Despite good intentions , humans can NOT be trusted , they simpley lack control over its own primal emotions.
they simply cant , so its no option to keep humans in a trust position.
this makes NXT no diffrent then the dollar.
and bitcoin diffrent.
Bitcoin does not need trust.
how does nxt put trust in people?  The initial IPO had ten people with 50% of the stake. There is no way to prove that those ten people weren't in fact one person, nor that one person has not acquired more than 50% already. They can then hold their position forever. It's like a priesthood. You must have faith that your authority figures will be honest. NXT's version of PoS allocates the block generation by active stake. Someone with a majority of active stake has the option to attack the network surreptitiously. I doubt they would overtly attack the network because it would devalue the currency, but they would always have plausible deniability if they sporadically attack. I can't prove that this has happened and nobody can prove that it didn't already or won't happen. You just have to trust people that they won't be greedy enough to try this. exactly you cant prove anything.. LOL if you held 50% or 15m+ dollars of a currency, would you screw up the network and cause the value of your holdings to plummet? what i really love about your arguments, is even if they are totally valid arguments, your going to have a hard time putting the same fight with even remotely similar arguments against nem which i have no doubt in a few weeks you will try, and then fail lol perhaps you should read up on NEM for a bit and prepare your fud in advance  That's why I don't even need to bother reading about NEM. There will always be another PoS. PoS doesn't need an expensive infrastructure, just a marketing gimmick. You say I have valid arguments, yet still call it FUD. Interesting. In fact, I am excited about the possibility of PoS, it's just that none of them are any good yet.you are right in saying nxt distribution is not very good, but you push it too far, and then it becomes fud. ok now we are making progress(bolded part) this is why i brought up nem.. its not PoS. its PoI. proof of importance. in nem your level of importance to the network is what decides your "forging power". it is partly based on how many coins you have but mostly how important you are to the network ie. if you distribute your coins via tx fees or any other transactions to other nodes with high importance then you gain importance. i you hoard, it drops(not by much but enough to deter hoarding). its not about how many transactions you do, but with whom you do transactions. if you make a transaction with a very high fee, your importance will rise a little i think even though the number of coins you have has gone down. people have been trying to break PoI for months with out any luck. this gives even small holders the opportunity to have a high importance regardless of their lack of coins. it will help increase the already large network effect created by 3000 original stake holders who got 1 million each, the vast majority being unique users/veteran accounts. distribution is pretty much the opposite of nxt. the largest stake holder in nem isnt even 1%. it will have all the features that nxt has and probably more. remote forging(forge with coins in cold storage) is a planned feature for beta (currently in alpha) as well as time synchronization between nodes(security feature). multisig could possibly be a feature ready for beta too but im not sure on that one. also it doesnt use brain wallets. it uses a local wallet but i think it could be a little different than regular bitcoin like local wallets. but for the most part i think its the same thing. Your importance is based on a high amount coins you have plus how many transaction fees you send to others with a high amount of coins. It sounds like you can build your own importance by sending coins and fees to yourself. no cheating the system like that doesn't work.. Loads have tried and failed. And it not how many you do nor the size but who you do txs with. Il post the white paper when it's released |
|
|
|
Despite good intentions , humans can NOT be trusted , they simpley lack control over its own primal emotions.
they simply cant , so its no option to keep humans in a trust position.
this makes NXT no diffrent then the dollar.
and bitcoin diffrent.
