I have a very, very hard time believing the OP is a scientist or meteorologist. If he was, he'd know that our oxygen supply is slowly, but surely decreasing in the atmosphere(which while natural is worrying(, while other gases continue to increase such as carbon dioxide. He'd know that our atmosphere protects us from most of the sun's rays, and without such protection, Earth would be inhabitable and would resemble it's sister, Venus(Which has temperatures regularly in the high hundreds of degrees, Fahrenheit), and finally, he would know that humanity's use of things such as cars, nuclear plants, factories, basically any type of machine that doesn't run solely on electricity, is largely contributing to the degradation of our atmosphere.
Point in case? OP is an idiot and a liar about being a scientist.
Your conclusions are wrong because you have your premises, and your facts wrong. 1. O2 supply going down is irrelevant. 2. Dynamics of atmosphere and temperature of Venus is completely different than Earth. 3. Machines that don't run solely on electricity are degrading our atmosphere? Who sez? 1) Not irrelevant, ever thought that the pollution coming from us may speed up that process? 2) Venus's atmosphere is largely composed of Carbon Dioxide, a gas in which we are exceedingly good at polluting our world with, hence cars, factories, and the like, and which leads to increased global warming. 3) If they don't run on electricity, then they must run on something else right? Water is out of the equation, so that leaves gasoline... 1) No, pollution from man does not change the O2 concenteration. This is a ridiculous assertion. CO2 is a low energy state molecule, O2 fairly high. O2 dynamically engages in many, many chemical reactions in both directions. 2) Venus's atmosphere characteristics are largely created by the sulfer dioxide cloud cover in the upper stratosphere of the planet. 3) Most electricity is the product of burning fossil fuels. You seem to think that can be ignored and that "electricity is good and carbon fuels are bad." 1) Entirely wrong, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/aug/13/carbonemissions.climatechange2) It's because Venus lacks a magnetic field, and it can't shield itself from brute force of the sun's harmful rays 3) Electricity is most often generated at a power station by electromechanical generators, primarily driven by heat engines fueled by chemical combustion or nuclear fission but also by other means such as the kinetic energy of flowing water and wind. Other energy sources include solar photovoltaics and geothermal power. I suggest you go study more on the matter at hand. lmfao isnt venus slightly closer to the sun too?  Go to school kid. Mercury is closest to the sun, yet not as hot as Venus. i think we are on earth here.. at least i am You made this comment, " lmfao isnt venus slightly closer to the sun too? ", which obviously meant that you belive Venus being closer to the Sun is what makes is so hot, and then I proved you wrong in stating that Venu's being closer to the Sun isn't the primary reason for it being so hot, since it's hotter than Mercury, which is the closest planet to the sun. Again, go back to school. |
|
|
|
I have a very, very hard time believing the OP is a scientist or meteorologist. If he was, he'd know that our oxygen supply is slowly, but surely decreasing in the atmosphere(which while natural is worrying(, while other gases continue to increase such as carbon dioxide. He'd know that our atmosphere protects us from most of the sun's rays, and without such protection, Earth would be inhabitable and would resemble it's sister, Venus(Which has temperatures regularly in the high hundreds of degrees, Fahrenheit), and finally, he would know that humanity's use of things such as cars, nuclear plants, factories, basically any type of machine that doesn't run solely on electricity, is largely contributing to the degradation of our atmosphere.
Point in case? OP is an idiot and a liar about being a scientist.
