Sollte es tatsächlich zu einem Zusammenbruch des weltweiten Finanzsystems kommen, dann rauscht auch der Coin ungebremst in den Keller.
Es kann tatsächlich so kommen, dass ALLE Wertgegenstände gleichzeitig in den Keller gehen. Das ist dann der Fall, wenn das globale Ponzi-Kredit-System wie ein Kartenhaus in sich zusammen fällt, quasi die Luft abgelassen wird, ein Kredit nach dem anderen ausfällt. Da aber alles relativ ist, wird derjenige im Vergleich gewinnen, der weniger verliert als der Durchschnitt. Keiner wird real einen Mü ärmer, wenn ausnahmslos alle Menschen dieser Welt 90% ihrer Ersparnisse verlieren. Da aus nachhaltiger Sicht alles austariert wird, wird es bei diesem Kredit-Crash-Szenario trotzdem einen Gewinner geben: die Natur. Sie ist ganz offensichtlich viel zu billig, nur deshalb können wir so mit ihr umspringen. Bitcoin ist nur ein Parasit. Ein Parasit kann nicht ohne seinen Wirt überleben.
Mit dieser Bewertung musst du selbst klar kommen. Bitcoins sind in jedem Fall eine Innovation. Ob wir dessen nachhaltigen Nutzen allerdings bereits vollständig erkannt haben, darüber bin ich mir immer noch nicht im klaren. |
|
|
|
I come on the forum from a lot of time and I read that mrai has no value anymore and there is no a principal chain?!?  Mrai is officially dead, Colin decided to close all the nodes thus making you unable to do any transaction from now on, also his cousin left a message on the main [ANN] thread and this is what he says... Hi everyone, I'm Colin cousin, he wanted for me to give you the news because he did not want to do it.
Unfortunately Colin has no more desire and intention to continue the project because he changed his interests, from the very heavy work and by family commitments.
I know it is not easy to accept this for him and for you but tried to give the signal during these months as absconding on the thread, on github and off nodes.
Anyway thanks everyone for the support that has been given over time and for the great adventure that has been traveled. Sincerely hopes that someone has the desire and passion to continue the project.
John Lemahieu
this is none sense. how could he close the project like this? and don't even want to announce that him self. now what will happen with raiblock holders? who will be the responsible for their lose? I have a friend who is holding 100K Raiblocks and was expecting to price increase but now I see the raiblock dead with whole system. this is completely unfair. it will break peoples trust on any altcoin and new projects. Responsible for your gains is allways yourself, right? Responsible for your losses is found outside, yes? This is really unfair! I cry with you, babe. |
|
|
|
Vielen Dank für die Antworten.  Bei mir beläuft es sich aktuell auf 30% BTC/ALT und 70% Konto. Ich war am überlegen, dieses zu ändern 50% Cryptowelt (70% BTC, 30% Alts) 50% Rest (60% Aktien weltweit gestreut, 20% Immobilien, 10% Gold/Silber, 10% Anleihen) |
|
|
|
Zum vorangehenden Beitrag in der ZEIT ist mein Kommentar nach wie vor nicht freigeschaltet. Ich will nicht weiter darüber spekulieren, was der Grund sein könnte, vielleicht haben sie das auch nur vergessen. Ich habe jedoch das Gefühl, das mir das schon vorher häufiger passiert ist, nur diesmal habe ich es genau verfolgt. Dann haben wir die Zensur bereits. Ich muss noch mal die Relativität betonen, die zu zwei Seiten einer jeden Handlung führen. Ich kann als Medium nicht nur direkt eskalieren, indem ich eskalierende Artikel veröffentliche (gut für den Profit von Redakteur und Zeitung). Ich kann als Medium auch indirekt eskalieren, indem ich deeskalierende Nachrichten/Kommentare verhindere. (das gleiche mit der Arbeit: der Faulpelz wird in der heutigen Zeit gerne angegriffen, aber man kann als Arbeitnehmer einer zerstörerischen Arbeit nachgehen, z.B. Bomben bauen. Der Faulpelz bekommt hier relativ betrachtet den evolutionsbiologisch höheren Wert, er trägt zum Überleben bei) Es gibt reichlich Artikel, die meinen Thesen nahe kommen, DIE ZEIT hat nur wenig später z.B. diesen Artikel veröffentlicht: http://www.zeit.de/2016/28/das-seelenleben-der-tiere-peter-wohlleben |
|
|
|
What are the last prices for buying/selling? I am curious to see the future of railblocks ...