Bitcoin does not need trust.
how does nxt put trust in people? The initial IPO had ten people with 50% of the stake. There is no way to prove that those ten people weren't in fact one person, nor that one person has not acquired more than 50% already. They can then hold their position forever. It's like a priesthood. You must have faith that your authority figures will be honest. NXT's version of PoS allocates the block generation by active stake. Someone with a majority of active stake has the option to attack the network surreptitiously. I doubt they would overtly attack the network because it would devalue the currency, but they would always have plausible deniability if they sporadically attack. I can't prove that this has happened and nobody can prove that it didn't already or won't happen. You just have to trust people that they won't be greedy enough to try this. exactly you cant prove anything.. LOL if you held 50% or 15m+ dollars of a currency, would you screw up the network and cause the value of your holdings to plummet? what i really love about your arguments, is even if they are totally valid arguments, your going to have a hard time putting the same fight with even remotely similar arguments against nem which i have no doubt in a few weeks you will try, and then fail lol perhaps you should read up on NEM for a bit and prepare your fud in advance That's why I don't even need to bother reading about NEM. There will always be another PoS. PoS doesn't need an expensive infrastructure, just a marketing gimmick. You say I have valid arguments, yet still call it FUD. Interesting. In fact, I am excited about the possibility of PoS, it's just that none of them are any good yet.you are right in saying nxt distribution is not very good, but you push it too far, and then it becomes fud. ok now we are making progress(bolded part) this is why i brought up nem.. its not PoS. its PoI. proof of importance. in nem your level of importance to the network is what decides your "forging power". it is partly based on how many coins you have but mostly how important you are to the network ie. if you distribute your coins via tx fees or any other transactions to other nodes with high importance then you gain importance. i you hoard, it drops(not by much but enough to deter hoarding). its not about how many transactions you do, but with whom you do transactions. if you make a transaction with a very high fee, your importance will rise a little i think even though the number of coins you have has gone down. people have been trying to break PoI for months with out any luck. this gives even small holders the opportunity to have a high importance regardless of their lack of coins. it will help increase the already large network effect created by 3000 original stake holders who got 1 million each, the vast majority being unique users/veteran accounts. distribution is pretty much the opposite of nxt. the largest stake holder in nem isnt even 1%. it will have all the features that nxt has and probably more. remote forging(forge with coins in cold storage) is a planned feature for beta (currently in alpha) as well as time synchronization between nodes(security feature). multisig could possibly be a feature ready for beta too but im not sure on that one. also it doesnt use brain wallets. it uses a local wallet but i think it could be a little different than regular bitcoin like local wallets. but for the most part i think its the same thing. |
|
|
|
A large ask wall feels like a bear manoever no?
I'm happy to lead with small buys! Feels a bit silly though in case the wall suddenly goes, price falls and I coulda got lower....
Walls just make everyone anxious :S
only if it gets filled.. scare the market down, order never gets filled, test the bid wall, pull the ask wall. your only a pretend bear |
|
|
|
How does a bull test a bidwall (without temporarily becoming a bear)?
put up a far bigger ask wall? |
|
|
|
Despite good intentions , humans can NOT be trusted , they simpley lack control over its own primal emotions.
they simply cant , so its no option to keep humans in a trust position.
this makes NXT no diffrent then the dollar.
and bitcoin diffrent.
Bitcoin does not need trust.
how does nxt put trust in people? The initial IPO had ten people with 50% of the stake. There is no way to prove that those ten people weren't in fact one person, nor that one person has not acquired more than 50% already. They can then hold their position forever. It's like a priesthood. You must have faith that your authority figures will be honest. NXT's version of PoS allocates the block generation by active stake. Someone with a majority of active stake has the option to attack the network surreptitiously. I doubt they would overtly attack the network because it would devalue the currency, but they would always have plausible deniability if they sporadically attack. I can't prove that this has happened and nobody can prove that it didn't already or won't happen. You just have to trust people that they won't be greedy enough to try this. exactly you cant prove anything.. LOL if you held 50% or 15m+ dollars of a currency, would you screw up the network and cause the value of your holdings to plummet? what i really love about your arguments, is even if they are totally valid arguments, your going to have a hard time putting the same fight with even remotely similar arguments against nem which i have no doubt in a few weeks you will try, and then fail lol perhaps you should read up on NEM for a bit and prepare your fud in advance |
|
|
|
It's not just NXT, in fact, all the so-call 2nd gen coin looks like scamcoin
ok.. tell me how nem is a scam then? |
|
|
|
Despite good intentions , humans can NOT be trusted , they simpley lack control over its own primal emotions.
they simply cant , so its no option to keep humans in a trust position.
this makes NXT no diffrent then the dollar.
and bitcoin diffrent.
