This feels like ghash.io all over again, except this time there's not even a face on the potential threat.. Looks like Andreas Antonopolis is on permanent amber alet for FUD spreading Bitcointalk threads now since the whole malliability thing. Within minutes of this thread appearing there's now a remark in red on the graph saying: A large portion of Unknown blocks does not mean an attack on the network, it simply means we have been unable to determine the origin.LoL !! I can just see him with his head in his hands in despair - oh jeez, another b.s. fud spreading Bitcointalk thread. Better go and do necessaries...  |
|
|
|
I don't think any of the answers given so far are the reason there's not rampant inflation. The reason is that the fed offers a competitive interest rate on excess reserves to serve as a magnet to "suck" all the new money back onto its own balance sheets as soon as the bond purchases are made, so that it doesn't get out into the economy. Look - all the money (mainly in the form of US T-Bonds), is sitting backed up on the feds balance sheet... http://qz.com/157198/the-federal-reserves-balance-sheet-will-hit-a-mind-boggling-4-trillion-any-day-now/Read this wiki article which states how the law was changed in 2008 to allow the fed to do this. The express purpose was so that they could start doing QE without it causing rampant inflation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_reserves#In_the_United_States_.282008-.29(Actually, this poster is saying the same thing) When we say the govt is printing money, we are not really talking about the paper notes in circulation, rather electronic money (digits in a computer screen) that exists in bank accounts.
Yes, of course. They are not doing that either though. an excerpt from some quick google search result: When the Fed creates $85 billion, it uses this money to buy bonds - typically split 50/50 between US Treasuries and Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS). Here is what's important: When the Fed creates and gives $85 billion in reserves to its member banks, it removes $85 billion worth of assets (bonds) from the balance sheets of those same member banks. The result is that no new net financial assets enter the economy. |
|
|
|
My initial thoughts are these guys are possibly, along with others, employed by either government or financial institutions to spread FUD and discredit the idea of decentralised cryptocurrency as an alternative to the failed fiat system. LoL. If only it were such grand a mission  In fact they're employed by their own egos to grind out antagonistic monotone in each of the forum threads that might make a difference in order to mitigate polite, diverse and constructive contributions from posters with a range of backgrounds. |
|
|
|
i'll be shocked if it recovers.
Better shout a bit louder. I don't think the market heard you. |
|
|
|
Adoption has a lot to do with SECURING the blockchain.
I think you mean "securing the blockchain has everything to do with adoption". |
|
|
|
By the way, everyone: AUR nearly doubled over the last day at Cryptsy. I'm just noting it, as I'm locked in elsewhere and couldn't do a thing about it even if I wanted to, but anyone who stepped up to the plate yesterday did pretty well.
Žarna sjįiš žiš. |
|
|
|
It will also depend upon whether they are willing and able to outbid all the other scrypt coins for mining services to secure their blockchain, which is a losing proposition for all non merged mined coins since the more such coins there are the more leverage the miners have to extort higher and higher pay for picking any particular coin to momentarily mine - momentarily meaning until some other coin decides to fork out even more to pay them to come defend it instead.