What about the new project ? Some one can give me a link?
The devs have shut down their main nodes without notification, and the block explorer also is not running. Because I cannot decide witch blockchain is the current one, from my point of view the game is over. As long as a group of trustworthy devs pick up this project and restart it. |
|
|
|
http://www.zeit.de/gesellschaft/zeitgeschehen/2016-07/terror-nizza-frankreich-reservedienst-sicherheitFrankreich ruft Bürger zum Reservedienst auf
Die französische Regierung will nach dem Anschlag in Nizza den Sicherheitsapparat noch einmal verstärken. Dafür sollen sich alle "patriotischen Bürger" melden.
Seit gestern abend wird mein Kommentar auf den ZEIT-Artikel, den ich unten gequoted habe, nicht freigegeben (eine Menge anderer Kommentare jedoch schon). Entweder sie sind wach geworden, und prüfen meine Ausführungen genauer. Oder sie verstehen gar nichts und halten mich für einen Wirrkopf. Die Vorgänge weltweit lassen sich problemlos beschreiben, wenn man davon ausgeht, dass wir Menschen schlicht Tiere (im neutralen Sinne) sind. Dann passiert gerade das mit uns, was einem Heuschreckenschwarm passieren würde: die eigene Auslöschung. Unser Großhirn zeichnet uns tatsächlich aus. Irrtümlicherweise glauben wir jedoch, nur wegen unseres Hirns prinzipiell "vernunftbegabt" zu sein. Aber absolute Vernunft gibt es nicht, weil sie nicht nachhaltig ist, es gibt nur relative Vernunft. Ich weise nach, dass im Großhirn ein Komplementärprogramm laufen könnte, der "Homo Stupido". Er akzeptiert seine Ahnungslosigkeit, Einfalt, Beschränktheit, Manipulierbarkeit und Impulsivität, die Ökonomie dahinter ist deeskalierend und friedfertig. Das Programm, das wir im Großhirn fahren, ist der "Homo Oeconomicus", das ist eine eskalierende, sich wissend gebende, und im Extrem gewaltbereite Ökonomie. Während Tiere meist intuitiv richtig liegen, können wir Menschen alles bewusst falsch machen. Der Homo Oeconomicus wird also entlang seiner Eskalationsphase zu einer Bestie, die alles auslöscht, was ihr nicht zu Diensten steht, eine Art synaptische Fehlschaltung im Großhirn, die man als Krankheit bezeichnen könnte. Die Eskalation betrifft ALLE beteiligten Seiten. http://bewahren-und-sein.weebly.com/http://bewahren-und-sein.myblog.de/
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for clarification. In my opinion dezentralisation is supported by natural rules, and therefore can also be implemented easily in technical stuff. No central blockchain, and a chain for every instance, is the maximum dezentralisation possible. No fee is supporting the poor, they at least have no disadvantage, this is also a natural rule. I'm rather sure this coin is a nice step into a human future. The devs should go on.
|
|
|
|
kneim what i meant was there are others who can answer you about your question about master chain. there should be a handful of people who have read the whitepaper and know about the stuff. im too lazy to readup now.
regarding the distribution of the remaining coins, i tend to agree we should stick with the faucet after the coinswap because a good part of the interest given to mrai by users is from the faucet distribution.