Bitcoin does not need trust.
how does nxt put trust in people? |
|
|
|
|
i think we could breach the ath by years end.
|
|
|
|
|
is there any way to know at what price the shorts start getting squeezed?
|
|
|
|
I´m new to this whole thing and can´t tell, if the claims about flaws in the PoS algorithm are true, but noone provides any convinving arguments, why there should be any. And the old Bitcoiners sure discuss like angry former authorities, not willing to pass the cepter. Just from how it sounds. Like "what are you even doing here? It´s a bitcoin forum"... Maybe I should consider buying some nxt  Buying NXT... Sounds like a good plan!  .... they realize that NxT is just like having a Central Bank that can print whenever it wants. .... Did you ever read a single line of text about NXT? "Print whaever it wants"? WTf!!! The amount of nxts in the NXT platform is FIXED and it is 1,000,000,000 (actually it is less coz some of them were burnt). Guess who controls all of those coins? NxT is effectively a huge pile of printed coins that they invented from thin air without anything to prove their value. They can choose to distribute/issue this huge pile of coins at any time for any reason and to anybody, which has the exact same effect as if they printed them at the time of use. The only difference between them and a central bank is that all of the NxT scamcoins are printed in advance, all at once. There is no functional difference at all between the two. I laid a trap and you walked right into it. If you keep going on about the nuance in definitions between "printed at time of misuse" and "printed in advance for future misuse" then you are just playing word games. Just like central banks, NxT is about financial slavery. looool do you really think some one is stupid enough to believe u? you are on bitcoin forum not kindergarten or you are trying to promote NXT with obvious FUD. I dont think it is good strategy (see monero) but this is too obvious bullshit so maybe you are trying to hurt NXT by writing obvious FUD as if you were promoting it, thus making "monero effect" or you are simply stupid and ignorant about facts Thank you for lobbing more insults my way. It really makes NxT look like crap when people like you "defend" it. Nothing you said changes the fact that they (the developers of NxT) are essentially sitting on a pile of a billion coins which they (the developers) can give or sell to anybody they want, whenever they want, for whatever reason they want. Guess who has control over the 21million bitcoins that will eventually exist. Go ahead and guess. We'll be waiting for your response. Trustless Cryptocurrency > Trust-Required Scamcoin Do you even understand this basic concept? the ever smaller and smaller group of miners who can afford to stay in the mining game. so the argument against nxt essentially comes down to you thinking the developers own all the nxt? could a handful of developers make a total of 29'704 asset exchange trades? this number is starting to go exponential too.  to say the devs hold all the nxt is just picking at straws. just like every other argument made so far. |
|
|
|
I´m new to this whole thing and can´t tell, if the claims about flaws in the PoS algorithm are true, but noone provides any convinving arguments, why there should be any. And the old Bitcoiners sure discuss like angry former authorities, not willing to pass the cepter. Just from how it sounds. Like "what are you even doing here? It´s a bitcoin forum"... Maybe I should consider buying some nxt Buying NXT... Sounds like a good plan! .... they realize that NxT is just like having a Central Bank that can print whenever it wants. .... Did you ever read a single line of text about NXT? "Print whaever it wants"? WTf!!! The amount of nxts in the NXT platform is FIXED and it is 1,000,000,000 (actually it is less coz some of them were burnt). Guess who controls all of those coins? NxT is effectively a huge pile of printed coins that they invented from thin air without anything to prove their value. They can choose to distribute/issue this huge pile of coins at any time for any reason and to anybody, which has the exact same effect as if they printed them at the time of use. The only difference between them and a central bank is that all of the NxT scamcoins are printed in advance, all at once. There is no functional difference at all between the two. I laid a trap and you walked right into it. If you keep going on about the nuance in definitions between "printed at time of misuse" and "printed in advance for future misuse" then you are just playing word games. Just like central banks, NxT is about financial slavery. oh Jeff garzick would like this one.. The fud is strong in this one |
|
|
|
