Taking place over eight hours at Miami Beach’s famed Fillmore Theater on Saturday, The North American Bitcoin Conference (TNABC) covered a range of topics dominating industry discussion, from security and commerce to development and regulation – notably rare in the discussion, however, was bitcoin’s turbulent price. The topic was absent in most of the event's panel sessions, despite its prominent status in the most recent news cycle. In contrast to last year’s TNABC Miami, which was held when the price was over $800, bitcoin was trading at sub-$200 levels at press time, having fallen from near-$300 at the start of 2015. Instead, speakers at this edition of TNABC appeared undeterred by this development and more focused on the work ahead. Less distracted by the initial rush of discovery on display in past conferences, most seemed more intent on solving specific pain points that could form stepping stones to the technology’s wider adoption. This emphasis on pressing forward in the face of obstacles with a more pragmatic optimism was perhaps best summed up by Eric Larchevêque, CEO of bitcoin hardware wallet developer Ledger, who told CoinDesk: “The price is not really an issue. We’re relying on the technology, the blockchain. Startups are going to continue to develop and bitcoin will go more mass market.”
The sentiment was echoed by AltMarket developer Bryce Weiner, who explained that he feels the event showcased how the industry is closer to consolidating its efforts. “The direction that we’re headed in is a refinement of the message. We’ll see a significant investment in that narrative, in that message, and the unification of that message [in 2015],” Weiner said, emphasizing the role the media will play may not always be positive, and that this message might not always be inclusive to new ideas. Lawrence Nahum, CEO of multisig startup GreenAddress, was more direct in his characterization of the visibly tempered enthusiasm of attendees. “At [Bitcoin 2014], people were like ‘to the moon!’,” he said. “Here not so much.”
Still, a number of talks showcased that, despite a seemingly ever-increasing diversity of ideas, the bitcoin community is demonstrating that it can direct a concerted effort toward attacking problems. Positiv, mutmachend. |
|
|
|
|
Good morning, let's have a nice Monero day everybody.
|
|
|
|
Mein Vorschlag: Orientiert euch so stark wie möglich an dem mMn. besten Country-Coin - Guldencoin der Holländer -. Die machen dass (zumindest in meinem Augen) richtig, siehe: https://guldencoin.com/Bei denen läuft's ja recht gut, scheinbar. |
|
|
|
You seam like to have already found your answer(s). This is my last try communicating with you (on this issue): So what I really wonder is when the Keynsian trained people are finally going to admit that "infinite expansion" is not possible.
They NEVER will. It's part of the model, one general assumption of their whole "theoretical system". Every single computer programmer or mathematician knows this (it is so simple I could teach it to a child who understand math).
(Last try, won't reply again:) - Every single computer programmer or mathematician knows every complex software system and technologies can always be improved (through research and science). - Every single computer programmer or mathematician knows these improvements and optimizations lead to increased (better) efficiency (e.g. in ressource usage). - Now every single computer programmer or mathematician should be able to realize that this increased efficiency satisfies the assumption of infinite expansion, at least in this theoretical model. Because as stated above, denying this would mean: we reach a situation, where the mankind isnt able do improvements and optimizations through brainwork (research and science) anymore. Have a nice day CIYAM, you are a good poster overall. |
|
|
|
It has been studied and it won't work. So think again.
I dont understand you. Even if you dont like the space thing. Point 1 still stands and justifies "infinite expansion". If you deny this, you are saying "we reach a level where humanity cant research, improve and innovate anymore". Which is non-sense. |
|
|
|
|
It's easy:
- Humans will always innovate, this will never stop. So there will always be increased efficiency allowing infinite expansion.
- Also as you noticed but didn't think through. Earth isn't the limit.
Just think about easy example: we may not find another earth, but maybe we soon put our waste on the moon and get raw materials from Mars or if the Earth gets to small we live in space station like ISS.
|
|
|
|
|
I would like to join.
Votes + fees : 60 xmr
Registered IRC handle : netg
Please PM payment ID so I can send TX.
|
|
|
|
Meiner Meinung nach ist es weniger die Leistungsfähigkeit als die (von Dir ebenfalls angesprochene) Sicherheit, die wirklich entscheidend ist und Turing-vollständige Kryptowährungen grundsätzlich problematisch macht.
Genau, denn vollständige Turing-Vollständigkeit in einer Kryptowährung führt ja mindestens zu folgenden Sicherheitsgefahren: - Angreifer Bob stielt von Service-Betreiber Alice Geld ("Ether") - Angreifer Bob stielt von Service-Betreiber Alice den Service (zahlt seine "Ether"-Fees nicht korrekt) - Angreifer Bob DDOS'ed Alices Service finanziell (verbraucht fremdes "Ether" ohne eigenen Nutzen, rein destruktiv, Beispiel: 100000000x starten eines Services der Alice "Ether" kostet) - Angreifer Bob DDOS'ed Alices Service durch klassische Überlastung (hardwareseitig Vollauslastung, softwareseitige Vollauslastung, Mischformen, Deadlocks, etc.) - durch Fehler im Protokoll oder Bugs in der Softwareimplementierung wird "Ether" ungewollt zerstört/geht verloren (Gefahr die zwar jede Coin in sich trägt, aber eben durch Turing-Vollständigkeit enorm steigt) Und eben wegen dieser Gefahren, wird a) Ethereum ewig Vaporware/in der Entwicklung bleiben oder b) nie volle Turing-Vollständigkeit erhalten und manche sagen eben, überhaupt erhalten können. (So wurde es mir erklärt, ich hoffe dass es so stimmt.) |
|
|
|
Meine Meinung hat sich nicht geändert: es gibt ein komplexes Netzwerk von Insidern, die den Kurs zur ihren Gunsten manipulieren! Und der Kurs führt letztlich nur in eine Richtung: nach unten!! Ganz weit nach unten!!
Na, das sind ja doofe Insider. Warum manipulieren die den Kurs zu ihren Gunsten nicht nach oben? Warum nur nach unten, sind das alles Masochisten? |
|
|
|
Davon abgesehen besitzen ein paar Dutzend Leute die Hälfte aller Bitcoins - mit dieser Verteilung kann es keine stabile Währung geben. Zumal die meisten davon auch noch anonym sind. Und wie viele Transaktionen kann Bitcoin nochmal pro Sekunde verarbeiten? 7? Bei Visa sind es 2500 - in Stoßzeiten 5000. Wie viel Bandbreite braucht man für den sicheren Betrieb? Die Synchronisation der letzten 5 Monate hat bei mir über 2 Tage gedauert - bei ner 32MBit-Leitung.  |
|
|
|
|
Das führt dich jetzt zu welcher Frage?
|
|
|
|
I bought 210 BTC for $6, 40 BTC for $80 and 35 BTC for $110 and invested all the 285 BTC at the orginal Silk Road for drugs. Didnt felt bad at the time, had alot money these days and was pretty bad addicted and stoned. Felt great, had domestic SR vendors. Spent BTC got drugs delivered via mail in under 24 hours. Was a great time. Also in my stoned & uninformed mind, I always thought price couldnt go bigger then $100/coin, that would be the absolut max. :-) Was later REALLY, REALLY annoyed when price moved to $1000. (Obvious cuz 285 * 1000= $285000) Feel way better now with price at $200. Doesnt feel like so much wasted money.  What also makes me feel better today, that its sure now that Bitcoin is no good crypto asset and will never go to $10.000 / coin or $500.000 / coin , which are values we all dreamed about in 2012 und and 2013. A new better, TBD crypto assset will go the moon, but not Bitcoin. That's good. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
