What fallout? The stumble in the FTSE has largely been erased, and other than their current decline in the GBP compared to other currencies, things aren't going to hell in a handbasket as the "Remain" camp inferred would happen.

But since we're talking about a group of penny-pinching outsourcing corporate fucks, I'm not surprised they are using this post-crisis to do some unpopular things they can blame on someone else. Its very similar to the minimum wage increases being blamed for everything that goes wrong in the service industry right now. Its never about corporate profit margins that can take a hit (but they'll never lower those, heaven forbid), its just the "poor old corporation" having to pay a living wage for people.

Cry me a river, because I can see through the lies.

Right, just like the odds are zero that LEO's would have mirrored traffic sent to routers at peering points all over North America. Except it did happen, and was verified later. If they want to fuck up Monero, trust me, they'll get the proper resources to do just that.

I know alt-coin supporters and specifically Monero supporters are ecstatic over a wiggle in their value, but there are larger problems such visibility raises. Without getting into technical details, lets just focus on the collective hashpower of the Monero network.

http://minexmr.com/pools.html

There's a graph near the bottom that shows the average collective hashing power of the major pools - 24.1 Megahashes/sec. This is a laughable minority, which brings to fore another potential threat. Lets say you're law enforcement or some other actor. All of these people doing things you perceive as illegal have adopted a poorly-defended alt-coin as their method of trade (Citation needed - extremely dubious).

So, as a LEO you work on how to disrupt this network.

If this was Bitcoin, well, you have a lot of work to do if you're trying to be a majority miner and make your chain the "correct" one. Bitcoin's collective hashpower stands at an estimated 1,798,050 Terahashes/sec, magnitudes higher than a paltry 24.1 that Monero offers.

Guess which is easier to attack?

The point is, I'm extremely doubtful that anyone would jump on the Monero train and not have their network severely disrupted by law enforcement if it indeed became the "currency of the darknet". Its simply too small and too poorly secured.

Right, so while you're busy picking up pennies in front of a steam roller, we'll be sitting here looking on with bemused interest.

Alts are no better than a penny stock, and most don't have any utility at all. Claiming that Bitcoin is ALL speculation is ridiculous, but then again, you're the one taking extreme risks by trading alts.

Best of luck, but juggling grenades isn't a safe occupation.

This isn't anything new.

Most seasoned Bitcoin users understand that if you don't have personal control over your private keys, you don't "hold" squat. Never use any other service for anything but instantaneous transfer of value, if you can help it. Consider anything external to your personal wallet a risk. Much like cash, you have to be careful. It seems most people can grasp that concept with bills in their physical wallet, but make serious mistakes when it is "virtual".

If you are going to be a simpleton and just look at price percentages, you can make an argument that so-and-so alt-coin is ramping to the moon.

But most people who trade understand the terms "Notional Value" and "Open Interest". Especially how they relate to markets. It takes a lot less money to pump LTC than it does BTC. Same with the other single and double-digit coins.

I've seen an abuse of "Market Capitalization" on nearly every alt-coin article I can think of, without an explanation that the number of issued units is much higher than Bitcoin. Ethereum, the rolling trainwreck of turing-complete fame, has at least 80 million units alone, with the capacity to make more - while Bitcoin will stay at 21 million total, ever.

That makes direct price comparisons pretty idiotic and only used when some e-journalist needs an easy sound bite or clickbait title for their shitty article.

You forgot the < sarcasm > tag.

Otherwise, it just makes you look like an idiot.

Best quote:


Oh, so your uber-currency has problems? No shit.

I guess the claims of it being the "replacement" for the darknet is just as valid. What an idiotic article. They couldn't even be bothered to correct an obvious mistake - "...has announced its support for Monero effective September 20136."

Damn, users will have to wait 18,120 years? Well damn, better set the calendar alert!

This was widely anticipated.

Banks have "not invented here" syndrome, which prevents them from bringing in something outside of the "house" into internal operations. What they are actually snubbing is the worldwide hashpower of Bitcoin, which is their first mistake. Their second mistake will come in the form of lack of mining resources. I doubt their little utility coin will be supported by corporate-sponsored legions of miners. No, they'll just put up what they think is "enough" to secure their blockchain and leave it at that.

Until the first virtual server breach, or network hack. Then some enterprising soul can show them what a 51% attack is and totally screw their coin - or better yet - redirect resources so they "mine" the utility coin and end up transferring a large chunk of value to some bank account they own.

None of this is going to result in "BankCorp" coin being anything but an expensive experiment in ego-stuffing. Let them learn the hard way... in fact, I'm betting on it.

Needs proper date formatting to be in the News Section.

Thanks...

Every time someone from Ripple opens their mouth, you better believe bullshit is soon to follow.

Their pre-mined centralized bank-friendly nightmare of a coin is a cancerous boil on the blockchain landscape. How they even think they are relevant is just an indication of how stupid they are. Go in the back of the line, Ripple, just behind Doge and the gang. They're not even near the failed ETH/DAO experiment as far as the fail-scape queue is concerned, lol.

Just tired of banking-suckups pretending they know what is best for the true free blockchain.

This is what kills me. These guys are complete amateur assholes.

Admit that your two top accounts are essentially trading inside info? They have full access to the order books to whatever depth they want. Talk about front-running, these fucks probably engineered several of the larger moves just to stop-run clusters of orders to line their own pockets with profits.

I have zero trust for these fucking thieves. I don't even believe their story that it was an external attack -- they're too damn convenient in scope and timing. I bet they were getting tired of running the place, so they decided a nice cash-out was in order.

Fuck these shady crooks.

So again, that is my question - how do you even think a viable quantum computing approach can be achieved in software? Its absurd, attacking NP problems in polynomial time? Get the fuck outta here.

Most of the USD trapped in Bitfinex is sitting there because of the problems with SynapsePay, yet-another-intermediary that BFX trusted to "work" until it didn't.

It wouldn't surprise me if BFX gets served with a few asset-freezing warrants, shutting down their bank accounts. Be warned, anyone with any funds trading on BFX should remove them as soon as possible. The risks are too high that you are going to get fully GOXed.

But naturally, there's always the "true believers" that don't heed warnings until the sites webpage shows a 404 or some terse "goodbye" message.

Oh sweet lord.

Yeah, lets get the guy that was fully and completed PWND in a recent hack to head up yet another "secure" service. Its like watching keystone cops chase a robber in one of those old 40's films.

Money quote from Maxwell:


How in the living fuck do you 'simulate' quantum processing? I'm not an advanced maths kind of guy, but I've been following the tech surrounding Qbits and how rudimentary quantum machines are right now. Trying to encapsulate such a property in software seems like an impossibility without using actual quantum elements to do it. Maxwell has it covered, but this whole story makes me wonder if Vitalik is just an advanced huckster moving on to the next shiny bauble in search of money.

Ethereum is a train wreck, and aside from being infinitely exploitable, is now fractured between two camps and even its purported uses are up for debate. Especially after the "code is law, until we decide it isn't and hard-fork" debacle.

Steer clear of his projects, is all I can say.

aigeezer has your reply, you pompous bastard.

Yes, fads do come and go, and Decentralized Rep Systems are fucking idiotic.

"Colored Coins" is just a fancy way of saying "AML/KYC User Tracking". Its also a way to make Bitcoins non-fungible, which I'm sure certain sovereign entities would just love. Add that into the pipedream of "Decentralized Reputation System" -- fucking impossible, by the way -- and you have the lush beginnings of a dog's breakfast of complete crypto bullshit.

Enjoy.

"Hi, I'm a retard writing about things that I have no idea about."

There's your summary.