[...] The community agreed to Core's roadmap at the ScalingBitcoin conference. [...]
Without opening the bitcoin maximalist dam please, what makes you measure the community support for this or that, to the point of being affirmative and general as you do here? I measure presence or absence in the dev community via merit, demonstrated roughly by lines of code contributed and/or other analogous accomplishments. This is exactly what I mean: https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-core/capacity-increases (90% of all commits to Bitcoin Core in 2015) https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-core-miners-agree-hard-fork-code-comes-july-2016-activation-in-2017/The devs writing and voluntarily taking on responsibility for fixing the code when it breaks get to decide what goes into that code, and when. FOSS isn't the Dilbert Corporation where the clueless Boss can order Wally to write unstable software to Catbert's Evil Marketecture specs. Talking about crypto doesn't make you part of crypto. Honey Badger really doesn't give a damn about a few pushy/noisy activist investor wannabees. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin development is stagnating. Is it true?  Segwit is mostly done being tested and scheduled for deployment Soon. Sidechains and payment channels are in development. The community agreed to Core's roadmap at the ScalingBitcoin conference. Elements Alpha is packed with gobs of scrumptious Wonka-style chocolate crypto magic. CSV, RBF, and CLTV are here, now. That's not "stagnating." BBR is stagnating. Bitcoin is doing everything but that. Please don't moan about anyone needing to  Leave Dash Alone if you're going have a Hearnia about how XT/Classic failing means certain d000m stagnation for Honey Badger. |
|
|
|
Dash is whatever Duffield does. That was true for XCoin and Darkcoin as well. You shouldn't be shocked or surprised. Vertoe told you Duffield controls Dash 100%. Tomorrow, Duffield may decide to rebrand Dash as OompaLoompaCoin, and there's nothing you could do about it, because he's the CEO of THE DARKCOIN FOUNDATION, INC. |
|
|
|
Back to speculation: The price is creeping up slowly slowly and probably preparing for the next leg upwards. These days of under previous high have shown to be a good buying opportunities this year. We will see if this trend continues.
Yep, XMR will keep climbing the stairway to heaven. I don't see any critical damage on the chart. This was/is a healthy correction and much needed cooling-off period. All the moaning about botnet FUD is ridiculous. No more such things as 'bad hashes' exist than such things as 'bad Moneros'. PoW is necessarily fungible, just like the e-cash it creates. Bitcoin has been mined by more types of botnets than anything else. Even stuff like routers and game updates were doing it. And Honey Badger turned out just fine.  |
|
|
|
Like herpes, Hearn is the gift that keeps on giving. IOW, he hasn't stopped whining about his rage-quit. OK Mikey, tell us all about how Core's roadmap is "much more aggressive" than XT/Classic's governance coup and contentious hardfork at ~75% ...  |
|
|
|
It takes three days for me to buy btc because coinbase is incompetent and has no customer service.
Kraken and Gemini are reputed to be more competent than Coinbank. |
|
|
|
Dash holders seem to have very strong faith in Dash...so we could see quite a bubble We already saw the bubbles, they happened back when what later became Dash was called Darkcoin. No chance of that happening again, given the dev's demonstrated history of subjecting the project to his mood swings and the latest passing fad (privacy, instant tx, smartchains). You're right about the very strong faith though. DashHoles think like cargo cultists and act like Scientologists. I haven't seen an intensely reality-hostile crypto-personality cult like Evan's Gate since ActiveMining and the "true believer" followers of LabKen. I would not take anything IceBreaker's say srs; if this forum does not know yet he is this scammer https://hashfastscam.wordpress.com/ Eduardo deCastro. Known as the biggest troll of Dash and big time supporter of Monero. See what I mean about acting like Scientologists? "Evengelical" DashHoles attack-the-attacker when anyone talks about Dash's instamine, bad crypto, and snake oil marketing. Scientologists ATTACK THE ATTACKER! - YouTube Criticize a Scientologist and STAND BACK. The Church will attack you and hard just like it did to journalist John Sweeney as seen in this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpCF48B7gZ0 |
|
|
|
Given my hypothesis has already been proven by actual events, I don't see how it's a disputable statement, unless you narrow the definition of "technological failure" until it excludes upgrade fiascos resulting in chain forks. Perhaps we should explicitly define "technological failure" as only events which take down both BTC and LTC. Then you get to be right by circular logic, which is pretty much exactly what you were trying to do in a more subtle manner.  If a chain fork is your idea of a black swan technological failure, then I guess you have nothing to worry about, because the worst has already happened Do as you wish. Some black swans are bigger than others. The time Bitcoin broke but was quickly fixed (while Litcoin was fine and enjoyed a price spike) was just a tiny black swanling. I don't worry about the biggest ones, which would take out BTC and LTC, such as a giant meteor of doom or Vogons destroying the planet. The gamut between those two extremes is where it gets interesting, unless we relay on lazy thinking like "No True Black Swan would disrupt/degrade/destroy Bitcoin but leave Litecoin alone." |
