|
And another thing , why did the price on quak coin go down today ?
The china news mentioned Bitcoin , no crypto , not LTC , no Quak?
Why did the clone follow it's master i ask:)
|
|
|
|
Look, just because something is first does NOT make it better, or stops it having to compete with later editions. A ferrari engine of today doesn't care that it could be called a clone of the first combustion engine. It is a better machine, it has improved upon the original. It is therefore more desirable, if it is more desirable then more demand for it right.
First is alway better because it was first is not correct.
That argument has not failed it is still going. I think it is bad that now unless you get the lastest asic with monster power you have no chance at mining a block. I mined 4 blocks of quark today on 2x i5 3570.
Quark is not over valued. Work it out against any other coin. Also factor in if you are using coinmarketcap that most of them have millions more coins to enter circulation.
Distribution has been done by the market and you cant get fairer than that. BTC is without question one of the least fairly distributed coin.
Yes having different algos is a very good thing, anyone who tries to down play this is talking rubbish.
Quark is it the best coin out there??? who can say, i like prime coin and i like the community behind ltc and a few others.
If you missed out on quark i'm sorry, however this is still the start lots of great ideas for coins are talked about everyday so keep reading and find the next coin that will catch people attention.
OK. What is improved in quak coin over bitcoin ? . Facts please. Let me see if you have at least researched it , how does it protect itself from a botnet ? Bitcoin hasn't yet been distributed , only 50% and you talk about fair distribution with 90% of coins gone ))) ? |
|
|
|
|
Sorry , but how is going to help the town?
I'm missing the picture here!
|
|
|
|
Are you sure that's the wallet? |
|
|
|
The unending supply of fools who want to comment on a technology without actually investigating it at all is clearly going to be the most exhausting thing about Bitcoin making it big. It's not even people that don't understand, it's people who aggressively do not wish to understand, while spouting crazy nonsense. These people deserve their fiat system. I agree with you totaly, but what can you tell us about this issue in the video? can you explain your point of view and how this will not affect in the future the BTC? Regards 1) At very high transaction rates each block can be over half a gigabyte in size. It is not required for most fully validating nodes to store the entire chain. In Satoshi's paper he describes "pruning", a way to delete unnecessary data about transactions that are fully spent. This reduces the amount of data that is needed for a fully validating node to be only the size of the current unspent output size, plus some additional data that is needed to handle re-orgs. As of October 2012 (block 203258) there have been 7,979,231 transactions, however the size of the unspent output set is less than 100MiB, which is small enough to easily fit in RAM for even quite old computers. 2) We don't need all the transactions is the blockchain to stay there forever do we? |
|
|
|
|
Ohhhhh , the blockchain killer.
Do people even bother to ask themselves if this is indeed a problem?
|
|
|
|
The question is why people buy them since it is mined already for the most part or why people buy them anyway?
Well tell me first -- why people buy Bitcoins? They buy bitcoins because it is the real thing. What quark or whatever it is called brings on top of bitcoin except some questionable speculation opportunity? . It is slow, it is mostly held in the hands of a few, it is only respected since it was first. Release it today and nobody would bother mining it, infact it could not even be released today without adjustment. An average person can not mine it on their computer. BTC is top and will be for sometime, but not forever. Can quark exceed Bitcoins market cap? who knows but it would not shock me at all if quark and many others eventually dethrone BTC. It will be sad in kind of a sentimental way but myspace was exceed by facebook. The stir and backlash from quark is bigger than i have seen before, this shows it has some big players worried. I can see qrk being number 3 rather soon actually. You're asking yourself what the original brings over the clone. Rather unfair right? The fact that the average person can't mine it on the computer argument. It has failed on LTC. It will fail on quark also. I'm not against the coin itself. I'm warning newbies against a getting rich scheme. Oh no shit! This is all that's fueling quak at this moment. |
|
|
|
The two questions everyone has failed to answer:
- Why the hell would someone give $11000 USD to everyone in the world
- How?
OP, don't study bitcoins if you are coming up with these questions.
Well , he said in the beginning and in the beginning 10 btc were't worth even a pizza package (wrecked one with two drops of ketchup). |
|
|
|
I encourage everyone to do the same in order to filter unnecessary spam/trolling and give the user a nice orange ignore button :]
Lols , I am asking about the differences , and what quak coins brings new to the crypto scene! And nobody knows. What .. you afraid your investment in quaks will go to 0? No more newbies helping the premined scheme? |
|
|
|
Give a tramp a million dollars and see if he still eats food from bins. Give me a million dollars and see if I ever eat Ramen noodles ever again. I never said he has to spend them all, but his money is sitting in wallets doing nothing.
If somebody gave you or anybody else billions I'd find it odd if you or they just kept it in a bank and did nothing with it.
I dont think anyone knowns all Satoshi Nakamoto addresses, so saying he does not spend any Bitcoins recently is bit odd. I'm just going by what everybody seems to be saying and that's that they know all his wallets. Obviously there's no way to tell how many he has, and yes, I would assume he has at least spent some of his horde. You can still track the blocks from the Satoshi mining era. Very few of those have ever moved , and if they moved they did long before the price went nuts and there are traces where they went. Early guys one this project. Most of the blocks believed to be mined by Satoshi himself are untouched. |
|
|
|
The question is why people buy them since it is mined already for the most part or why people buy them anyway?
