I was about to tell him the same thing, how reliable can the assurance of a pseudonymous guy be in such matters? One pseudonymous guy vouching for someone who may or may not be who he says he is. Too much trust.

I told them, since there is doubt, the situation won't be proven with links. What's so difficult finding the number of dan and calling to see if he is the actual one? Oh god, why did I ever ask this - they were like "oh you are invading the privacy" and shit... W T F... like if there is a yellow pages entry one can find, what privacy? It's all public. You call, you ask hi, are you dan? is that your coin? if he says yes, he is the real man. If not, then the guy posting is an ID scammer on top of the rest. The real one would like to know that for sure. There's no reason debating this for so long on whether he is who he is or not. Links upon links prove nothing. A phone call (to a phone he himself has publicly listed in some catalog or directory) would do the job - or as a member said in there, if he controls his linkedin profile than just a change of letters in some details of the resume or personal info would convince anyone and that's the end of it. Not even a phonecall needed.

If you were into numismatics you'd understand the meaning of mintage and scarcity. There is a reason why a 1933 double eagle costs 7 million dollars: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1933_double_eagle

Scarcity.

There is a reason why 42 costs like 20 BTC. Scarcity & ratios.

You might not understand the scarcity factor but A LOT of people do understand it and invest insane amounts of money to acquire scarcity.

There is no "correct" or "wrong" rationality, it's just what different people value. For you a 1933 double eagle might be more like 1 oz of gold that is scrap metal - just like a 1932/31/30/29 etc. For another it is worth 7.5mn dollars. That's just how it goes.

Can't somebody find the phone of Dan and call him to verify if he is or he isn't the Dan (or "Dan") posting in here? How hard can it be?

Links are good, but first person communication is better for these matters.

Gold above ground: 180k tons
BTCs in circulation: ~12m (minus the lost ones)

Average ratio of gold per BTC = 15kg of gold for 1 BTC

By the same ratio, 1 BTC = 15kg of gold (in terms of scarcity) = 600k USD+ in terms of value per coin.

When you hear "wow, BTC overtook gold in price, this is outrageous" remember they are only talking about how BTC is more expensive than just 31.1grams of gold (troy ounce), when there are like 5.5 BILLION ounces above ground.

So 12mn BTCs vs 5.5 BILLION ounces of gold, yes, well, the BTCs are rarer, even as numismatics. It's the first trustless digital currency with mass appeal with much historic significance, like the first ancient coins out of gold, iron, silver etc.

Even if the currency for transaction is taken out of the equation, just the numismatics aspect can make them quite scarce - if only they had an appealing physical counterpart  / exceptional design (preferably at high relief). And I would rather have it in gold or platinum, sold at a low premium.

A mint could do that and have, say, 1 oz coins of precious metal PLUS one btc on them in physical form... and then sell them for like 1oz gold price + 2-5% minting price + BTC price at the time of sell + 10% margin for profit. If people go for excessive profit in this project, operation "distribute BTC" will fail. The point is to get a combined precious metal + bitcoin worth + rarity at a low premium.

Collectors and BTC enthusiasts will sweep them up big time, reducing liquidity and increasing BTC price - so it's a win-win, unless the feds want to raid a mint or something and take both gold + btcs

Even goldbugs and silverbugs who are "converts" to the BTC camp (and like both BTC + PMs) may pick some up. This market is producing millions of ounces in 1 oz rounds every year. If people got a few BTCs with these, it'd be epic.

Platinum coins should be 0.5 / 1 / 2 / 5oz per coin and have 0.5 / 1 / 2 / 5 BTCs loaded.
Gold coins should be 0.5 / 1 / 2 / 5 oz per coin and have 0.5 / 1 / 2 / 5 BTCs loaded.
Silver coins should be 1oz / 5oz and have 0.02 / 0.1  per coin.

Cryptsy whale buyer wants 172 BTC worth of DRK at 0.0135.

Anyone want to dump him?

