what mining centralization?  |
|
|
|
remember back when a bunch of us were discussing appcoins and how i said that unless appcoin issuance was directly tied to the % equity granted in the app it wouldn't make sense? well, it looks like Patrick Byrnes and CP are going to do this right. this could get interesting. let's wish them luck: "In more Bitcoin-esque terms, crypto-equity is a way to distribute company equity shares in “coins.” It entitles the owner to an “equal amount of equity percentage in the company.”http://cointelegraph.com/news/113346/patrick-byrne-on-the-upcoming-crypto-stock-market-its-a-threat-to-the-oligarchy |
|
|
|
This is the way to go at the current level of adoption. Local companies in different countries partner with each other, no need to establish a supernational umbrella company. Relatively low risk. The two sides can be smaller, in case the dominators come in and destroy the business. http://www.coindesk.com/bitspark-rolls-remittance-service-indonesia/"The process allows customers to deposit and withdraw cash, without touching bitcoin, while Bitspark and Artabit transact in the cryptocurrency. In the Philippines, Bitspark works with bitcoin exchange Rebit." Yeah, that really is bullish as hell. Great stuff going on in that corridor of the world. Agree. Finally people seem to be wising up to the fact that using Bitcoin for the masses to touch (try to) and hold (try to) and use for buying trinkets is the worst idea ever. People who have a half a clue as to what they are doing using Bitcoin as and reserve and proxy for more encumbered currencies is where the sustainable value comes from. That is, leveraging it's advantages over gold. blah, blah, blah. your moods are as fickle as the wind. my guess is you sense a bottom --> time to take back all the negative bullshit
Now all we need is sidechains to have the best of both worlds. The herds will have the same levels of security without paying usurious rates to a middle-man (and being flat out ripped of by him half the time) and the solution won't be swamped and sunk under the weight of a sea of a billion retards.
we've already explained to you a hundred times how these SC's can't possibly be AS secure as the MC unless they magically somehow attract 100% MM which is a pipedream by my estimation. especially for anything more than probably 2 SC's. that assumption ignores miners who might actually NOT want SC's to succeed or might want to attack them due to the easy pickings with no consequences to their seed corn MC mining. |
|
|
|
This part is bullshit: "Under this backdrop, it is easy to see why the USD is surging as the US has stopped QE and indicated a rate hike at some point this year. The US is perceived to have the strongest economy in the world." Everyone seems to forget the Fed just finished around $4T in QE over 6 years. CB's simply do a Round Robin when it comes to QE which creates am artificial "stability" in cross rate, when in fact, they're all devaluing at different intervals. This is why they are all so worried about Bitcoin and rightfully so. |
|
|
|
Got half my gold short position back on yesterday at 1307 or 6 equivalent for DZZ.
Congrats on a successful trade. Way too early for that conclusion. Besides I still need to get the other half on  Most tops and bottoms get retested so i wasn't too upset missing the first test of 1307. The real question is whether we'll get a longer term retest. And then I'll put the other half on. |
|
|
|
|
Inca, how about an updated rich list?
|
|
|
|
if they do not fuck it up it is quite big news.
one of the most legimate critiques on bitcoin is the bottleneck problem, e.g. the point where the system interoperates with the fiat world.
this was up to this point valid, because you had to trust exchanges, which were run at best in a grey area of jurisdiction. these exchanges were almost solely responsible for the external price determination of bitcoin.
if they manage to reduce this problem they really strengthen the ecosystem of bitcoin.
Dead on man. Especially being a well funded New York exchange. Let's hope they have lock down security. |
|
|
|
|
Got half my gold short position back on yesterday at 1307 or 6 equivalent for DZZ.
|
|
|
|
This is the way to go at the current level of adoption. Local companies in different countries partner with each other, no need to establish a supernational umbrella company. Relatively low risk. The two sides can be smaller, in case the dominators come in and destroy the business. http://www.coindesk.com/bitspark-rolls-remittance-service-indonesia/"The process allows customers to deposit and withdraw cash, without touching bitcoin, while Bitspark and Artabit transact in the cryptocurrency. In the Philippines, Bitspark works with bitcoin exchange Rebit." Yeah, that really is bullish as hell. Great stuff going on in that corridor of the world. |
|
|
|
Contains a precious quote: Bitcoin needs millions, and then billions, of users who demand better money. The demand for Bitcoin must be strong enough that they will break the law if that’s what it takes to obtain it.
my favorite too |
|
|
|
I suppose they see no point in sinking more money in half-measures. Especially when a thorough solution is in sight.
next failure coming; ApplePay. Apple is not Amazon ... more plausible would be for their engineers to take care of the ApplePay UI with bitcoin under the hood. Any problems with that? no, theoretically not. shouldn't be too complicated at all. the question, will they do that, especially before they scrap the project. who knows. |
|
|
|
actually, i'm quite pissed that i missed the chance to re-short gold @ 1307 this morning. it came right up to my target of several months ago. got a limit order up right now that i hope gets hit. c'mon gold, c'mon. |
|
|
|
I suppose they see no point in sinking more money in half-measures. Especially when a thorough solution is in sight.
next failure coming; ApplePay. |
|
|
|
lol. I'd like to know his definitions of 'hyperinflation' and 'limited supply'. One of them must be weird... maybe he's talking about price inflation? Yes he was. Even so, it is in a sense money supply inflation but only relative to the equilibrium money supply with a lower assumed velocity. If the velocity increases then all else being equal to maintain constant prices you would need the money supply to decrease. it depends. if the fundamentals are good and the market psychology is positive, increasing usage aka velocity, may be interpreted as a good thing or as a concept "catching on". market participants in that scenario would be encouraged to bid up prices to get in on the action. |
|
|
|
What exactly does "transparency to pricing" mean?
All Your Bitcoin Are Belong To Banksters good luck for them putting their hands on my private keys. They don't want yours. They already got their hands on hundreds of thousands of cheap coins during the last month. We know what comes next. yes we do |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
