it also could be seen as if the team has abandoned it's own project. The majority believes Ethereum is Ethereum because of VB and the original team. But that might turn out as misconception.

One interesting question is: What to do with the funding and the premine if Vitaliks Ethereum should lose.

Btw: That's also a reason why they won't give up. They will most likely keep on with ETH even if ETC should overtake an be superior in all important parts, including hashrate.