no news?
stagnant situation i guess
I don’t see any old coins moving. Everyone waiting for the bitcoin breakout. Looks like it’s gonna start this winter cause it keeps making higher highs ($13,700 now). At ~$20,000 the media will take over and the muppets will FOMO in. And with btc heading to $50k a lot of money will be aiming for way cheaper solid older projects. We should see the biggest Crypto run ever next year. But first the titanic btc has to speed up toward that glacier.  Hopefully money will then rotate to old coins cause we never had our big runs. Then we get real cash and big cash means big devs and big marketing and ixc finally doing what it has been trying to do for nearly a decade. We’ll see how it plays out, but it’s hard to believe all these years money only chased hyped garbage coins and ICO’s and ignored some really honest solid projects with mass potential. That’s human nature I suppose. History repeats itself and what you mentioned may be a path. However, if FOMO occurs, all old projects need a structure to support the demand. Is Ixcoin ready? I believe so but for how long? What limit does Ixcoin support? |
|
|
|
|
The concept seems interesting and must be discussed to find a possible application. The current big problem is the application and I hope that this project will find the necessary way to show this great theory that we found in the Whitepaper.
|
|
|
|
This is for bounty managers who are working on projects who are launching ICO and IEO why not giving them red tag for not doing escrow and make this a must for bounty managers, we have seen so many complaints about project that's been locking, delaying and not distributing the bounty, even if you are not a DT you can create a tag or a flag and let the community support, it's time that something like this happen to protect the community of bounty hunters.
I fully agree with this position but we cannot generalize, there are many managers with excellent quality and ethics in their work. In my opinion, some rules should be taken a little more seriously. |
|
|
|
|
In my opinion Ethereum needs to stagnate its price without relying on Bitcoin and that means that any single value can generate a future margin for Ethereum. However and with another point of view anything can happen in cryto but for a value of $10k or $12k to appear needs new updates or some promising news.
|
|
|
|
|
In practical terms, PoS are intended to reward long-term holders but this affects the current price and creates some difficulty for new investors. When we buy at a certain high price, there is the possibility that someone who has masternode to dump in the market causing prices to fall, making trust difficult. In my opinion there are two paths: Mass adoption of the project or waiting to finish the distribution of the PoS.
|
|
|
|
|
We look for new projects for the same reason of analysis and conclusion of the previous projects but how so? That's right and what we really look for is comfort and profit in continuity just like Bitcoin and other projects recognized in the market. Maybe, if we change the style of searching, we can change the way we profit.
It's worth reflecting.
|
|
|
|
|
The current bounty system hasn't changed much since a few years ago on the forum and the only difference is the amount allocated. We have nothing to complain about because it's not a mandatory job but an opportunity to earn money and experience blockchain technology. However, each manager has their own style of work and we must know it before joining any campaign.
|
|
|
|
|
The technological concept is interesting because it's a new style of technology that can improve the daily life and the safety of the project. However, the theory is excellent and that practically few projects are starting to take off the paper and put into practice and perhaps because of the high in this type of subject, the developers push this type of technology even more improving the cryto ecosystem. I will wait until the end of 2020 to get a broader view on DeFi.
|
|
|
|
|
Any project that has a great team and a good direction can be successful in 2021 even because this year of 2020 was only for planning and readjustments. Returning to the theme if a project doesn't have a solid structure and a continuity plan, markenting can only help at the beginning to leverage sales but it won't last long because the market needs new concepts.
All projects are likely to be large in 2021.
|
|
|
|
|
I found the site interesting and with its information and another interesting point is how the tracking occurs keeping the short and long average prices. The question is can we trust? I believe so because the same tracking mechanism is the same as for the ranking sites. Finally, it's a good site to research and it's worth remembering that it's not an advertisement but a personal analysis.
|
|
|
|
|
We know that there is currently a trade rivalry between the United States and China and that it affects virtually all global trade. So with the possibility of decentralized VPN the crypto world can be the alternative improvement for this demand and it can be the best time.
|
|
|
|
|
We are in the speculative field and part of the optimism and this is good to generate a promising demand for the near future, but we know from the experiences that the market hardly grows exponentially and grows only linearly(there are variations). However, today's projects can become obsolete or gain a new motor gear and everything will depend on the current moment.
|
|
|
|
It's very strange to think that for a cryptocurrency to be successful it needs to suffer a hackers attack and looking back to the past, major projects have suffered this type of attack. The system security vulnerability is the main gateway and why don't developers focus on security? The question is how to invest in a project with a security breach?
Wrong, Bitcoin has one time was vulnerable to 51% attack, but the mining pool didn't take advantage of it. It really depends on how miners are security ETC's network, but it seems that the percentage of bad miners is obviously greater because they were able to put this off again in a week. And remember that ETC is just a fork coin, so it is really vulnerable just like the other forks on Bitcoin. Investors doesn't care, as long as they are making money, they will simply get inside and then exited when they have a good returns. So we are in a historical discussion because we are observing that a project depends completely on miners? From an energy point of view this is correct but does it affect the point of view of security? It's showing that yes. As I mentioned in the comment above, it's a complex topic to be analyzed because we must analyze the chain completely and it has been a while since I observed this type of situation that it seems to be a pattern that for all successful projects is under attack. From an economic point of view I agree with you. |
|
|
|
It's very strange to think that for a cryptocurrency to be successful it needs to suffer a hackers attack and looking back to the past, major projects have suffered this type of attack. The system security vulnerability is the main gateway and why don't developers focus on security? The question is how to invest in a project with a security breach?
You misunderstand the nature of 51% attack, it's not a security bug, it's how decentralized coins operate. They need to grow big enough to reduce the risk of 51% to a minimum, and those that don't grow can be considered shitcoins just because they are vulnerable to 51% attack. By having many coins with the same alrorithm, a natural selection will take place, because the equipment of the majority coin can be used to attack the smaller coins. This is what happened with ETH Classic and Ethereum, as Ethereum holds nearly all ETHash hashpower. I'ts not a security bug? I fully understand your point of view but we must separate the technical point of view and the point of view for application. In this case we have two options that would be an error or a natural historical fault that always damages the project. The theory is complex and this should be considered a security bug because how will the project value with the possibility of an attack? I just analyze the story. |
|
|
|
|
The situation was strange and there is a tendency for the project to fail, but apparently prices are stagnating in the face of such a situation. However, if ETC can resist this situation, the price may go up due to the resistance and the development of security, but lately I'm commenting on and I see nothing of a solution.
|
|
|
|
|
It's very strange to think that for a cryptocurrency to be successful it needs to suffer a hackers attack and looking back to the past, major projects have suffered this type of attack. The system security vulnerability is the main gateway and why don't developers focus on security? The question is how to invest in a project with a security breach?
|
|
|
|
|
The analysis was simple and solid and shows practically the last terms of the market, but the question we should ask ourselves is whether this adds anything or just shows how many other projects depend on Bitcoin's market value. This theme is the most discussed recently and we see different comments and opinions but we always arrive at the same result.
What would be of altcoins without Bitcoin?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