Your conclusions are wrong because you have your premises, and your facts wrong. 1. O2 supply going down is irrelevant. 2. Dynamics of atmosphere and temperature of Venus is completely different than Earth. 3. Machines that don't run solely on electricity are degrading our atmosphere? Who sez? 1) Not irrelevant, ever thought that the pollution coming from us may speed up that process? 2) Venus's atmosphere is largely composed of Carbon Dioxide, a gas in which we are exceedingly good at polluting our world with, hence cars, factories, and the like, and which leads to increased global warming. 3) If they don't run on electricity, then they must run on something else right? Water is out of the equation, so that leaves gasoline... 1) No, pollution from man does not change the O2 concenteration. This is a ridiculous assertion. CO2 is a low energy state molecule, O2 fairly high. O2 dynamically engages in many, many chemical reactions in both directions. 2) Venus's atmosphere characteristics are largely created by the sulfer dioxide cloud cover in the upper stratosphere of the planet. 3) Most electricity is the product of burning fossil fuels. You seem to think that can be ignored and that "electricity is good and carbon fuels are bad." 1) Entirely wrong, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/aug/13/carbonemissions.climatechange2) It's because Venus lacks a magnetic field, and it can't shield itself from brute force of the sun's harmful rays 3) Electricity is most often generated at a power station by electromechanical generators, primarily driven by heat engines fueled by chemical combustion or nuclear fission but also by other means such as the kinetic energy of flowing water and wind. Other energy sources include solar photovoltaics and geothermal power. I suggest you go study more on the matter at hand. lmfao isnt venus slightly closer to the sun too? Go to school kid. Mercury is closest to the sun, yet not as hot as Venus. |
|
|
|
I have a very, very hard time believing the OP is a scientist or meteorologist. If he was, he'd know that our oxygen supply is slowly, but surely decreasing in the atmosphere(which while natural is worrying(, while other gases continue to increase such as carbon dioxide. He'd know that our atmosphere protects us from most of the sun's rays, and without such protection, Earth would be inhabitable and would resemble it's sister, Venus(Which has temperatures regularly in the high hundreds of degrees, Fahrenheit), and finally, he would know that humanity's use of things such as cars, nuclear plants, factories, basically any type of machine that doesn't run solely on electricity, is largely contributing to the degradation of our atmosphere.
Point in case? OP is an idiot and a liar about being a scientist.
Your conclusions are wrong because you have your premises, and your facts wrong. 1. O2 supply going down is irrelevant. 2. Dynamics of atmosphere and temperature of Venus is completely different than Earth. 3. Machines that don't run solely on electricity are degrading our atmosphere? Who sez? 1) Not irrelevant, ever thought that the pollution coming from us may speed up that process? 2) Venus's atmosphere is largely composed of Carbon Dioxide, a gas in which we are exceedingly good at polluting our world with, hence cars, factories, and the like, and which leads to increased global warming. 3) If they don't run on electricity, then they must run on something else right? Water is out of the equation, so that leaves gasoline... 1) No, pollution from man does not change the O2 concenteration. This is a ridiculous assertion. CO2 is a low energy state molecule, O2 fairly high. O2 dynamically engages in many, many chemical reactions in both directions. 2) Venus's atmosphere characteristics are largely created by the sulfer dioxide cloud cover in the upper stratosphere of the planet. 3) Most electricity is the product of burning fossil fuels. You seem to think that can be ignored and that "electricity is good and carbon fuels are bad." 1) Entirely wrong; ever hear of light pollution in cities? Yea, well the same goes for CO2 pollution http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/aug/13/carbonemissions.climatechange, http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/co2.html2) It's because Venus lacks a magnetic field, and it can't shield itself from brute force of the sun's harmful rays 3) Partly true, Water is also widely used. Electricity is most often generated at a power station by electromechanical generators, primarily driven by heat engines fueled by chemical combustion or nuclear fission but also by other means such as the kinetic energy of flowing water and wind. Other energy sources include solar photovoltaics and geothermal power. I suggest you go study more on the matter at hand. |
|
|
|
I have a very, very hard time believing the OP is a scientist or meteorologist. If he was, he'd know that our oxygen supply is slowly, but surely decreasing in the atmosphere(which while natural is worrying(, while other gases continue to increase such as carbon dioxide. He'd know that our atmosphere protects us from most of the sun's rays, and without such protection, Earth would be inhabitable and would resemble it's sister, Venus(Which has temperatures regularly in the high hundreds of degrees, Fahrenheit), and finally, he would know that humanity's use of things such as cars, nuclear plants, factories, basically any type of machine that doesn't run solely on electricity, is largely contributing to the degradation of our atmosphere.
Point in case? OP is an idiot and a liar about being a scientist.