Well tell me first -- why people buy Bitcoins? They buy bitcoins because it is the real thing. What quark or whatever it is called brings on top of bitcoin except some questionable speculation opportunity? He's comparing kermitcoin with Bitcoin! He'a a total quako! |
|
|
|
however you explain it to those that missed out they will still cry scam coin, premine instamine. Who cares what they say, it will exceed everyones expectations and the same people will cry more they did not buy in now.
The don't get that mining is not the most powerful distribution source. The market is. Even now it's distribution grows and grows if it could drop to 10cents for a few weeks and stay there i think it would build an even bigger foundation to build from.
Sure the rocket it took seems extreme but that is because it was way way way undervalued. It will take a while to sink in that quark is not high at all right now it is just catching up to where is should be. It can never sink back to where it was, it was an unknown coin then, now it is talked about by anyone who knows anything at all about crypto. Quark is here to stay long term get used to it. Is it the best coin out there by design....it is certainly up there with the best.
Look to other opportunities instead of crying over missed ones.
Please provide some arguments for this. And forget that CPU mining already debunked as total crap , also the so called security adds nothing to an already secure coin? Anything else? Oh , 90% of the coins in the hands of the developers , no actual use for it , nobody using it for anything else than trading it to BTC. |
|
|
|
Hey you're laughing at that now - but let's wait 5000 years into the future when man can walk on the sun, that deed will be worth billions if not trillions and trillions of dollars Add some more years to those 5000. Just to be safe. You know how hot that damn thingy is right? |
|
|
|
Well, there is NO point for banks, when we have bitcoin!  So , I want to get a loan , where do I go? Tradefortress? |
|
|
|
I can;t stop laughing at people suggesting an escrow , (third party) for a supposed decentralized and p2p currency.
You see the Irony in it?
no, I don't. I'm certain that a third party doesn't 'centralize' things, and it's certainly in the spirit of p2p. They say escrow, what they mean is trust. Find a means to pay someone that includes enough trust for you to be satisfied with the transaction. The same with ANY transaction, BTC or otherwise. Where's the irony? Bitcoin is supposed to get rid of the middleman. Now , with our human nature , we bring it back into the picture. Next is banks were you deposits bitcoins - w8 already happened. Next is ... god helps us |
|
|
|
In the long term the transaction fees have to pay the maintance cost, since no more BTC are "printed" or "mined" or however you want to call it.
The income from transactions fees is still very low, not enough to maintain the network at current rates by far.
Idiot not understanding what running costs are.
Ok, then tell me just one little thing. Why was the network deficit in April a lot bigger? Graphics cards were a lot more expensive in April? No? Oh right, there was a price surge of BTC.
I think there is an obvious idiot here, and i got a hunch it aint me.
Idiot not knowing how to read a graphic. Idiot not knowing what a deficit with - (minus) means. Time to hit the ignore button. |
|
|
|
So you're telling me that your link https://blockchain.info/de/charts/network-deficit, labeled network deficit and explained as Network Deficit Per Day - Shows difference between transaction fees and cost of bitcoin mining. is "the simple difference of payouts per day (calculating BTC in USD) vs income generated via transactions" Sir , You are obvious an Idiot. Ok, then tell me just one little thing. Why was the network deficit in April a lot bigger? Graphics cards were a lot more expensive in April? No? Oh right, there was a price surge of BTC. I think there is an obvious idiot here, and i got a hunch it aint me. Wrong hunch. And to end it once for all. Taking into account those 42k , they will cover the running cost for enough knc miners to bring the difficulty to 21PH. Do the math or go back to your cave since i got a felling you like to troll. |
|
|
|
Your link
Network Deficit Per Day - Shows difference between transaction fees and cost of bitcoin mining.
The cost of mining on blockchain is based on gpu numbers.
No, its the simple difference of payouts per day (calculating BTC in USD) vs income generated via transactions. If you dont believe me, just compare it to the following, that the real actual income from usefullness. Yes, the transaction fees have never exceeded those 42K USD/day. And thats not even close to the "income" generated for block rewards. Block rewards are going to die with time. Transaction fees are the long term sustainability. And they are not catching up nearly fast enough. So you're telling me that your link https://blockchain.info/de/charts/network-deficit, labeled network deficit and explained as Network Deficit Per Day - Shows difference between transaction fees and cost of bitcoin mining. is "the simple difference of payouts per day (calculating BTC in USD) vs income generated via transactions" Sir , You are obvious an Idiot. |
|
|
|
Go to that page , do the math and then say you were wrong:
"The income from transactions fees is still very low, not enough to maintain the network at current rates by far."
I can do a lot better. Back to you. Your link Network Deficit Per Day - Shows difference between transaction fees and cost of bitcoin mining. The cost of mining on blockchain is based on gpu numbers. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