I´m new to this whole thing and can´t tell, if the claims about flaws in the PoS algorithm are true, but noone provides any convinving arguments, why there should be any. And the old Bitcoiners sure discuss like angry former authorities, not willing to pass the cepter. Just from how it sounds. Like "what are you even doing here? It´s a bitcoin forum"... Maybe I should consider buying some nxt thank you for this post.. makes the battle all worth while! it would certainly be wise to check it out |
|
|
|
Well said visual.. These types of threads only reassure me that 2.0 platforms are a very real serious threat to bitcoin.. How many scams have their been around the alt section? And how many threads made by hero members and also mainly populated by hero/legendary members spreading fud has there been? It's embarrassing to see once reputable bitcoiners lower themselves to scrapping the barrel for what ever FUD they can come up with!
You can call them 2.0 platforms, but you can't call them Bitcoin 2.0 platforms because you are not using the Bitcoin blockchain. Again, this is a Bitcoin forum. Why are you even here? did I call it bitcoin 2.0? Because nxt is a 2.0 platform. It is the second generation of blockchain technology. If this is a bitcoin forum why are people discussing coins other than bitcoin here? Should you all not be busy discussing bitcoin instead of propagating fud about other coins? |
|
|
|
|
Well said visual.. These types of threads only reassure me that 2.0 platforms are a very real serious threat to bitcoin.. How many scams have their been around the alt section? And how many threads made by hero members and also mainly populated by hero/legendary members spreading fud has there been? It's embarrassing to see once reputable bitcoiners lower themselves to scrapping the barrel for what ever FUD they can come up with!
|
|
|
|
so if every major online and street retail outlet globally suddenly accepted nxt for payment and a few counties allowed citizens to pay their taxes in nxt (or their own national currency) and a few multibillion dollar companies ipo'ed on the asset exchange it would still have a market cap lower than bitcoin simply because there was zero production cost? you must be mad..
All of these scenarios won't happen if the coin cost nothing to make. It seems that fiat money also cost nothing to make and every merchant and whole financial system is using this transaction medium, but there is a hidden cost: You must pass a law to make fiat money the legal tender, thus forcing people to use it, what is the cost to make that law? Try to make a law to make NXT the legal tender and see how much that will cost you From end user's perspective, why should I exchange my valuable goods/services with a coin that cost nothing to make? Am I so mad to become the slave of those coin makers? I should join them to make the coin instead your grasping at straws to try and make your argument stand. Your completely disregarding supply and demand, utility and every valid argument made so far. The scenarios I mentioned could very well happen but not over night. From end users perspective, would the end Joe soap user even know the difference between pos and pow? No they most likely wouldn't. Your applying an argument that may work for pm's, to a context that it can't possibly apply to here.. Overstock are considering listing shares on an asset exchange and it could do it on nxt, and other companies could follow suit.. And that could set in motion the scenario I mentioned. I never said anything about it being mandatory to pay taxes in nxt ether. At the end of the day, your theory doesn't hold water. If it did then pos coins would never have any value what so ever and never would. You cannot say it doesn't apply at a low marketcap(not that 40m is low,) and say it does at a higher cap? When does your theory start to apply? Can you provide any mathematical formula to back up your theory? Would nxt just hit 200m market cap and everyone would just think oh wait it cost nothing to produce I better sell? I'm sorry for being rude but your ether talking out your bias ass to protect your vested interests, just repeating what all the other pow fanbois are saying or you know your wrong and are not willing to admit or you just have no clue what your talking about. All of the above make you look like an idiot. Good day. Ps. Your argument would stand if it was possible to continue making a coin for free, I mean minting new coins in an existing system, but the total coins are minted and no more can be minted after that, thus rendering your argument invalid. |
|
|
|
Gold also can not be converted back to the energy that were used to mine it. And gold's price are mostly decided by those energy (manufacturing cost)