I don't see it like this. Although that's technically true, we are in the growth phase of all cryptocurrencies. As long as there's a reasonable amount of hashpower around to protect the ones that developed a significant level of socio-economic network effect during that growth period then the sector as a whole will grow. The fact that there are theoretical (and in some cases practical) risks just has to be accepted because there are so many other priorities in play. It's the "socio-economic" part that's significant here, not whatever technical specs the coin has. There are all kinds of 'anchors' for cryptocurrencies to gain a foothold into the world financial system. I agree that 'national coin' is possibly not a long term prospect, but it definitely is at the moment because it provides for an early-adopter scenario that's far more realistic that the global one. Watching Bitcoin try to gain a foothold in commerce is like watching paint dry. The global market is just far too huge to make that leap at once on a such a scale. On the other hand, micro-economies like Iceland with capital controls and a disaster of a fiat currency are much more fertile ground. They also happen to be a highly educated population who are into new technology in a big way and may just take to this like ducks to water - especially if they see the value start to rise. Look at it this way. They've now got 2 places to put their money instead of one: [1] - a highly levered proxy money that gets devalued on a periodic basis by their government by up to 20% at a time [2] - an unlevered base money with a limited supply who's value is likely to start accruing from here The coin's only been out a few days and already it's seen casual use in more sectors than Bitcoin did in 3 years. There's huge potential for a virtuous cycle of commerce, value accrual and promotion being set up. Forget about talk of "dumping for bitcoin" or "dumping for dollars". Were talking about ordinary people here who don't wile away their lives on cryptocurrency exchanges or reading bitcointalk threads. It's easier for them either just to hold onto it or spend it on some gardening stuff that they can pick up from half a mile away. Add to that the fact that the airdrop will be continuing for up to a year and EVERYONE's going to get some. This project isn't disappearing anytime soon - it's only just starting in my opinion and if it goes anywhere socially then it will attract all the hashing power it needs to "protect the network". If you know anything at all about Icelandic people and economy, this is an extremely interesting situation. It should be supported instead of dismissed because if it works it will light a fire under Bitcoin and the whole viability of cryptocurrencies around the world. |
|
|
|
In other words just keep churning out scams and whichever scam the public falls for will magically turn into a legitimate business enterprise Contrary to what you may like to think, you're no more of an authority on what is a scam and what isn't than any other market participant. That's particularly true in this case where you're basically clueless about what your talking about when it comes to the real criteria that will give value to and "secure" this coin. So why not just leave it to "market forces" for a while and stop whining on about network security till we see what genuine commercial and social basis there is for the initiative. |
|
|
|
The masses should be able to just sit back and use the world's most secure blockchains without worrying themselves at all about how it is that those particular blockchains happen to be the only secure ones. That however is undermined by floods and floods of scammers promoting the most insecure garbage possible and mouthing off about how their scam is as good as or better than an, or maybe even any, actually secure currency You've got this the wrong way around. The "masses" decide what currency they're using and following that the network will be secured. They don't decide that on the basis of technical aspects of the coin. The criteria for the success of cryptocurrency have nothing to do with network hashrate or technical security. They are socio-economic. The mining community will make sure is secures whatever currency see the most adoption through the network effect of those socio-economic forces. That's why all the technical FUD being banded around here is largely irrelevant at the moment because we don't yet know what its fortune will be. |
|
|
|
Sp it is your desire and intent that the coins remain insecure? It's my desire that somebody give this stuck record a nudge. |
|
|
|
I like how the goal post has been moved from, "The dev is going to run off with and dump the premine" to "The dev and his supporters didn't secure the block chain"
What will it be next week if AUR continues to hang on or rises? I don't own any AUR but I respect a man of his word, I bet not one single member of this Operation Scamcoin cleanup would have the integrity to sit on a valuable premine and not cash out.
+1 In the absence of any substance we can expect a new all time high for the number of times the word "scam" can be crammed into a single post. |
|
|
|
@markm
you are battering these noobs that just registered here mouthing you off like they are somebody lol
they have just shown to valid response to common sense on the last few pages and just resort to diversionary tactics and name calling etc.
rather than addressing the technical aspects of the issue at hand.. Whatever the merits or otherwise of his points, thankfully it isn't a couple of cryptocurrency naval-gazing anoraks - nor their 'hangers on' - who will decide the fate of this coin. Nor will it be down to whether it's a "clone" or an "original". Nobody who actually ends up using it is going to give 2 flying turkeys about network hash, source code, retargeting interval or what the F*ck a "premine" is. They're getting them for free anyway so it's not them who are being 'scammed'. It will be down to commercial, political and social issues which most of the snarling cryptocoin trainspotters on here are clueless about and if it's successful on that basis then none of the technical FUD being thrown around here will matter. |
|
|
|
What a bullshit thread, first of all who the f are you? What is your experience in analysing markets? Your analysis doesn't make a single sense, infact it's so bad that you look like a troll.