Your conclusions are wrong because you have your premises, and your facts wrong. 1. O2 supply going down is irrelevant. 2. Dynamics of atmosphere and temperature of Venus is completely different than Earth. 3. Machines that don't run solely on electricity are degrading our atmosphere? Who sez? 1) Not irrelevant, ever thought that the pollution coming from us may speed up that process? 2) Venus's atmosphere is largely composed of Carbon Dioxide, a gas in which we are exceedingly good at polluting our world with, hence cars, factories, and the like, and which leads to increased global warming. 3) If they don't run on electricity, then they must run on something else right? Water is out of the equation, so that leaves gasoline... lol such troll  ever heard of photosynthesis? "Photosynthesis is a process used by plants and other organisms to convert light energy, normally from the Sun, into chemical energy that can be later released to fuel the organisms' activities." What exactly does Photosynthesis have do with this...We're talking about mankind's contribution to the problem of global warming... Why are you so stupid? meh, photosynthesis is in the center of your stupid global warming problem. it is indeed a problem, just not the one you think. You see, CO2 is the natural gaz vital for any vegetal to thrive (despite massive human deforestation) and it is such process that also allows us human to breath O2. Hence, i want more CO2 as you blindly suggested "that our oxygen supply is slowly, but surely decreasing". now go away, its stupid people like you that are a threat to earth and mankind. Well... I can't tell him/her to go away as this thread needs to never ban anyone, unlike the one on REDDIT. SHE/HE would ban us for sure, proof by calling anyone who does not agree with his/her superior brain stupid  To the contrary I say "Welcome to my little thread my dear Cum-In-Behind!" After reading hdbuck's paragraph, if you can call it that.. and Wikkon supporting him. I'm done here, it's just going to be a waste of time debating with someone(s) who has the intelligence of a 3 year old, and even saying that is an insult to the smart 3 year olds out there, my apologies to them. |
|
|
|
Any winners announced yet?
DB is deciding. Isn't it cute how they pretend that 400 people voted on this. They don't have 400 players. If they had 10,000 players 400 wouldn't vote in a week for alts. DB has been working hard signing up new names at BCT to vote. They don't have any advantage to do so, Just few tons of XMR/DRK coin owners hoping a big site accepts their currency to spread some FUD and raise the price a little before selling (and there alts). as a real player here I voted for PeerCoin because it's one that I actually use, Possibility of PeerCoin winning with things going like this are "nonexistent" though. Just a few comments: 1. Yes, there is an active community behind these coins and a good percentage of the votes is originally from people looking to support their coins rather than the site, but they learned about the site through this exercise and that is good exposure, I would love it if I was operating Direct Bet. The question is where are the supporters of the other coins? Are they not interested or they just don't have that kind of community support? 2. Will everybody voting eventually become a client not really, but a larger community gives them a larger sample to work with and they will definitely win some new customers. I would love to bet on spanish football if they make Darkcoin available as an example. 3. They need to think about how the new coin addition can benefit current customers. In the case of Darkcoin instant confirmations and anonymity might just be a good fit for the betting site regardless of the community behind it. 4. Maybe you need to learn more about these projects and why are so many people excited about them. I dont see Monero happening just yet because they dont have a GUI Wallet that people can use and is an untested codebase. But yeah I woud add Darkcoin now and maybe Monero later when they are ready. At least these coins have a use case that is different from BTC and they add value. Looking at your post history I see why you want to put off using Monero. Monero has survived two attacks in recent months and has wallets available. People just want anonymous options, and I personally want an anonymous option that isn't based on Bitcoin's code. In all honesty, Darkcoin uses Bitcoin's code as generalizethis has said. So, it doesn't make much sense to use a coin on a site in which Bitcoin could simply incorporate it's features later on. That's why I'd prefer Monero to be added to sites that want anonymous coins, as it's code is not taken from Bitcoin's and it's features can't be implemented in Bitcoin's via simple copy/paste(with tweaks) like Darkcoins can. |
|
|
|
I have a very, very hard time believing the OP is a scientist or meteorologist. If he was, he'd know that our oxygen supply is slowly, but surely decreasing in the atmosphere(which while natural is worrying(, while other gases continue to increase such as carbon dioxide. He'd know that our atmosphere protects us from most of the sun's rays, and without such protection, Earth would be inhabitable and would resemble it's sister, Venus(Which has temperatures regularly in the high hundreds of degrees, Fahrenheit), and finally, he would know that humanity's use of things such as cars, nuclear plants, factories, basically any type of machine that doesn't run solely on electricity, is largely contributing to the degradation of our atmosphere.
Point in case? OP is an idiot and a liar about being a scientist.
Your conclusions are wrong because you have your premises, and your facts wrong. 1. O2 supply going down is irrelevant. 2. Dynamics of atmosphere and temperature of Venus is completely different than Earth. 3. Machines that don't run solely on electricity are degrading our atmosphere? Who sez? 1) Not irrelevant, ever thought that the pollution coming from us may speed up that process? 2) Venus's atmosphere is largely composed of Carbon Dioxide, a gas in which we are exceedingly good at polluting our world with, hence cars, factories, and the like, and which leads to increased global warming. 3) If they don't run on electricity, then they must run on something else right? Water is out of the equation, so that leaves gasoline... lol such troll ever heard of photosynthesis? "Photosynthesis is a process used by plants and other organisms to convert light energy, normally from the Sun, into chemical energy that can be later released to fuel the organisms' activities." What exactly does Photosynthesis have do with this...We're talking about mankind's contribution to the problem of global warming... Why are you so stupid? |
|
|
|
If crypto's really take off I believe there will be more than 1 or 2 that will survive. I believe instead of asking Visa, Master Card, Discover, or American Express, we will have the option to pay in multiply cryptocoins.
