I tried both links but both are dead  You went to a 7 year old scam site and expected it to still be working? |
|
|
|
An ASIC is simply a chip designed for a specific purpose. There is no reason why an ASIC can't be designed to be good at memory access.
Accessing memory bus is already optimized in cpu/gpu tech and it does not make sense for a designer/manufacturer to claim such a thing: An asic optimized for memory bus access! ... I think he was just arguing semantics more than anything, just the definition of asic as application specific integrated circuit. It is a tiring and unproductive argument though. Technically I could make an asic for Yescrypt by removing usb ports and GPU ports and shrinking the board, maximizing copper for heat dissipation for 100% max CPU usage, etc. The point is though it would still be a functioning computer, just designed for CPU mining. So technically it would be an asic but not an asic by any real metric. So basically ASIC just needs to be defined more closely to its real world form, say that to be defined as an asic, it must achieve at least an order of magnitude improvement in running a given application over general purpose computers.... I'm not just arguing semantics or definitions. It seems to me that the goal of "ASIC-resistance" is really to prevent a specialized device whose performance is an order of magnitude improvement over a PC, but at the same cost. Whether it is a single chip or not is not really the point, is it? Now, I am not an EE so humor me, but aren't there RAMs that have access speeds that are an order of magnitude greater than standard DRAM, and wouldn't using that defeat the memory access bottleneck in an ASIC-resistant design? |
|
|
|
Well, there are now over 400 replies to the original post, but only a few of those mention the fact that the chart is invalid. Most of the posts are just meaningless forum spam. I have explained why it is invalid in a previous post, but I don't think that the people who are posting in this thread read any of the replies. So, here is my experiment... I will give 1 merit to every person who replies and explains why the chart is invalid.* *Restrictions:You must not belong to a signature campaign (no sense in feeding the parasites), and you must be Jr. Member rank or higher. |
|
|
|
But I proved you wrong. Do I get a prize?  |
|
|
|
In my opinion BTC was made to figure out how to decrypt sha-256 encrypted messages.
There is no such thing as "sha-256 encrypted messages" in Bitcoin. SHA-256 is not an encryption method. Bitcoin is not encrypted. "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt." — ABRAHAM LINCOLN. |
|
|
|
Curious, wouldn't a "utility token" be what the OP is looking for since his project won't be utilizing a coin as a tradeable asset in the end? That said, as you noted crowdsale contract through ethereum is OP's best option.
A "utility" token is a token that is necessary in order to use the service. A "security" token is a token that works like a security - you don't use the token, you just hold it as an investment and you get some kind of return. Since the OP doesn't have a good use for tokens in his service, a security token would be the appropriate choice. Also, the primary reason for a utility token is to get around being considered a security. (That's why there are so many stupid projects that use a utility token for a service that doesn't need its own token.) But now that the SEC has stated that they consider a utility token to be a security, that loophole no longer exists (at least in the U.S.). Yes bud you can still do ICO even if you are not going to offer any coins. For me thats crowdfunding and you collect funds for your project.
You can't do an ICO without coins. ICO is Initial Coin Offering. |
|
|
|
|
My thought is that it doesn't matter who created Bitcoin or why.
Note that that TOR was created by the U.S. Navy.
|
|
|
|
Block zero, the Genesis Block, for bitcoin or any other coin, always contains instructions for the creation of coins. In the case of bitcoin, it was 50 BTC.
What is the difference between coins created in a Genesis Block and a "premine"? Does the term "premine" necessarily refer to coins created in addition to the amount dictated by a mining reward in block zero?
I'm creating a guide to understanding the blockchain for crypto noobs and would like to get other peoples' opinions on the matter. Thanks.
The coins in the Bitcoin genesis block are not spendable. |
|
|
|
|
Yes. Look up "security token". You will have better luck on an Ethereum forum, though.
|
|
|
|
|
What are your earnings projections?
|
|
|
|
|
Please just move on. I was banned from Coinbase years ago and it hasn't affected me one bit.
1. You are better off storing your bitcoins in your own wallet. Storing them in somebody else's wallet is unnecessary and risky.
2. There are other exchanges.
3. There are other payment processing platforms.
|
|
|
|
|
Try localbitcoins.com. You can use the site to buy and sell bitcoins face-to-face with cash.
|
|
|
|
First post and new to all this so please bare with me if this is wrong. I sent (something like) 0.0144 bitcoins from my blockchain wallet into my dream market account. it only says (something like) 0.00014 is available. So i should have £82 or something worth of bitcoins when i only have £6. My blockchain account says that all the bitcoins were sent so im confused as to why it all hasnt appeared. This is the address it says I sent it to 1HFtpsYZx6WdXezvKyE1LtSSxX8tR76Pb9 and transaction has been confirmed. 246 confirmations (not sure what this means) and says unspent next to the address i sent it to. Please help  There is no doubt that the bitcoins were sent and received. If 1HFtpsYZ... was the correct address, then the receiver is mistaken if they do not acknowledge the receipt. The number of confirmations is a measure of how "final" the transaction is. 0 means that is has not yet been included in the block chain. 1 means that it has been included. 6 confirmations is enough to be considered permanent. |
|
|
|
|
I think the major reasons are network effect, brand, and first mover advantage. I feel that it is possible that Bitcoin could drop to #2, though I don't see that happening soon.
|
|
|
|
|
I believe it has been shown that most nodes are at most one or two hops from a miner. That and the fact that nearly all miners connect directly to each other reduce the value of non-mining nodes as part of the consensus protocol.
However, I feel that the reduced value in that role does not diminish the importance of a wallet's ability to validate the blocks and transactions it receives.
|
|
|
|
POW seems sufficient, Why is the useful work part necessary and what is the benefit?
PoW is sufficient to send payment. But usually if we are sending a payment remotely, we also want a product delivered to us back remotely too right? Typically people use fedex, ups, usps etc. Well what if we could decentralize this shipment? This is what this idea would allow. The blockchain would enforce independent shippers to trustfully deliver the item to you. There are many other possible uses but this is the most apparent to me. For more info read my previous post. You presented your idea as a different way to do consensus, but it seems like you are really proposing a block chain that can be used to prove that a service was provided. |
|
|
|
|
My issues are:
1. There are legitimate reasons for 0-conf double spends, e.g RBF.
2. I consider punishing someone for making a mistake to be a problem and not a feature.
3. Address reuse cannot be prevented by the owner of an address.
|
|
|
|
|
POW seems sufficient, Why is the useful work part necessary and what is the benefit?
|
|
|
|
Many bounty manager asks for investment in their ICO (fixed amount) for rewarding bounty stakes after completion of bounty .
It's a scam. Don't give them anything. |
|
|
|
Be careful of groups that tell you what to buy and when to buy it. They are typically pump-and-dump scams and the members are the intended victims. BTW, anybody can claim to be an expert. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
