Well, lets look at the facts, without the scary talk. The rollback was done as a direct reaction to a theft which would have been of nearly 2 million USD, from innocent (albeit incredibly stupid) random people. The theft also would have damaged the integrity of the coin, as it would have essentially made it highly likely that a single party would be able to attack the network.

The reality is also that a comparative very small number (and value) of transactions were conducted beyond this theft. I think that had the volume of transactions been higher, this may not have occurred. The way those other transactions in question are handled in retrospect is a factor that also has yet to be seen.

Another fact is that the speculation that another rollback will be done in the future under a different set of circumstances is simply that, pure speculation, and that is immutable and unarguable point of fact. It is being thrown around with the same ominous scary bedtime story feel that most of failllings posts have regarding Bitcoin. Pure speculation, and literally nothing more.

And another fact is that merchants already carry inherent risks of a reversible transaction. It happens through consumer protection on credit cards, and can be written off as fraud. I would say that if you were to use the speculation of the threat of a rollback to a merchant, it is only fair to speculate that a merchant could seek recompense through a fraud write off that they could already do with any credit card transaction.

Yes, this rollback has some ominous undertones if it is specifically viewed in such a light...and I think many here are trying to make that out to be the only case. But I think at this point in time, if you truly weigh facts against facts, and speculation against speculation, this is still more likely to be favorably viewed by John Q Public.

Only in the eyes of certain parties...namely the crypto decentralization purists. The truth is, to most random people (that would be the folks necessary to bring to crypto to ever make it 'mainstream'), Bitcoin is far more tarnished thanks to things like Silk Road and Gox than Vericoin will be by this. In the eyes of the everyday person, this will appear to many as being safer, knowing action can be taken to thwart a massive attack such as this.

While I normally give your serious commentary a fair bit of weight in the reading I do around here, I think that people who are viewing this occurrence in such a fashion are thinking too narrowly. For the average person, centralization and decentralization are not the black and white concepts they are viewed as here.

Occasionally, it is necessary to venture beyond the echo chamber of these forums to understand what still must come to pass before cryptocurrency can ever be a tool of the average Joe.

I could add a few zeros to the assorted buy walls I see popping up on the exchanges.

I kinda wonder what that would do. You think if I stuck a 1k BTC buy wall up there, anyone would dump into it?

The future of crypto is not in the people that currently hold it. It's in the ones who will come and make it mainstream.

They will not see this as a taint upon the coin, but rather a disaster averted where other coins, including Bitcoin itself, left it's holders high and dry in the face of such odds.

This is the day that cryptocurrency starts to look 'safe' in the eyes of the masses. And it is the opinion of the masses yet to come, not the fudsters and 'purists' in this thread, that will be the driving force in the months and years to come.

You have witnessed something special today folks, mark my words.

And to the devs, congrats on a job well done.

You do realize that it doesn't matter who does or doesn't support it, so long as enough of the right people do?

Strictly speaking, if I really wanted to, I could prop up the price right now at it's current value indefinitely given the capital at my disposal. There isn't enough VRC to sell me to run me dry at these prices. And if the price remained stable, or even continued to rise after all of this, you don't think people would notice and follow the profits?

You seem to live in a funny world my friend. It seems starkly at odds with every reality I have ever observed in free markets.

Here's how this all goes folks:

1. Vericoin devs successfully thwart an attack of a magnitude which would have killed any other coin, including Bitcoin itself.
2. Investors notice Vericoin as a coin backed by diligent, vigilant developers capable of averting disaster.
3. Investors move into Vericoin because it now becomes obvious it's insanely undervalued.
4. Everyone who sold it off in the FUDstorm cries themselves to sleep for the next decade for throwing away their winning lottery ticket.

Just watch.

Everyone do yourself a favor and thing long and hard about this...

The value of any currency, be it fiat or crypto, is not in the currency itself but the value placed upon those that back it. Be it a government, or developers, or a community that uses and accepts it, the currency is worth no more than the faith that those who use it place in that which stands behind it.