|
|
|
Dash holders seem to have very strong faith in Dash...so we could see quite a bubble We already saw the bubbles, they happened back when what later became Dash was called Darkcoin. No chance of that happening again, given the dev's demonstrated history of subjecting the project to his mood swings and the latest passing fad (privacy, instant tx, smartchains). You're right about the very strong faith though. DashHoles think like cargo cultists and act like Scientologists. I haven't seen an intensely reality-hostile crypto-personality cult like Evan's Gate since ActiveMining and the "true believer" followers of LabKen. |
|
|
|
Dash reached a high of 0.028 XBT in May 2014 and a lower high of 0.025 XBT in March 2015 so Dash reaching 0.02 is not that big a deal. The real question is will Dash break 0.025 XBT? https://poloniex.com/exchange#btc_dash. For those that wish to compare Dash with Monero the DASH/XMR chart is relevant. https://poloniex.com/exchange#xmr_dash The historical trading range for Dash has been between 4 and 6.5 XMR with a couple of tops up to 17.215 XMR and 15.2 XMR. As in the case with Bitcoin the second top is the lower of the two. On the upside I would watch 0.025 XBT for Dash. On the downside I would watch 4 XMR for Dash. Edit: Added Dash/XMR chart. DARKCOIN, not DASH, reached that high in 2014. DASH is a different project than DARKCOIN (many DRK supporters and devs left thanks to Evan's sudden dictatorial whim). DASH never reached its pre-rebrand hype price, much less DRK's ATH.  The rebrand was a change in focus and objectives, not just a name change for the lulz. The market gave Xcoin's second pivot a big thumbs down, just as it's now doing for Xcoin's third pivot to Evolution (yet another platform-as-a-platform ETH wannabee). |
|
|
|
A chain fork (and resulting market behavior) is not evidence that LTC will withstand a technological failure that Bitcoin cannot. The actual occurrence of a Bitcoin chain fork (which is a form of technological failure, especially when it results from a botched upgrade), has already demonstrated LTC's utility in that type of scenario. I'm not saying LTC will remain immune to and withstand ANY AND ALL Bitcoin failure modes, just a significant subset of them. Given my hypothesis has already been proven by actual events, I don't see how it's a disputable statement, unless you narrow the definition of "technological failure" until it excludes upgrade fiascos resulting in chain forks. Perhaps we should explicitly define "technological failure" as only events which take down both BTC and LTC. Then you get to be right by circular logic, which is pretty much exactly what you were trying to do in a more subtle manner. |
|
|
|
Is it just my imagination or has the lending market on Polo gone a little bit crazy?
I wish the collective free market would decide that a 0.1% rate is the absolute floor for Monero lending. I did strongly agree with that, but am coming around to the 'basically free teaser rate' / 'first hit is free' strategy for enticing shorts into positions they cannot close except at great loss, and are are then forced to maintain at greatly inflated (>>0.1%) rates, leading to an eventual corresponding overall gain in XMR (ceteris paribus). 1. Whale lends out 100k XMR at ~0%.
2. Whale makes large market buys and/or large support walls, keeping borrower(s) in the red.
3. Whale lends out more XMR for 0.5%-2%.
4. Whale repeats (Steps 1+2+3) until shorts are margin called, optionally placing market making offers squeezed shorts will be forced to buy.
5. Profit! |
|
|
|
It seems to me that the Dash network difficulty has been dropping. My wimpy p2pool payouts have doubled to trippled. With new asics, why would the difficulty be dropping? I suppose miners could be mining other coins (and we all know the ASICs were being "tried out" for months most likely, so our hash rate had risen well before delivery and now of course, the hash rate drops as they're unplugged and for sale.
So, either miners are mining elsewhere, Asics have been disconnected for delivery, or a combo of the two? What do you all think?
X11 ASICs might have switched to XC, which is rumored to be alive and possibly making a comeback.  |
|
|
|
I'm not commenting on the merits of any coin, just stating whether or not I think they'd make a suitable backup. A suitable backup would be a cryptocurrency that shares none of Bitcoin's code, uses a different PoW, and doesn't depend on Secp256k1. Are there any non-scam, transparent-chain coins with those characteristics? I honestly don't know/never checked. Were you here that time BTC has an itsy-bitsy little chain fork and LTC instantly absorbed the FUD? I was, and so were a lot of other people. We're not going to forget that, no matter how impressively many zeros BTC adds to its uptime.
Then there is the fact many (especially in China) see BTC and LTC as Coke and Pepsi. They don't need to understand my "LTC as a backup argument" because they don't even see LTC as an altcoin.