Your comparison makes no sense. Gold has a history of 5000 years of being valued by people, has unique features and cannot be cloned. Bitcoin has a history of 5 years and can be cloned and has been cloned/improved upon, including the mining network - just invent a different algo, that sha256 ASICs cannot hijack and voila! Or even introduce a PoS crypto. 5 years is not enough of a history to make it universally valued and accepted by people, it's even ridiculous to talk about comparing it with gold. Silver and copper also has a history of of being used as currency, and their value also established from the manufacturing cost. You can create a new algo and start an alt-coin, but you have to invest equal amount of chips/energy in order to bring the manufacturing cost close to what bitcoins stands today, thus bring its market capital close to bitcoin Although gold has a fixed total supply on earth, human has only digged out a very small percentage of gold near the surface of the earth, now many deep gold mines are opening up in China, who knows what the market price will be in the coming years, anyway it can not be consumed easily so if every major online and street retail outlet globally suddenly accepted nxt for payment and a few counties allowed citizens to pay their taxes in nxt (or their own national currency) and a few multibillion dollar companies ipo'ed on the asset exchange it would still have a market cap lower than bitcoin simply because there was zero production cost? you must be mad.. |
|
|
|
Did someone mention that PoW coins are backed by energy it took to create them?
Well, you guys should study history of money and definitions better.
'Backing currency with something' means you can convert the currency back to a pre-determined amount of the underlying asset, that's why it's called 'backing'. You can't convert Bitcoins or any other PoW currency to a pre-determined amount of energy any better than you can convert a PoS coin. The only value a coin has is utility value, which is what it can be used for. The more functions the coin has, the higher the utility value, and that's how the price is discovered on the market. The argument of 'PoW is backed by energy' doesn't hold water.
Gold also can not be converted back to the energy that were used to mine it. And gold's price are mostly decided by those energy (manufacturing cost) It does not matter you use gold or use some paper(usd) or use a string of text to work as currency. The purpose of all currency is to act as a unit of value, so that they can be used to purchase goods/services with corresponding value So where is the currency's value comes from? It is usually the manufacturing cost. If one ounce of gold cost only $10 to mine, can you sell it at a market price of $1200? When people produce goods/services and get paid with the currency, the value of the currency is corresponding to their work, so it feels very fair and natural that everyone must work to get money, including those who produce money, all the value creation process must be equal (Fiat money is an exception, it has value because all the people are forced to use it at its face value, but its value is based on a consensus) this is a pointless argument.. all nxt coins were produced for free.. yet it has 5th? highest marketcap.. this proves that zero production cost DOES NOT mean that it has no value/price. this is a perfect example of cost free production + limited supply + utility + demand = value. |
|
|
|
the only thing holding bitcoin up as top dog right now and for probably a good while longer is its immense network effect which it has from a very long 4-5 year lead on all alts.. whether you like it not, bitcoin will fall just like bebo. and whether you like it or not, a technically more advanced and far more innovate platform is going to pick up where bitcoin left off and take over the globe in a blaze of glory like no other tech has seen before, and its going to be spectacular. ps.. vested interests are a BITCH  Innovation is great, but on the other hand you also need stability and backwards compatibility if you want the platform to succeed in the long run. If every few years a new coin takes over the world in a manner that devalues the vested interests in the previous coin then people would pretty much consider cryptocurrencies as flash-in-the-pan bullshit, only good for short term speculation at most. Of course, nobody really can control what happens. For me personally, the key feature that I am looking for is inflation-protected long term store of wealth. If the cryptocurrency scene becomes too dynamic such that it is unable to offer me this then I will pretty much leave, as would many others. As for switching to PoS, that would definitely be destabilizing to Bitcoin and you will risk alienating some of the current userbase. It would certainly move the flow of wealth away from the hardware manufacturers and utility companies, but it may not have the desired effect on BTC price that the OP is hoping for. i never said that a new coin would take over every couple of years.. most likely it will only be one that is so much more innovative than the rest that it out strips btc in a couple years and then eventually dominates the global financial