So would the name of a coin alone help it succeed? Even though they don't get much attention I think Globalcoin has a good name. Also, Netcoin.
Or does the name not matter and it's all up to the dev and community? I guess I'm trying to compare early websites like business.com that sold for millions based on its name.
Branding alone can definitely make a coin successful. There's no point in talking to people about branding here. Look at the suggestions some have made, Globalcoin, Netcoin. Lol, guys, any cryptocurrency with the english name "coin" in it besides Bitcoin, will fail branding wise. "Insert here"Coin sounds immature, tacky, childish, and overall like play money. Bitcoin got by with it's name solely because it was the first cryptocurrency, not because it's name was spectacular(it's the opposite). To have a really successful brand name, it must be easily recognizable, simple, short, unique, and one worded. EX: Google, Yahoo, Bing, eBay, Apple, etc What's so funny? Why are you here "talking"?? Get that checked out. I'm saying at a mainstream level, if cryptocurrencies take off, would the name or branding help it succeed mainstream. I think Globalcoin or Digitalcoin would more likely be adopted than methcoin or Murrycoin. It's a question. I appreciate you making yourself look like an ass. You must be real broke. See how I connected those dots? I mean we can post public addresses and move .00009876 BTC at an agreed time. I'll bet 100 BTC I have more. Wanna play lol. Too easy. Get well soon. Are you on fucking drugs? Your entire paragraph seems like you typed it with your left hand up your ass. Move .00009 btc at a time? Is that what you call rich? 100 BTC, oh you think you have more? Let's go, bring in an escrow. Wanna play. Too easy. |
|
|
|
I have a very, very hard time believing the OP is a scientist or meteorologist. If he was, he'd know that our oxygen supply is slowly, but surely decreasing in the atmosphere(which while natural is worrying(, while other gases continue to increase such as carbon dioxide. He'd know that our atmosphere protects us from most of the sun's rays, and without such protection, Earth would be inhabitable and would resemble it's sister, Venus(Which has temperatures regularly in the high hundreds of degrees, Fahrenheit), and finally, he would know that humanity's use of things such as cars, nuclear plants, factories, basically any type of machine that doesn't run solely on electricity, is largely contributing to the degradation of our atmosphere.
Point in case? OP is an idiot and a liar about being a scientist.
Your conclusions are wrong because you have your premises, and your facts wrong. 1. O2 supply going down is irrelevant. 2. Dynamics of atmosphere and temperature of Venus is completely different than Earth. 3. Machines that don't run solely on electricity are degrading our atmosphere? Who sez? 1) Not irrelevant, ever thought that the pollution coming from us may speed up that process? 2) Venus's atmosphere is largely composed of Carbon Dioxide, a gas in which we are exceedingly good at polluting our world with, hence cars, factories, and the like, and which leads to increased global warming. 3) If they don't run on electricity, then they must run on something else right? Water is out of the equation, so that leaves gasoline... |
|
|
|
If Monero was added, I would consider using Directbet.eu. Darkcoin's anonymity doesn't cut it.
" This issue comes from the way fees are paid in Darksend with the combination of the way the client tries to denominate the same amount each round. The result is the possibility to trace a transaction through Darksend. " -eduffield
So your response was to take an out-of-context quote about an issue that has been fixed and pass it off as a current problem? Solid. So tell me the origin of this tx id: d06e7cd0726f693b9133ed2be5505312d9fdfa18f60deb7e7a7d2423ff4b5b25 No. I never passed it off as a current problem. I meant that it's masternode based anonymity has/can have bugs, as in the case of that one. However...seeing as that both coins have a large, practically equal, amount of votes while the others listed are practically invisible, it would be best if they were both added. |
|
|
|
|
If Monero was added, I would consider using Directbet.eu. Darkcoin's anonymity doesn't cut it.