Obviously the market sees value in LTC. I'm not disagreeing with you on that. I only disagree that LTC would make a suitable backup to Bitcoin. Since you can't tell us how Bitcoin is going to fail, please don't presume to also assert that unknown, theoretical failure mode would necessarily be occupied by Litecoin or any (non-merged-mined) altcoin as well.
Of course I can't predict how Bitcoin might fail, which is why I wouldn't choose a coin that's 95% identical to serve as a backup. And yes, considering how similar they are, I will presume that any theoretical failure in Bitcoin will also affect LTC. Your presumption is empirically denied. I even mentioned it and you quoted it, but then glossed right over it in the rush to confirm and reiterate your bias. I'll try bolding it; maybe that will help. For many coins, suitability for backup is their most important merit. You can't commend on them separately. Litecoin has on occasion already provided stability (ie acted as a suitable backup) when Bitcoin threatened/suffered catastrophic consensus failure, and the markets responded accordingly. But we've never seen them both experience simultaneous downtime. That scenario only exists in your personal Imaginationland. Regardless of all that, your quest for a suitable Bitcoin backup is now ended. Monero shares none of Bitcoin's code, uses a different PoW, and doesn't depend on Secp256k1.  |
|
|
|
low volume no selling weekend breakout coming
 |
|
|
|
Never heard of this, so I had a look: Exchange Summary
Total Markets: 1535
Total Trades(24 hours): 3938 Haven't heard of 90% of the coins listed either. Not that I look much at that stuff, but still. Trading XMR would likely blow the top right off the exchange. One bot would increase their volume by an order of magnitude I commend the initiative and effort, but can't recommend an exchange that -puts new listings up for a vote, then utterly fails to act on the results (cough, Craptsy, cough) -says XMR is a priority in Oct 2015 and still needs to be gently nudged 6 months later (Craptsy did that) -supports 1500 shitcoins but can't bother with an innovative/fairly launched/top 10 coin (more shades of Craptsy) -needs hand-holding tech support from (potential?) customers to sort their backend (I expect an exchange to know more than I do) -only provides updates (in the form of lame/implausible excuses) on the previously promised pair when prompted by inquiry Actually we have strict rules for fair launch coins, No ICO, no excessive premines, os even coins like DASH and ETH cant be listed on our platform. I understand you are upset that is taken us longer to implement XMR that you would have liked, but Cryptopia is a small team with one dev. We NEVER asked for hand holding, just hours in the day as i have a full time job and a family, we dont have endless budgets like Polo, Bitrex and Crypsty We will happily refund all votes as you seem super upset that this has taken longer than YOU expected The votes were paid? I forgot about that. It's reasonable to refund them when you can't/don't deliver. Craptsy did that to XMR also. That's the reoccurring pattern making me "super upset." It was your responsibility to communicate difficulties and ask for hand holding when (in accordance with the paid "votes") adding XMR started taking an unreasonable amount of time/effort, not to wait until some enterprising member of the community reached out to you. The newest version takes much less system resources to run. I wish your growing exchange great success with XMR and sincerely appreciate your refusal to list insta-mined crapcoins like DASH. I would seriously consider leaving Polo for an exchange that doesn't facilitate IPO scams like MAID and NXT. |
|
|
|
so much for quiting bitcointalk.org
i just love the controversy too much!
I didn't believe you'd really leave. You can't really trust that other forum anyway. It's run by cypherdoc. Not even that, but literally everything there is anti-core, anti-blockstream. Gets annoying/repetitive after a while. To me, the Frap.doc forum's knee-jerk anti-CoreStream grumbling only becomes more hilarious as time goes on. It leads them to ridiculous positions like being anti-CLTV, anti-RBF, and anti-SEGWIT. Now they want to stop segwit from bumping the tps, after spending the last year moaning about how "we neeeed a tps bump RIGHT FUCKING MEOW, or Bitcoin will surely die alone and unloved like an old cat lady."  And then there's the endless process of failed vanity fork bikeshedding, from XT to Unlimited and now to Satoshi's Altcoin. That deranged ant farm never gets old. They're always agitated and scurrying around looking for something to bite or sting. The frequent pouty meltdowns and whiny rage-quits are priceless. It's very entertaining when they finally realize they have no power over Bitcoin, and can do nothing to change that fact no matter how much noise they make. The Gavinistas are so self-righteous and determined, yet so ineffective. That makes for a perfect comedy of errors! They could simply do an honest self-assessment, admit failing because they don't understand how Bitcoin works, and come back. But that would entail admissions of error on their part and of correctness regarding Core/Blockstream/Theymos, so it won't happen, and we get to enjoy sweet LOLcow products until the last one suffers their inevitable Hearnia. |
|
|
|
XC on Azure? Ok, can we officially call Azure a joke now?
XC and VanillaCoin VASH on Azure? Just need XCOIN Darkcoin DASH added to complete MS's Shitcoin-as-a-Service deployment! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
