It seems BTC stayed 650/550? ranges for ages then when to 800 over time but rather quickly went from 800 to 1K

what are some views as to why this happened?

Particularly the last bit 800 to 1K

while this may or may not an ATH 5K~10K incoming there is, I posit a lot of room to grow

Its still so much early days in BTC as among other things 99.9999% of people understand nothing about money itself i.e

What is
FIAT,
FRACTIONAL RESERVE BANKING,
QE!,

rather they just want muh dollar and have their buying power whittled away

People can not see that in a super low inflation environment how then are houses and cost of living skyrocketing, there must be hyperinflation, and there is by QE.

Wages are not keeping up. People are not getting money via wages but endless loan issuance.


I feel a 0.5~2T market cap is easily achievable for BTC (at today's dollar buying power)

this..this is a new attribute....maybe there is room for a coin that random auto forks!

It so funny in here, most posters posts reflect a lag of bTC price

how about some you know actual speculation::

I think the Emission rate of Zcoin is very interesting

It may be see that it encourages HODL on a never before seen scale.

It starts so low that people get used to the idea of not putting a lot out there, and trading in multiple amounts of btc.

This could translate to never b4 seen levels of HODL even when the emission rate picks up.

The question is did ZCash choose the right Emission rate to effect this balance, and will their be whale dumps anyway?

If BTC adopts a similar level of anonymity and it probably can with a better algo given it can look at the issues of Zcash, then Zcash is very dead, if its not already.

It says something that VB has had to come out and say we too at Etherium must do this.

Ok so with my Lawyer hat on I took a quick look at the Zcash FAQ.

Zcash try to  address the "premine" accusation, which is often seen as deleterious in the crypto community,

Zcash argument is effecitvely allocating funds after mining has started and open to anyone to mine, (semantically) Zcash then say it is "not a premine".

However materially it is the same thing.

The aspect of the premine in issue is not when the mining was done, but how a percentage of funds was always locked up, requiring everyone else to come on board and pick up the tab, give it value etc.


So it is disingenuous of Zcash to claim its not a premine while achieving exactly the same thing.

In effect they have extend/changed the temporal horizon of the premine to a postmine for 4 years.

How do you feel about a 4 year premine, well that's what you have here, a 4 year postmine

I am not saying a postmine is intrinsically wrong (or a premine for that matter), but I am saying they should be more transparent in their info to the community, if they wish to generate trust.

I recall the long Resistance here to giving the new boards, but now there is even a speculation for alts. It seems over time alts will grow to reflect most of the topics in the main board. that probably necessary and wise to help BTC [talk] stay current and focal.

So where is the alt that is an ETH ETC clone, and can thus avoid the drama of both and just implement the updates from either ETH or ETC until it overtakes them in value and all the devs jump anyway?

Would it be possible that an exchange put away 0.1% of all trading profit to a cold wallet verifiable address, just in case of a Hack.

Now I realize this address itself could be hacked, but if it was held in multisig by trusted escrows, that should be pretty secure.

I also realize that is may encourage for insider jobs who just go meh, you have insurance, and this extra become trading margin becomes the excuse for higher fees, and less security.

However something like this if done right may attract a a lot more market share of trading and spread risk.

ok not over 9000, but I think we will see over $1K

can some one fill me in on how NXT is going, it seemed to be one of the best but the devs seem to be going to other projects, this is general impression i had ....

It also seemed to have so many features ....


did the initial distribution kill it?

[Vitalik]

Vitalik
https://blog.ethereum.org/2016/06/19/thinking-smart-contract-security/

"However, it does show that there is a fundamental barrier to what can be accomplished, and “fairness” is not something that can be mathematically proven in a theorem"

well yes it can:

If you hold a system will function in a particular way and it does then that is fair, and you can mathematically prove it
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4opjov/the_bug_which_the_dao_hacker_exploited_was_not/
TL;DR - Complexity and "Turing completeness" are not the real culprit here - those are all good things that we can have someday. The real culprit is poor language design. Specifically, I would recommend using "functional" (rather than "procedural") languages for mission-critical code which will be driving "smart contracts" - and even better if a high-level "specification" language could be used, allowing formal derivation of a (verifiably correct) program in a low-level "implementation" language (ie, providing mathematical proof that the implementation satisfies the specification - and mitigating the problem where the high-level human-readable "description" is different from the low-level machine-runnable "code").