" This issue comes from the way fees are paid in Darksend with the combination of the way the client tries to denominate the same amount each round. The result is the possibility to trace a transaction through Darksend. " -eduffield
|
|
|
|
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/13/world/meast/isis-currency/index.html?hpt=hp_c2ISIS is planning to mint its own currency in gold, silver and copper, the group said Thursday.
Its aim is to stay away from the "tyrant's financial system," ISIS said in a statement. It said it would issue another statement to explain the new currency's exchange rate, and where it can be found. Sounds like they are printing their own kind of FIAT. More scamcoin. I think this is a great opportunity to show them Bitcoin and get some users from the Middle East. The anonymity and low fees are sure to be a turn on. How can we spread the word and help Bitcoin go TO THE MOON!? You're a freaking retard of the highest proportions. Why the hell would you want ISIS to use Bitcoin? Hell no they shouldn't use Bitcoin. Stupid OP. Um. I would rather ISIS use bitcoin than the US government... Truthfully I would prefer both but I got a good laugh out of "We don't want the little governments fighting for land to use Bitcoin" compared to asking permission from the big governments that already have land I was actually trolling, but god damn I knew at least 1 person would agree that was actually a good idea (hint: its fucking terrible). Thank god, reading your OP made me breathe fire... |
|
|
|
If crypto's really take off I believe there will be more than 1 or 2 that will survive. I believe instead of asking Visa, Master Card, Discover, or American Express, we will have the option to pay in multiply cryptocoins.
So would the name of a coin alone help it succeed? Even though they don't get much attention I think Globalcoin has a good name. Also, Netcoin.
Or does the name not matter and it's all up to the dev and community? I guess I'm trying to compare early websites like business.com that sold for millions based on its name.
Branding alone can definitely make a coin successful. There's no point in talking to people about branding here. Look at the suggestions some have made, Globalcoin, Netcoin. Lol, guys, any cryptocurrency with the english name "coin" in it besides Bitcoin, will fail branding wise. "Insert here"Coin sounds immature, tacky, childish, and overall like play money. Bitcoin got by with it's name solely because it was the first cryptocurrency, not because it's name was spectacular(it's the opposite). To have a really successful brand name, it must be easily recognizable, simple, short, unique, and one worded. EX: Google, Yahoo, Bing, eBay, Apple, etc |
|
|
|
|
I have a very, very hard time believing the OP is a scientist or meteorologist. If he was, he'd know that our oxygen supply is slowly, but surely decreasing in the atmosphere(which while natural is worrying(, while other gases continue to increase such as carbon dioxide. He'd know that our atmosphere protects us from most of the sun's rays, and without such protection, Earth would be inhabitable and would resemble it's sister, Venus(Which has temperatures regularly in the high hundreds of degrees, Fahrenheit), and finally, he would know that humanity's use of things such as cars, nuclear plants, factories, basically any type of machine that doesn't run solely on electricity, is largely contributing to the degradation of our atmosphere.
Point in case? OP is an idiot and a liar about being a scientist.
|
|
|
|
It's also more importantly half of the name of the currency we're dealing with. The name is "bit"-coin. It always seems like people conveniently forget to mention that the name of the proposed new term is IN THE NAME OF THE ACTUAL COIN!
Which is why some new users assume 1bit==1Bitcoin. Yea, I have never used Bit, and still won't. It's just stupid. Anyone who never heard bit before or doesn't know what it represents, will assume Bit=Bitcoin i.e 1 Bit=1 Bitcoin, which isn't the case. Using the word Bit is stupid as hell. Consensus works only if people educated on the subject are the only ones entitled to vote. Having people who have No Idea about Bitcoin or how it works, "vote" on something like this is just stupid. |
|
|
|
Monero offers higher level of untraceability due to nature of CryptoNote protocol which is completely different from Bitcoin protocol. However this tech is still in very early stage of development. Who cares ? That's pure theory and it pales into insignificance against the massive redundancy that the Darkcoin network now has with it's background pre-emptive coin supply anonymisation. Monero is a single tier approach technology. It has to do it's "anon" in realtime at the point of the transaction. With Darkcoin, your entire wallet has been anonymised into oblivion way before you've even decided you need to do the transaction. Darkcoin's actual mixing algo could be only half as effective as any other and yet the network will still deliver far a more secure service in terms of untraceability. Another area where Darkcoin is architecturally optimal is in deciding what to evolve and what not to evolve. It has a 2-tier network which lets it do all its anon-development