system. this platform would be backwards compatible and a lot more so that bitcoin is. hell bitcoin doesnt need to be backwards compatible because its been pretty much set in stone the last 5 years. that is why i said only 2-3 platforms stand any chance at all of surpassing bitcoin. and most likely you are correct that if a pos coin displaces bitcoin many people from the current userbase will be lost. but you must bare in mind that the current userbase is so tiny. if a new far more innovative coin does displace bitcoin it could very well pick up a whole new base of users that were not previously in crypto. perhaps it may not even be PoS but a newer even more innovative platform with a newer more innovative consensus algo, im not arguing that PoS will be the platform that does this as it most likely wont be. there are still flaws in PoS that need to be fixed and currently i only see one new (unlaunched) platform that is actually making major fixes. the bebo v facebook argument comes back here again.. bebo, for a while, dominated the userbase at the time in the social network arena, but then facebook came along. how many people that use facebook today ever used bebo? i didnt and now i use facebook. many many people swapped from bebo to facebook, bebo collapsed and with the rise of facebook, the second generation of social networks if you like, social networks hit the mainstream like no one could have foreseen. for sure many people that used bebo were alienated and bebo collapsed, but social networks grew far far stronger because of the "second generation" of social networks and now people dont give two shits about the one that pretty much kicked this all off. bitcoin could very well be the bebo of crypto. it only has a user base of 1-2 million people as far as i know. 20k in the uk. far less where i live. PoS could very well be the myspace(bigger than bebo but far smaller than facebook) and there could very well be a new coin that is far more innovative and powerful than PoS that turns out to be the facebook of the crypto world. cryptocurrencies are evolving at an astonishing rate.. way faster than any other technology. each major step in the evolution is ironing out the major flaws of the last. PoW's major flaws have mostly been fixed by PoS but in turn PoS has brought about a whole new generation of Flaws aswell as a new generation of tech. there is a new algo that i wont mention that seems like it is going to be the next major step in the evolution of cryptographic currencies that will fix the new flaws of PoS and any remaining flaws of PoW that were brought forward. id like a question answered if you or anyone can.. name one technology with multiple generations where the 1st generation created is still the most widely used? i mean phones, tv's mp3's electronics or anyother face paced technology? how many people still use basic phones that only call and txt which is what bitcoin would be if it was a mobile phone. and how many people use smart phones, which is what the 2.0 currencies would be if they were phones? once you compare crypto technology to other innovative and disruptive technologies it is very simple to see where all this is going. you might also say well basic phones went main stream long before smart phones took over and you would be correct, but you must also take into account the speed of development of the telecoms v crypto technology. crypto is evolving and innovating way way faster than phones ever could have so the first generation of crypto may not even have long enough to gain wide spread main stream adoption before the 2.0 platform takes over. with only 1-2 million people estimated to be actually using bitcoin, bitcoin is a far cry from mainstream. so i agree that if bitcoin is displaced many users will be lost, but while displacing the few who refuse to adapt to the ever changing crypto landscape we may very well gain a few orders of magnitudes more users in the process of displacing bitcoin and for a long time after displacing bitcoin. i have already watched this happening in real time. i have watched and been involved in a business that uses the new tech of a 2.0 platform at its core and guess what.. new users who never used bitcoin, started using the 2.0 platform as a result of the new tech brought about by the 2.0(happens to be PoS) platform. for every person that these 2.0 platforms displace while displacing bitcoin itself, many more users will join. just like bebo and facebook. times are changing rapidly. for a long time many legendary/hero members were so far ahead of the curve that they could sit pretty and be proud of being ahead of the curve. but in their complacency in the current status quo and complacency in the innovative yet stagnating PoW technology many have fallen behind the rapidly advancing tech and the curve has quickly caught up to them with out them even noticing. new people with open minds