+100 |
|
|
|
The scam is simply the fraudulent pretense that an totally insecure financial system is secure enough for actual use.
That simple, really, It is deliberately designed to be insecure, It deliberately avoids simple precautions that could help it be secure.
It is gross negligence, irresponsibility, to perpetrate such an insanely insecure thing for actual use.
The problem IS the insecurity of the blockchain.
It is INTENDED BY DESIGN to be insecure and to make it as hard as possible to secure.
-MarkM-
I think you forgot to mention that the network wasn't sufficiently secured and that the coin is therefore a scam. (Buying) |
|
|
|
@MarkM You again talking about hashing power? If that was the case, any new coin would have faced massive attacks. As kids like to break things. It is so completely evident neither you nor BCX has either skills or understanding to carry out any kind of meaningful attack. +1 |
|
|
|
This is a non-issue, since people who want hand-holding companies to hold their hands for them will use credit cards or debit cards or similar off-blockchain transaction processing services, they will not deal directly with bitcoins. If they chose to have accounts denominated in bitcoins with such services those services will deal with the blockchain, or maybe even they will act at a degree of remove such as by dealing with ETFs or somesuch. +1000 People keep confusing money media with payment processing services. The two things have nothing to do with each other except that one is used to denominate the other. Visa, Mastercard et al will be needed more than ever in a Bitcoin economy. They already deal in a myriad of currencies. (Don't get excited - not Myriad coin but a Myriad of Fiat). At the moment you can charge your credit card in one currency and do transactions in any other when you to other countries or buy on the internet. When you go to the supermarket, the point of sale cash tills will NOT be doing blockchain transactions. That would be a nightmare. They will work like the Cryptocurrency exchanges do right now - using accounts where the trades go through instantly. That also allows for all the meta services that payment processors provide - transaction insurance, refunds, discounts, store card support etc. What happens when the supermarket checkout person accidentally rings through next customer's cornflakes on your bill ? They need to be able to quickly refund you the difference and re-charge to the next guy. Can you imagine doing that on the blockchain ? Forget it. Payment processors provide an important service to the banking system - whether it be fiat or crypto - bu buffering the transactions and supporting front line point of sale. This will continue to be the case with Auroracoin. |
|
|
|
Don't you think that distributing 50% of pre-mined coins among country population is socialistic or even communistic approach ?
I know several examples of similar asset distribution in post-commie countries in the past and every of these approaches was doomed to fail and lead to economic collapse. Most of the public assets ended up in pockets of a few oligarchs.
That's because they never were in te hands of "the many" in the first place. Make your mind up - either you want crypto to succeed and gain a foothold or not. Icelanders are being distributed with something that's next to worthless with the prospect that they will "give it value" through gradually increasing adoption by their economy. It's got nothing to do with "socialism" or any other political philosophy nonsense. |
|
|
|
Jeez, I can't believe some of the idiotic remarks being made here. Now people are suspect because their english is too GOOD ?   How many history lessons are we going to get from Icelanders over and over again about their economy?
Apparently as many as it takes to get it through the thick heads of some morally grandstanding retards that they don't have a problem with the way the coin was managed. So the idea that Icelanders are poor things, worse victims than everywhere else is quite wrong. And the idea that they are a special case and should be given free money and it's not their fault for being too lazy to do some mining on an old computer... words fail. This is not like mining bitcoin, there was so little difficulty that anyone could have done it if they wanted to.
Look - if you don't want to trust your government to defend your currency, and want to create an alternative, you have to do the defending yourself. Just being passive and expecting everything to be done for you, foreign people to mine it for you, foreign people to develop it, foreign people to secure the blockchain, people in panama to do airdrops ... come on! This is not how the world works.
That's some peice of twisted logic you've got there by any standards. You make it sound like there was an altruistic element to the initial investment that went into Auroracoin. Don't kid yourself. People got rich off Aurora and it wasn't the ones who are getting it for free. If they ever make anything it will be because their economy did the hard work of giving it enough network effect to have some real value. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