without disrupting or coupling with the commercial interface which is Bitcoin compliant. That's another area where cryptonote is sub-optimal. If Bitcoin itself hadn't consolidated so well this year I'd have said that these things were still up for grabs. But as things have turned out, Bitcoin has all but killed off all the competition. Its nearest threat was Litecoin which got to within 2% of Bitcoin's valuation at the time. It's now sitting at 0.02% of BTC's marketcap. So what does this mean as far as commercial protocols go ? It means that any future player that wants a look in on the cryptocoin retail and trade market needs to use the Bitcoin prototcol which Darkcoin does - that was the whole basis behind its 2-tier approach. Not true at all. Darkcoin's anonymity is be default, easily centralized and easy to compromise. Nodes must be hosted of which most are on centralized servers(Amazon etc), if those nodes are taken down then Darkcoin's coinjoin is taken down. Also, Darkcoin's Darksend was Broken for a while, meaning anyone who used Darkcoin during that time to send coins anonymously could be traced, and that Darkcoin is suspectible for bugs that would destroy it's anonymity system. https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/darkcoin-finds-fixes-darksend-privacy-bug/Overall, Darkcoin relies on external things such as the setting up of nodes, to give it's users privacy, while Monero does not. Monero's privacy is built in, and thus can't fall susceptible to things Darkcoin can. |
|
|
|
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/13/world/meast/isis-currency/index.html?hpt=hp_c2ISIS is planning to mint its own currency in gold, silver and copper, the group said Thursday.
Its aim is to stay away from the "tyrant's financial system," ISIS said in a statement. It said it would issue another statement to explain the new currency's exchange rate, and where it can be found. Sounds like they are printing their own kind of FIAT. More scamcoin. I think this is a great opportunity to show them Bitcoin and get some users from the Middle East. The anonymity and low fees are sure to be a turn on. How can we spread the word and help Bitcoin go TO THE MOON!? You're a freaking retard of the highest proportions. Why the hell would you want ISIS to use Bitcoin? Hell no they shouldn't use Bitcoin. Stupid OP. Um. I would rather ISIS use bitcoin than the US government... Truthfully I would prefer both but I got a good laugh out of "We don't want the little governments fighting for land to use Bitcoin" compared to asking permission from the big governments that already have land Then you're one retarded Motherfucker. ISIS publicly using Bitcoin will be the End of Bitcoin(Price and Adoption Wise). |
|
|
|
People fudding XMR in anticipation of the Cryptsy pump should be ashamed.
LOL People buying in cryptsy pump should be ashamed IMO. My advice is to find the equilibrium price for the coin and not to pump it artificially. When the equilibrium price has been discovered, then it is time to start accumulating and the price will be able to start rising. If the price is too high for the absorbing the coins, then the price keeps falling, if the price is too low (meaning: there is more demand than the miners can supply at the price, the price will rise). Personally I will start my buying at 0.0005 levels and see if it is too high or too low. Tbh, you're completely wrong. There's no such thing as a equilibrium price in crypto. Does Bitcoin has a equilibrium price? No. Price depends on demand, and you get demand from (insert here). Pumps in themselves are not artificial, if you want to go that route. Then I can claim every cryptocurrency, especially Bitcoin, is "artificial", ever heard of the bot Willy, who pumped bitcoin to it's all time highs seen in November? Yea... |
|
|
|
|
I would like to nominate Come-In-Behind. <
|
|
|
|
What are the advantages of Monero compared to Darkcoin from investor's point of view?
Block chain math anonymity vs node mixing service. He asked for advantages, which one has the advantage? Having the anonymity in the chain trusting the math won't be broken / is not buggy vs taking that risk out by not putting the mixing in the chain in the first place. Instamine scam vs not scam.
Oh, did you miss the lunch? Without fast distribution drk wouldn't have 1200+ masternodes running and enabling services like anonymization and instant transactions. Sometimes good things can follow from a mishappening in the beginning. The name "Darkcoin" vs "Monero"
The other is instantly brandable, everyone will at least have a hunch of what it's doing. Current pricing if both coins are worth the same allows for profit when we are down to 3000 coins a day. Darkcoin does not.
Can't wait. How long will that be btw? Concerning image/branding opportunity. Monero is by far in the lead, it's name sounds like money...Dinero.. anyone? Darkcoin's sounds like something strictly illegal hence the Dark part. Darkcoin's name alone(Outside of the small crypto community here) already puts it at a large disadvantage. |
|
|
|
Looks like Bter have worst price/support for XMR.
I'm surprised people even still use Bter as an exchange. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