are seeing this curve and jumping ahead of it long before many "early crypto people/PoW heads" realise they are even behind the curve. the reason for this delayed realization is most certainly due to complacency in their current situation(or denial/vested interests blinding them etc) the exact same way that investing juggernauts are complacent in old school investments and fail to see the advantages and potential of crypto. ps. how many accounts bellow hero or senior are arguing the case that so many hero/legendary members are arguing? the only people i see fighting the anti-altcoin corner are those who have been in bitcoin a very long time and are therefore emotionally attached to their bitcoins, have vested interests, or are complacent in their current situation and therefore intentionally cover their eyes and ears anytime it is mentioned that, god forbid, another platform surpasses bitcoin that isnt PoW. people fighting that corner were once or maybe still are the majority. but this is also changing, prompting far far more prominent and public trusted people to openly attack PoS. the smarter of the bunch are seeing the curve move ahead of them but cannot openly support the change as it would go against their interests so instead they attack that that pushes the curve further forward in a futile attempt to prevent the progression of the curve. everyone should step back, take a look around with open eyes and an open mind and then the truth might be seen. the curve is moving and its moving fast. burying of heads will not stop the rapid progressing that is leaving so many hero/legendary forlks behind with their heads in the ground |
|
|
|
how many bitcoin clones are there? has it affected the price of bitcoin what so ever? yet there are thousands of bitcoin clones and alt coins in general.. its a myth that alt coins dilute the value of the mother coin.
The PoW altcoin does not dilute the value of the lead coin, just because it is PoW based: You can easily copy the source code, but there is no way to copy the hash power, people already invested huge amount of real valuable resources to establish an enough large hash power. Since resources are limited, the miners will most possibly assign the resources to the most strong and mature coin In a PoS system, the lead coin can still have the first mover advantage, but the late comers can create and mine more clones of it without too much resource, but you really can not tell the difference between them and why one of them worth more than the other. For PoW coin it is very easy to tell: The mining cost roughly decide one coin's value your argument is made on the idea that all proof of work coins are of the same source code and have the same features.. so you can most certainly tell the difference.. the value of say nxt does not fall because 100 new clones of blackcoin came out..(not that they are of the same source). the value of these coins is derived from the functions and features they provide and also to a very large extent the network effect they command. perhaps only among the straight clones of coin x you have a fair point.. but coin x would not be included in the equation. coin x actually benefits from the many clones because anyone who finds out about the clone would soon enough discover the mother coin leading to further adoption of the mother coin.. look how many people discovered bitcoin because of doge. you are basing your argument outside of the context of the 2.0 landscape in order for your argument to work. also, imo the more coins that are created the better.. recently a trend has taken off where straight clones fail.. now it is also going the route that even coins written from scratch are failing very early on.. and the reason isnt that they are not innovating, it is that they are not innovating enough. the heat is rising in the altcoin race.. and there are only 2-3 main competitors that have any worth while odds of winning while the others are just filler.. people are starting to see that for a coin to succeed short, medium and long term it must be able to compete with the most innovative of platforms other wise people make a quick buck off the lesser coin in order to build their holdings in the platform they deem as the most likely to succeed and therefore strengthening the grater platform. those who cannot innovate enough, fall severely behind the pack and struggle to gain ground in any meaningful way. this is what negates your argument that a PoS platforms value can be depleted due to "clones" and the low cost of production. if facebook released their source code and 1000000000 clones appeared that were exactly the same.. would anyone use anything other than the original? no, because that is what everyone is using and therefore gains value from the network effect it commands. just because 1000000 clones of facebook come out, it doesnt mean people become confused about what one to