I choose to invest in and hold Vericoin not because it is worth 31k Satoshi each. I do not choose to hold Vericoin because it is high profile and has a good likelihood of getting pumped. I choose to hold Vericoin because it is backed by developers that have a vision for the coin, the skills to make it happen, and a track record of success in things they put their hands to.

The events of today have only reaffirmed that Vericoin is backed by people who will step up, when so many others would have simply slunk away.


"Bitcoin is dead, Litecoin is dead, Blackcoin is dead, Dogecoin is dead, Vericoin is dead..." The list goes on and on and you screaming fucktards have yet to once be right. This song and dance is getting old, lets change the beat.

Do yourself a favor and never involve yourself in anything that involves doing math. You suck at it more than my six year old nephew.

After extensive review of your posts, I have come to the conclusion that you quite literally do not know the meaning of 'centralized'. Please stop posting, as the effort you are expending to type is wasting my perfectly good oxygen.

You all can FUD about this all you want, I don't care.

Assuming the devs successfully defend the integrity of VRC with this, then there will be no question as to the long term success of VeriCoin. And on that note, once the exchanges are back all up and running on the same page, I'm going on a buying spree.

You'll think 40k was cheap by the time this is done.

People should take note of this. Not because of the hack, but because of the immediate step-up of the developers to defend the integrity of the coin.

Ladies and gentlemen, I do believe the bar has effectively been raised.

First of all, while I tend to toss around terms like 'Feds' being an American myself, it applies throughout the world governments that some similar entity exists, please don't read too much into that particular word.

Strictly speaking, yes, the point of anonymity is to be anonymous. The question is twofold however.

First of all, while the whole world does not 'have' to comply with US regulations, the US Financial system (for all it's faults) is still capable through the Federal Reserve and US government of applying an absurd amount of pressure to entities based outside of the US. Most money laundering laws are international as well (since every government worldwide pretty much wants to have their hand in the cookie jar), so very little reach is even required. Because something truly anonymous could be used extensively for funding terrorism as well, they could come after it from that vector too. Long story short, until you are living in a non-extradition country and banking with an institution that is not reliant in any way on US or US ally based financial institutions, you might want to rethink how much you can blow off. Its scary how much economic leverage can be applied to anyone to get them to step to the beat. Sad, but true, plain and simple.

And the second facet to this is that any anonymous currency ostracized by the global financial system will probably be very hard to acquire, or cash out. Now while it is in it's own way a currency (obviously), it is only as useful as it can be spent. If you had one million dollars (or equivalent in whichever national currency you prefer) in "AnonymousCOINX" (pulling something random outta my ass as to not offend anyone), you wouldd have to either spend it with merchants who would give you something of value for it, or sell it on an exchange for fiat in order to actually have that value. But if companies wont accept it for fear of being ostracized, and if your local banks wont accept funds from an exchange that trades it for the fear of being ostracized, then what do you really have?

The essential point is that untraceable electronic transfers would be a haven for illicit activity, not just people who feel they have the right to privacy. Because of this, it's would come under what would probably be an almost unsurvivable amount of scrutiny by any and every world government.

Kind of a case of the rotten apples spoiling the whole bushel. While I know a lot of honest folks have interest in the anon aspects of crypto, it is in my personal opinion going to be hammered too much by legal authorities worldwide who are going to be way too fearful of it's illicit use.

I believe we may have a miscommunication here with regards to what you are considering 'private'. Banks are required to retain information regarding their customers, however that information is considered privileged information. While protected from the general public, regulations dictate that that information be made available to legal and regulatory authorities through appropriate channels if warranted with just cause.

In such a respect, a bank serves as a centralized resource for this information, although it is guarded from public domain. Is this what you are referring to when you say 'private'?

As I said, I'm not here to FUD, and actually have quite a vested interest in seeing VeriCoin succeed. If there is something that I can help clarify, I would be happy to do so, but I think we need to make sure we are on the same page first. Otherwise we may just go in circles.

Please explain to me why you think I am a 'paid sock puppet'.

