So it seems that OST shares the destiny of a huge number of tokens in this bear market. But with their current market cup of $12,8M, they surely have a lot of room to grow.

After briefly checking their website, it seems that they run their token on top of the ETH network. It is interesting that they offer their partners to mint branded tokens as side chains in their platform with a few lines of code. This seems to be quite a unique feature among the other Ethereum tokens.


I've been using unsplash a lot in the past for their free images. If unsplash indeed joins, that could be a nice boost. Other than that, I don't see that they have attracted many partners so far, which might be critical for the success of their project.

I can't tell for sure, but maybe you can use online html to bbcode converters, like this one:

https://www.garyshood.com/htmltobb/

I quickly checked your html and it seems to convert to bbcode. Now how good the conversion is I don't know. You would have to check for yourself.

Thanks a lot, but all credits go to the authors of the quoted book for explaining this consensus thing so clearly.

Well said, this is another important difference.

Thanks for pointing this out. I hear a lot about what happened with core and segwit, but I'm sorry to say that I wasn't a part of the bitcoin community back then. I still have to learn about these network changes in greater details to be able to say anything. In the meantime, all I can do is to stay open minded and try to hear both sides.

You failed to mention what coin this incorrect data is related to. I think I've seen coins listed there with inaccurate supply numbers. In any case, they are generally known to be slow in their responses. I don't think there is anything you can do but send them an update request.

Many altcoins have lost similar market share. I don't see anything special about it.

Maybe there is a place in the grand scheme of things for a centralized coin like EOS. Who knows. Some people brag that they are less centralized than a single organization, and if that's the degree of decentralization they are satisfied with, then be it.

Their main net may process a lot of transactions per second, but it wouldn't mean much if the price to pay for that is losing your fortune overnight. And we yet have to see how resilient they are to hacks and other attacks.

All things considered, I may use EOS for speculative purposes, but not really for anything else.

BitcoinTalk UserName: butka
Campaigns: Content
Vivid Address: VEfD15ohYZ6TE3Jg4anzaoiY7QGyqkDyUh

Our education system (or at least in the country where I'm from) is such that students learn very little about the principles and foundation of money. For example, nobody is teaching about the history of money, how it is created, how it works, why it works etc.

Maybe the principles of money are known to economics students, but it is easy to check that the general population knows very little about the concept of money. Given how important money is in everyone's life, this lack of knowledge is really symptomatic. So much so that one has to ask oneself if this is done deliberately to keep the masses ignorant of one of the most important aspects in their lives.

In the following, I want to share a couple of interesting points about how crypto compares to fiat money and where is the important difference. It is about 3 types of consensus inherent to Bitcoin that I learned from the book:

Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Technologies, Chapter 7. Community, Politics, and Regulation

As the authors state, there are basically

3 types of consensus that any cryptocurrency functioning as money has to have:

• consensus about rules
• consensus about history
• consensus about value

1. The consensus about rules is basically a set of rules the majority agrees to follow.

Fiat money doesn't have this kind of consensus, because the government declares the rules by fiat. It may even change the rules along the way as it sees fit. Great example is the current hyperinflation disaster in Venezuela.

Cryptocurrencies do have this kind of consensus. In Bitcoin, we have a consensus about what makes a transaction valid, what makes a block valid, how new bitcoins are minted, what the total supply is, etc.

2. The consensus about history is actually about record keeping.

Like in the previous point, fiat money doesn't need this kind of consensus. It is enough to physically own money, or the banks can take care of your money and keep a record for you, so there is no need for this consensus.

Cryptocurrencies do need this kind of consensus. In Bitcoin, there has to be a consensus about the history of all valid transactions as well as about the current state of the public record.

3. The consensus about value is a mutual agreement about the value of money.

This consensus is the only consensus both fiat and crypto require in order to function properly. It is about people agreeing that the value of the money they are using will be there in the future.

This consensus equally applies to dollars, euros, and bitcoin. You have to believe that the money you hold will retain its value tomorrow. If many people believe in the same outcome, there is a consensus about value.

Interdependence of the 3 Types of Consensus

Bitcoin (and other cryptocurrencies) have to have all three types of consensus to work as they are supposed to. Moreover, these 3 types support one another. If everyone agrees about valid blocks and transactions, everyone agrees about the state of the public record. As a result, everyone agrees that the currency is not double spent and everyone agrees that the currency will be valuable in the future.

And the other way around: If everyone agrees that the currency will have value in the future, everyone will make sure the consensus rules are followed and the miners have incentive to obey the rules. Then, automatically there is a consensus about the state of the public record.

The ingenuity of Satoshi Nakamoto can be seen, among other things, in connecting these 3 consensus mechanisms and making them work so well in practice to support each other.

Welcome to the forum. It's a great place to learn about crypto-currencies, but you have to give it some time to explore it.

Forget about following on the advice from these messages. They are 99.99999% scam attempts.