use or what its worth. but the network effect cannot protect something forever if something far superior comes along.. it will for a while but eventually it will be surpassed by the superior tech. look at bebo. it was the first social media to bring social media into mainstream as far as i know.. atleast it was where i live. it lasted a couple years value shot way up but then facebook, the younger better platform can along. it took a while for it to challenge bebo, but by the time it was seen as a genuine threat it was far too late to do anything about it. it was a better more innovative platform long before bebo fell to its knees. bebo could not innovate enough in a short enough time period and therefore facebook stormed the social network arena in a blaze of fire and bebo collapsed, and only remains today as a legacy of social networks. the only thing holding bitcoin up as top dog right now and for probably a good while longer is its immense network effect which it has from a very long 4-5 year lead on all alts.. whether you like it not, bitcoin will fall just like bebo. and whether you like it or not, a technically more advanced and far more innovate platform is going to pick up where bitcoin left off and take over the globe in a blaze of glory like no other tech has seen before, and its going to be spectacular. ps.. vested interests are a BITCH |
|
|
|
Actually the mining cost of the whole network is what backs bitcoin's value. Since digital currency is not backed by any government or physical assets, the only thing that can baseline its value is the cost, no cost = no value. I can not think of anything that has value without a cost
Of course the cost means the lowest possible cost, which is already very energy efficient today. If you do those hashes using CPU you will cost millions of times more electricity
water... water has value and is free.. depending on where you live of course.. are you charged to breath the air you breath? what value would you put on the air you breath? if suddenly there was a 10k dollar valuation put on the air you breath and you knew you wouldnt get the air if you didnt pay would you pay it if you had the money? what if it was 100k.. would you pay if you had the money? 1 million if you had the money? but it cost nothing to produce of course you wouldnt right? you would rather die than pay money for something that cost nothing to produce right? does the air we breath have a cost to produce? no.. obviously if we keep using up natural resources it could incur a cost to produce in the future.. but as it stands it costs nothing to produce, yet is probably the most valuable thing on the planet. bare in mind value and price are not the same. if governments thought they had half a chance of charging for the air we breath dont you think they would.. havnt most govs privatised water and started charging everyone for that? if something has a lot of value.. people will pay for it.. UNLESS.. there is an "unlimited"(enough to go around for a very long time) supply. proof of stake currencies are a perfect example staring you straight in the face. currently how many proof of stake coins in the top twenty cost ZERO in resources to produce and run(excluding living expenses of the dev)? and do these coins that cost nothing to produce and run have value? yes because they have value, there is NOT an unlimited supply and therefore people are willing to pay for them. saying currencies need a cost to produce in order to have value is completely false. in short.. " no cost = no value" is totally incorrect. Water or air, if you can get for free, then it has no value, you mixed utility with value. Value is only decided by supply and demand. Of course you can artificially limit the supply and lift its price for a while, but that will never last long, since the competitors with low cost supply will quickly bring down the price This is the same for POS coin, if a low-cost-coin can command a high value, there will be many people creating such low-cost-coins to join the competition, thus the value will be quickly brought down later. However, if high-cost-coin have high value, no one will join the competition without carefully calculate their risk first I think there will be competition for "high cost" coins, just not as much. If a high cost coin were to be made the the creators can still earn some amount off of it (you are correct in saying there are risks in doing this). I also think you hit it dead on regarding "no cost" coins aka PoS as if it costs nothing to create then there is no reason why people would not create more of them until the total value is diluted to near zero. how many bitcoin clones are there? has it affected the price of bitcoin what so ever? yet there are thousands of bitcoin clones and alt coins in general.. its a myth that alt coins dilute the value of the mother coin. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