As I understood the faucet could be misused by bots, operated by technically skilled people. This is the opposite of humanity. there were measures put in place, like for example IP detection. i dunno if this measure could be perfected so it could no longer be circumvented to be gamed by bot users. what really happened was those with btc to spare hired people who wanted a quick buck and bought their farmed coins cheap. i think its okay since it is voluntary trade. This solution is too technically. Think of people that cannot use computers, or even write, have no technical skills (also known as humans). The admin of the subchains of each person in this world should be able to be delegated to a group of specialist having fun on technics and finance. Example: A not too small group of natural people (dezentralisation), everyone with an own existing subchain, commiting on an existing human or new born child, can create a subchain for him/her. On every week, that this target person is commiting it's existance, it is getting some coins on it's chain (similar to PoS?). (This example is a very rudimentary one, I cannot say if this is right or even solvable). Whenever one individual person is found using more than one subchain, there should come penalties into account, that makes this theft too expensive to try. |
|
|
|
Fair distribution means a diffirent way of distributing the coins? If you tried to change the distribution of this coins it will not get demand as much as old raiblocks had. People only want the way of distribution this coin gave, other than that is not that important for them already.
I like your speculation of what people want. I cannot see any demand of raiblocks, how do you measure it? Simple, people here want things to be easy. They just want profit over their time and they don't want something like to invest on to have a profit. The time they saw faucet distribution altcoin, they grab the chance because it is like working with a captcha job where you will be paid specific amount of raiblock per captcha and convert it to sat(by selling) and make a profit. It just cost you time, that's what most people want. Everything in this world can be expressed as a balance. If you want to "profit", whose wealth do you want to take? |
|
|
|
kneim what i meant was there are others who can answer you about your question about master chain. there should be a handful of people who have read the whitepaper and know about the stuff. im too lazy to readup now.
regarding the distribution of the remaining coins, i tend to agree we should stick with the faucet after the coinswap because a good part of the interest given to mrai by users is from the faucet distribution.
As I understood the faucet could be misused by bots, operated by technically skilled people. This is the opposite of humanity. |
|
|
|
Fair distribution means a diffirent way of distributing the coins? If you tried to change the distribution of this coins it will not get demand as much as old raiblocks had. People only want the way of distribution this coin gave, other than that is not that important for them already.
I like your speculation of what people want. I cannot see any demand of raiblocks, how do you measure it? |
|
|
|
i do not understand the part you said about a person having own chain? can you expound more? i do not understand/know this mechanism
Other's can explain this technical part better to you. Every wallet is riding it's own chain, and they are merged dezentralized. I can't answer, if these individual chains are like sidechains of a master chain. Is there a main chain with this coin? i have no clue. i need to readup. and yes there are a lot of technically competent people here who can chime in. If you have no clue, how can you know that here are technically competent people? The decision of people being competent can only be done by people that are more competent. (The original devs, for example) about the inevitable deflation you mentioned, i dunno, maybe introduce a very small % PoS?
there are a lot of good coins out there with fixed supply and i think its okay. BTC itslef will end up like this once it reaches the cap of 21M coins.
PoS is mainly for reducing energy consumption, and I think raiblocks have solved this in a perfect way. PoS can also substitute lost coins, but I would prefer another approach, that I have not solved yet. Every single person/instance should have the possibility to create his own wallet/subchain, and gain some coins with it. I don't know, if once only (on start of living), or on a regular basis (weekly perhaps). And in some way it should become expensive, if this single person/instance tries to create wallets/subchains over and over again. Hint: The poorest people in this world should in tendency get the highest chance to profit from it. |
|
|
|
i do not understand the part you said about a person having own chain? can you expound more? i do not understand/know this mechanism
Other's can explain this technical part better to you. Every wallet is riding it's own chain, and they are merged dezentralized. I can't answer, if these individual chains are like sidechains of a master chain. Is there a main chain with this coin? |
|
|
|
not to be exact, i will declare i have between zero and 100k only. not much. i have seen others on here holding about a million or so out of the 13m distibuted so far.
and what do you think about my previous suggestion? is it feasible? maybe a manual check everytime a swap is done just to make sure the genesis account is untouched. and then proceed with the swap? watchathink?