The people are doing the pump or the whale pumpers? Btw, it's 27% up from 0.011 to 0.014 in a couple of hours. That's +8-9mn USD in terms of marketcap - which is more than what XC has as a coin. Bigger coins move in slower swings precisely due to the large market cap fluctuations. To get a small coin from 100k usd market cap to a million, that's easy. To get bitcoin from 7bn to 70bn, well... that's not easy

Thanks for the update

Nice, knowing the problem is halfway to resolving it. I guess it could be simulated on testnet to see if it can be adequate reason for causing a fork. If it's not, there must be something else. If that's the fault => fix the masternode update => get payments working.

Btw, the votes getting delayed at the start have anything to do with this?

What if the coin running the Main Ledger has a problem? Is it wrong to have resilience through diversification of options? Even in financial terms, there is the hedging necessity of alts.

Use wallet version ending in .11.

I'm on it.

If "rich" hoard a coin and there is more scarcity on the market, price goes up and the lack of # of coins is compensated by increased value per coin.

Isn't this what's happening with gold?

Above ground reserves of gold are ~180ktons. Above ground reserves of silver are 5 times that. In terms of mining, the ratio is nearly 1:9 (1kg gold for 9kg of silver). Yet gold is 60x in price. Why? Historically it was near 1:10 to 1:19.

The reason for the price today is because gold has been effectively taken out of circulation (as money), thus the Elite can hoard it. Their massive hoarding* is what actually allows the average person to hold a gram of gold in their hands and have it cost 30 euro instead of 5 euro (if the 1:60 ratio of gold/silver was adjusted to 1:10 which is the scarcity in nature).

* price manipulation is not factored, because both gold and silver are suppressed.

Another one that I hear often is this: Inflation is necessary for the broader economy blah blah blah and that deflation is bad blah blah blah - so deflationary currencies create depression through hoarding.

That's OK as a perspective but it can only be applied on the level of a national currency and how it dominates the affairs of an economy. There is no monopoly of currencies and as such what one currency does, cannot affect the necessary expansion of the monetary supply in terms of fiat. In other words countries increase their fiat supply everyday, and stuff like gold or bitcoin add further inflation - although in relative terms the later (gold, bitcoins) are better store of values because they are less debased. Gold is debased by 1.3% per year while Bitcoins are substantially more than that.

If a crypto is being debased faster than fiat, there is simply no reason to hold that crypto unless there is massive demand that compensates.


It's not price obsession or an issue of price per coin. It's debasement. Even 42 started at like 400-500 BTC or something per coin and is now 16 BTC per coin.

What matters for the individual is that he can put his money on a coin and know that it won't tank, or that the price of electricity that he is paying today to mine it can be recovered by holding. If the price is to go down, this creates pressure for the miner to sell. But miners are the least part of the equilibrium since hashrate and difficulty are adjusted depending their costs.

That's easy to find out: Issue a good bounty and if it's possible the GPU miner will be made.

The bounty specs would be like: "We want a gpu miner for MRO. The bounty is XXXX MROs. Devs must declare their interest, their hardware targeting (opencl or cuda) and an estimated time schedule for completion. In case of two varying implementations (one nvidia, one amd) both developers will get the reward (so the bounty fund doubles). In case of two or more competing implementations on the same architecture, and supposing the time schedule for delivery is pretty close between them, the faster implementation will be paid the bounty - so optimization is essential. The code must be open source."

This will disallow selfish GPU miners to mine MRO with privately owned software.

Would it be a stretch to assume hardware (cpus, mobos/bios'es, phones etc) created post-2013 will be rooted specifically for reporting / tracking / spying cryptocurrency use, and that a safer way to use cryptos would be to use older hardware (prior to crypto-boom)?

Cool story bro.

+20% payment = 2 masternodes

That's not accurate. The rate for DRKs was 100.000 DRKs for 2.5 BTC for ~15 days straight since launch plus the first days in the exchanges (ccex opened at 0.00001 - 0.00002).

The whole instamine of 1.7m was priced at 25 to 42.5 BTC (with then rates) for two weeks.

As cheap as XC was, (I got in at 0.00007 and out at 0.004+) there was simply no comparison, and the price spike was much quicker for people to get in. And of course the POW monetary base was instamined at 100% (XC), not a fraction of it - because that's the nature of POW/POS hybrids.

With a generous bounty anything is possible. DRK gave 3.5k DRK bounty to get sph-sgminer (which was then used as the basis for all other coins with overlapping hashes, and later extended to new hashes as well).

WTF ahahah...