When I read Vitalik, its boils down to semantics, buzz words and a spin not hard logic/maths, contra vitalik to the white paper of satoshi. Satoshi is almost all business and proofs.

Vitalik is obviously good at galveinsing capital behind a project and networking with people, just not so much as CEO of a code based contracts system it seems, as he does not have the understanding to select the coding team and understand what they tell him.

i suspected there must be quite a lot.

This was one of the reasons irc why satoshi left out or switched this of in BTC.

what has this guy done in codeing, maths or logic?

I have yet to find much about his abilities beyond getting people behind him

Not saying that is not a serious skill

but no so much in actually building the product.

Its sorta showing now as in the whole stable of DAO Eth not one of the programmers saw the bug (or did they)

same question raised here in more detail...
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4opjov/the_bug_which_the_dao_hacker_exploited_was_not/

so eth have used a bolt on high level language .... this is likely to be riddled with exploits. JavaScript like which is so loosely defined its great to run anything anywhere, but as long as you don't mid restarting your browser every so often.

Mission critical not so much.

this is sorta the feel I got, and perhaps counter party forced eth to release early .... but in any even Vitilaik, is not the guy who know inmho, who he needs as coders, and what code is and does, not does he seem to have the mathematical power to undertake proofs etc. I hope I am wrong. He seems like a spokesperson, so maybe he should be CCO chief communications officer of something, but a CEO of a contracts with billions of $ on a unstoppable distributed computer needs a grade 1 + coder / mathematician / computer scientist/ computer engineer, so tjhey can personally sort through the bullshit and choose the right codeing team and approach.

as per the subject.

BTC was often accused of being Tulips (by people that did not understand you can't teleport indestructible, un-forgeable, tulips). They seem to be pretty much gone faced with the fact this has gone on now for many more years than the Tulips did, and cannot be switched off. Also that stupid graph you know the one

One thing about BTC say your country has a natural disaster, invasion, pandemic, bad political situation eg Zimbabwe, your assets are often worthless and hard to get out in any event. Eg good luck selling your property. Cash limits will be slapped on and your currency is likely to be devalued.

Now you could keep say some cash amounts in overseas bank accounts but the hassle, and overheads and it really requires a quite a bit of cash...and then you may not be sure of which country you can get to....

BTC however keeping just a bit that you basically realise anywhere to keep you in food and shelter to weather the worst of it or start agian......its quite a good proposition. 

one thing btc tech (not necessarily btc itself) i am interested in is how it can compete in the NFC space.

At the moment I am trying my banks app, and I have to say it is pretty good, secure not so much, but I can put in a passowrd, and hold my phone to a check out and its done in 20 seconds or less.

Will this be an of chain solution for btc, or some low value chain like doge that goes fast for smaller amounts and sort of ties back into BTC through a clearing gateway.

I am pretty sure my bank and the pos use a "of chain" solution, that is they pre auth smaller amounts the reconcile a whole bundle of transaction every so often.

I have to say though its pretty good.

So you think zero confirm and larger block size can meet this.

That said I don't care that much about retail pos as that's the small change of financial markerts and money supply. I am interested though as to any views here in the tech section.

In some cases, I think these are sometimes to make themselves not a target and avoid taxes later.

imagine you had a bitcoin sticker on you car since 2010 so it looks pretty weathered.....your makeing yourself a target.

look what happened to the Australian guy as soon as they though he had quite a bit of BTC....raided by Oz Feds.

Its good cover to "muh hack", "selling all my btc", only had 10~ 100 left anyway" etc.

Can people enter their alts ITT and what about date they had trouble withdrawing that alt.

This will give us an idea if Vern was drawing down on alts which alts and from when.

Or if it was all at once, and their as at the time of the announcement a swag of alts in the cold storage. Also look out for out of normal large transactions on your alt chain.