It's unneccessarily complicated, and I do not see any reason to exclude the original devs. They are not my enemy, and never will be. this does not mean the original devs are excluded. this is just to make sure they would not dump the undistributed coins. they could even be secretly holding coins from other wallets that farmed thru faucets too and thats fine. because those coins were gained fairly. i am not a coder so im not really sure if that idea is feasible or not. but i think its fair. and considering there are really not that many adopters of mrai yet, i think it can be done. why not do a claiming of ownership of the richlist like what other coins do in their blockexplorers? There could be just an agreement with the original devs to hold 10% of the coins, and distribute the rest. But I believe, the coin should be developed just a little bit more. As I understood, every person (or other instance) could have his own chain. And this this chain could be created and live and die like any person (or other instance) in the world. This is giving the maximum of decentralisation that is possible. But what if a person is dying and coins on his chain are lost. How are they substituted? The number of Mrai is fix, and this would lead into a deflation, or not? |
|
|
|
not to be exact, i will declare i have between zero and 100k only. not much. i have seen others on here holding about a million or so out of the 13m distibuted so far.
and what do you think about my previous suggestion? is it feasible? maybe a manual check everytime a swap is done just to make sure the genesis account is untouched. and then proceed with the swap? watchathink?
It's unneccessarily complicated, and I do not see any reason to exclude the original devs. They are not my enemy, and never will be. |
|
|
|
how about this : a coinswap to a fresh clone while making sure the remaining coins from the genesis account do not get to move to swap? in short, only those coins which were farmed through faucets gets to be swapped.
How many Mrai coins do you own? |
|
|
|
the people with huge loads of raiblocks should initiate a takeover or forking of this project. kaselit already gave up. its okay at least he tried. this has happened with many other coins before. with the right people this coin will be good again. those who can code should step forward. those with bagloads can maybe contribute to give bounties etc. it can be done guys if we want it bad enough.
Does this make sense? Original devs have a shitload of coins, that they could sell on other's work. Which persons have huge loads of raiblocks? We will never find out. My investments into raiblocks are comparable with a donation to the devs. If they don't want to develop even more, they should keep running the network and hand their work over to others. They did a good work until now, and I see no reason or constraint for them to go on. I myself have no reason to donate more, why should I? Sellers already have some Bitcoins from me. Theoretically there could be an agreement between human beings, to donate a part of the gains to the project. But man is not human any more, a lot will not do. So summarized a team of competent devs could simply clone it, and start it from the beginning. How to distribute coins should be discussed before in the community. Human rules should be followed all the time: dezentralization; equal treatment; thinking long-term; define the addressee of this coin (no it's not the devs nor the community); how many coins are acceptable to the devs, and how will they be distributed; democratic processes with about 75% agreement; In a human world small instances have always advantages over large instances. I have seen a lot of greedy stupid comments the last months, and with this team it will not work. |
|
|
|
Gegenstand: Assicurazioni Generali S.p.A. (italienischer Versicherungskonzern) Chart: https://www.comdirect.de/inf/aktien/detail/chart.html?REQUESTED_REDIRECT=STOCK&ID_NOTATION=9385837#timeSpan=1Y&indicatorsBelowChart=RSI&e&Vertrauensfaktor: 1,0% aller Anlagen außerhalb Cryptocoins Derzeit habe ich hauptsächlich Aktienfonds, denen ich jedoch auch immer weniger vertraue. Gewöhnliche Fonds sollen ebenfalls die Werte darin verleihen, das gefällt mir nicht. Außerdem sind die wenigsten dieser Fonds Rebalancer. Wegen des Zwangs zur ewigen Steigerung werden auch die Fondsmanager zur Spekulation verführt. Es gibt noch keinen einzigen Versicherungskonzern in meinem Portfolio, deshalb nehme ich einen von denen, die die letzten 10 Jahre eine eher mäßige Performance hatten. Da der aktuelle RSI(14) schon wieder bei ca. 50 steht (also kein Kaufgrund), erstelle ich bei ca. 8 Euro pro Aktie eine Limit-Order für die längstmögliche Zeitdauer, in einem Bereich bis maximal 1% meines Nicht-Crypto-Vermögens. Sollte der Kurs in den Bereich zurück schnappen, so soll es mir Recht sein. |
|
|
|
LOL, blind confidence? WHere did I asked it?
I've managed different project in my life and I always developed a full product.
Which line should you read by me?
Am i naive just because i quitted a project that got no funds?
I ... I ... I ... I ... Are you this important? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