If their approach to making money was possible, they wouldn't chase you. They would be using their systems to make money on their own.

Exactly right.

You should be careful of almost all unsolicited offers. Or at least until you know enough to discriminate them.

Stick around this forum long enough, and you will figure out ways to earn some crypto-currencies in a legitimate way. All legit ways require work (and time) on your part.

So they will use the NEO blockchain to tokenize real world assets. I'm a bit skeptical when it comes to representing non-digital assets on the blockchain. The main reason is possible legal problems. Do you have an idea how BizShake is going to solve disputes and various ownership problems that may appear due to tokenization?

Who will ensure that the link between physical properties and digital tokens is not broken? If I own some tokens that, for example, represent land, who is to ensure that I really own that land in the physical world?

Spectre has a projected annual inflation rate of 5 percent. It looks to me, this inflation is a bit on the heavy side when it come to cryptocurrency. Other than that, it's like Proof-of-Stake (PoS) Monero-like crypto with privacy features. How does staking work, at the same time maintaining the privacy of the users, is beyond me.

All in all, I don't see Monero being threatened here.

Thanks for the warning. I search google from time to time when I want to check older bitcointalk.org posts, but I always use site:bitcointalk.org + search term, thus avoiding the (dot) to site. Newbies may use something like bitcointalk + search term which may bring search results from the phishing site.

Isn't there a way to report this (dot) to site to google? I've seen google delisting well established sites due to copyright (DMCA) infringements. Phishing is much worse than that. How come Google keeps tolerating these scammers in their index?

On the pros side, NEM has had its separate blockchain from the start. It has a solid technical foundation (built in C++ and java totally from scratch).


Not overly large liquidity can mean two things, either the holders are confident it NEM's future and are not interesting in selling, or the demand is low. Low demand can also leave some room for future expansion if or when NEM becomes more popular. On the cons side, they have bad marketing and no real business collaborations. All in all, hard to give a definitive judgement, but this is one of the crypto-currencies one should keep an eye on.

Go to the bottom left of the thread in question. You'll see something like this:



Click on "move topic" and select the appropriate board. You may also enter a brief description as to why you are doing that.

You have posted your question on the wrong board, so chances are you won't get any answer here.

From the github project you are quoting, your pool is for the ZHash algo, which is a new algorithm that aims to make Equihash ASIC resistant.

Therefore, I suggest to you to move this thread to this board:

Bitcoin Forum --> Alternate cryptocurrencies --> Mining (Altcoins)

Probably they haven't reached their soft cap limit or they are not satisfied with the amount of money they have raised. It is certainly advantageous for the company, but I don't see any advantages for the bounty hunters (unless, of course, they increase the bounty reward proportionally to the time spent promoting them). Personally, it hasn't happened to me to participate in such a campaign, but if it did, I wouldn't stick with it any longer.

Too many ICOs break the terms of their campaigns, which is unprofessional, and a good sign that their project is either scam or worthless.

As far as I can tell, these calculations are correct if things stay as they are today.
However, one may assume that the transaction fees are not going to stay at today's level. It may very well be that on-chain transacting on the bitcoin network won't be that cheap. Also, these calculations don't include off-chain scaling. We don't know now how big the impact of the lightning network will be and how it may affect the scalability problem.

This is interesting. They seem to be doing well, and being the third crypto exchange by volume (after Binance and OKEx) seems to confirm that.

I've never used them, and I don't plan to use them, at least until I stop hearing people's complaints about them.

BTW, I also find it interesting that they have plans to create their own blockchain that would be used for voting on future coin listings and for fundraising events.

My suggestion is to ask yourself is there a problem you can solve, and more specifically, is there a problem you can solve that requires using blockchain technology. IMO, starting your own ICO makes sense only if you need to raise money in order to solve that problem.

For example, you have a great idea about a working product. Even better, you are close to releasing that working product. However, to do that you need more resources, better developers, and better marketing. Money will help you get there, and in contrast to the traditional ways of raising capital for business, you now have a sort of decentralized crowdfunding.

How Vitalik started his Ethereum is a good example. Had he turned to traditional ways of raising capital, I doubt he would have been successful. Instead he did crowdfunding via an ICO, but he knew what he was doing.

That was exactly my reaction on their website too. No complaints about the activity of their github page, but they have to be more aggressive with their internet presence (website).

Now regarding investing in their token, I guess they will have to share the fate of all similar utility tokens of this type (Ticketchain, Blocktix). No question there is a real life usability for their token, but the velocity won't be great.

This is one of the oldest tricks in the book, but it doesn't mean it is less effective. If you are in a hurry, you can easily overlook that the pasted address is not your intended address.

I don't think manually entering the address is an efficient ways to prevent such an attack. If you often make a lot of transactions, it can be a tedious job. However, for larger transactions, even that is possible.

A vanity address (I have no idea if Etherum has vanity generators, probably yes) is a nice thing to have to counter this kind of attack. You cannot miss noticing that your address has changed.