I am not attempting to hype or FUD, I am merely stating an opinion, openly ascribed as such. I do however have an extensive background in the financial world, which includes (but is by no means limited to) a Series 27 License, and more experience in financial regulations than probably 99% of the people trolling around on these boards.

My only intent is to offer some relative insight into what has become a crypto 'flavor of the month' feature. Anonymity is a buzzword in crypto right now, but I foresee it only being a passing fad at best, and at worst it could become a direct obstacle to regulation compliance which could eventually
bar it from mass adoption.

Crytocurrencies that are inherently untraceable in any fashion whatsoever are almost the rough equivalent to a bank that advertises money laundering as a service provided to it's investors. It's just not going to hold up in the end.

It's my personal opinion that while the total anonymity undoubtedly has the interest of some parties, it will in the end become a liability for the altcoins that rely on that for their uniqueness. While crypto stands on the doorstep of seeing government acceptance and wider scale adoption, it will be under increasingly heavy scrutiny as time goes on.

Crypto is already 'anonymous' in the eyes of the average user, as it allows to disconnect your personal information from a payment system and being a bearer instrument, essentially allowing an individual to separate their purchase from their financial history. The single biggest advantage in that regard is limiting risk exposure that one suffers as a result of providing a 3rd party with your credit card or bank routing information.

Coins that are attempting to obfuscate the entire traceability of the transactions will never be able to become 'mainstream' due to the inability to comply with regulations. I imagine that any exchanges that list these coins will be strong-armed into dropping them to become compliant with regulatory oversight.

Actually, as someone who has a long standing background in the financial world and has personally worked extensively with FinCEN, Vericoin's features in that regard are under very low risk. What is at very high risk of catching unwanted attention is the recent batch of alts that have anonymity woven into them.

By centralizing certain aspects of Verisend, they technically have the ability to comply with US Federal regulations. Coins that have built in decentralized anonymity quite literally have a target painted on their collective asses, and will be the first hammered into the dirt by the Feds should they ever start looking in that general direction.

I do believe we've found a newcomer to crypto who got taken like a cheap whore and now has a chip on the shoulder and a clinical case of paranoia.

@BadAss.Sx

To put things into perspective, pretty much every 'OMG I'm terrified what will happen to the value of this coin' could have been said about Bitcoin from about 2009 through to the 11/2013 'ohshit' price spike.

The way I see it, a person holding VRC has to take one of two approaches. Either speculate/day-trade and flip for profit as you would anything else, or intend it as a long term investment that probably won't come into it's own for months.

I'd just like to comment on a couple things here that I think anyone investing in VRC should keep in mind.

1.) The devs are still the same folks that started this up. They can't feasibly release something new every day. Over and over again people said it's best to under promise and over deliver. Just because we don't have something new to hype up doesn't mean they aren't still working hard. I for one still have 100% faith in them, especially during the 'slower' times.

2.) Remember Bitcoin spend a couple years with a virtually negligible value. While VRC spiked recently, that kind of growth rate has to correct and fluctuate. Price is down now compared to a few days ago, but still on the up since it came to the major exchanges, and by a lot. Patience folks.

3.) Always remember that the crypto community by and large has the attention span of an ADHD goldfish on methamphetamine. Just because volume decreases and people aren't all over every social media hyping or FUD'ing VRC doesn't mean it's dead, dying, abandoned, failing, or anything. It just means the goldfish found something else sparkly to divert it's attention to for the next 7 seconds.

I'm still HODLing, and have no intention of dumping/selling. I still have complete faith in the devs and the other members of the VRC community to continue taking the steps and initiative to bring this coin to it's full potential, a potential that I think is well above it's current price, but I know it's not going to get there overnight without ups and downs.

Anyway, that's my two cents for what it's worth.

No rally will occur within the range of the previous pattern. This will cause people to get nervous, and after some time there will be a speculator sell off. It'll tank spot down by about $100-150 USD for a day or two, which will become the obligatory bear trap before the price goes nuts again in late August or early September.