|
There are two interesting coins. Ethereum and Monero. I've found nothing else.
Mike Hearn announcement just put an exclamation point on everything everyone knew. Bitcoin can't innovate and can barely scale enough to keep up with a very laxidasical demand.
You know what happens if I let this happen to my network - wait for it to slow things down before doing anything about it? I get fired.
Bitcoin's approach of squabbling for years on end over a trivial 1mb increase (to anyone who's paying attention and realizes that bitcoins value comes from the innovation of the blockchain) is proof that bitcoin isn't in the future far enough. Maybe it's two years or fifteen - I don't pretend to know. But whatever "blockchain" is in the future for the general ledger - bitcoin isn't it.
|
|
|
|
|
Do you guys read anything outside of the echo chamber? Mike has been yelling about this for a year.
Theymos bans coinbase for testing a different client.
He bans Mike too (I think).
Everything he talks about he has been talking about for a long time. And he finally reached his conclusion. This wasn't some overnight thing. And you think he was just manipulating the market and it's a bullish sign?
|
|
|
|
Found this on bitcoinmarkets (seem to be one of the more reasonable social media sources save buttcoin) [–]DesertRainBullish 24 points 47 minutes ago
What I've learned today from the Bitcoin Classic slack:
Bitcoin Classic seems all but a sure thing. All they need is for F2pool to give their support, and over 75% of the mining power will be accounted for. The BC devs are on good terms with Wang Chun from F2pool (because they are diplomatic, unlike Mike Hearn who repeatedly gave China the middle finger) and are listening to his one point of feedback, which is a logical one - and that is to base any increase in max block size on block height rather than time. BC may or may not include that change in the first release, and Wang Chun will probably come along either way.
We could see a release in as soon as 2 weeks, but the devs don't want to rush this.
After the release, it will take a minimum of 5 weeks for the first larger block to be mined.
This FUD is temporary. Now is a good time to buy IMO, but the next few weeks could be bumpy. If I wasn't already at my max BTC holdings I'd be averaging in more as we speak. From what I can tell BitcoinClassic has 50% commitment and they're about to add another 23 ... |
|
|
|
Thanks to this guy Mike Hearn the price went down $60 today. Alot of people have lost a lot of money and it's all because of this guy.
In order to get back our money we need to find this guy and make him take back all the bullshit and lies he wrote in his blog. He will be making a full public media apology for his actions and a confession that he is a troll and FUD master.
So if you know Mike Hearn, his address or any information about him please post it. We need to contact him personally and let him know he is responsible for people losing their hard earned money. And we need to ask him what he is going to do about it.
I'm unable to tell if this is sarcasm? I've seen a lot of "He was morally wrong to do X, Y, Z" or "he hasn't contributed as much as blah blah blah" from people who have done nothing. I have yet to see any type of logical correction to his article. Not once. Not from Theymos, not from forum mods, not from small block trolls. Only character assessments. Which speaks volumes to me - Mike attacked personalities less and ideas more than his counterparts are doing. He will never be part of Core again, and Core is all that matters as we have seen with XT, no body ran nodes for that piece of shit, and nobody will run nodes for Bitcoin Classic and other alt wannabes. They are fighting a losing battle. You do realize they have commitments from 50% of the miners / pools at this point and are in negotiations with another 23%? Quite frankly with as much class as the 1mb 4 ever crowd has shown I think they should do a 51% fork. Let the group who's been pulling all this shit (DDOS, censoriship that would make North Korea proud, etc) feel the pain of picking the wrong side. |
|
|
|
Spoetnik buddy. I don't think another negative rating is going to hurt you much worse than you are. It's a little like sentancing someone to his 52nd life sentances  Have you actually ever traded with anyone on here? Thinking that trust system might get a little overuse |
|
|
|
|
I tried Ethereum - but even on a large GPU instance I'm going to be making about $9 worth of Eth a month (in exchange for $300). Any recommendations on AWS mining since I got 2K of codes for free?
|
|
|
|
|
Then I transitioned from a gullible fool and I started to ponder the more likely truth about the altcoin arena being one big "mining the speculators" paradigm.
Any newbies who fall into this trap, I guess deserve the cost of educationa
Best summary of altcoin market I've seen
|
|
|
|
|
Sadly there is a trademark on the opensource added by Satoshi that only allows copying under certain criteria.
In this case you would need to at least raise $300,000 of pre-mine funds and donate 1/3 of it to a charity of your choice in Africa & there are also IRS regulations in regards to modifying money instrument code.
Spoetnik is the only one authorized to get you out of the donation requirement & I believe Anonymint is able to bypass IRS regulations via Sovereign Man declaration.
|
|
|
|
|
ahhhh zerovert guy is back.
|
|
|
|
summary; ask not what litecoin can do for you, but what you can do for litecoin You mean like the time freejack2k and research committee spent dozens (maybe hundreds) of hours creating, polling, modifying and coming to consensus on a new logo before the developer stepped in and said "Nope - not ok. Overuled." when consensus was finally reached  Crypto fascinates me - but bitcoin is probably the best example of why decentralized efforts don't work. Litecoin is probably the second best example. Both had only features that matter completely built under centralization - the only thing decentralization can do is (sometimes) maintain. I'm 51% sure bitcoin will die within the next 5 years. I'm 80% sure that litecoin will continue to slip into obscurity unless the demand for money laundering via BTC-E picks back up and is able to sustain it (BTC price needed for this to happen). If bitcoin becomes a permanent digital store of value - maybe litecoin can maintain some type of silver parity with it. If it works out - hodlers will be well rewarded .... |
|
|
|
I wonder if it would work to abstract to a word for energy? Currency is really just a form of represented energy (like numerals to numbers or whatever) - cryptocurrency is possibly more directly linked to electrical energy / social energy / intellectual energy than fiat. (Probably coming from a silly vid I watched on buttcoin) http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/energiespeps verves zings zips vitals I think "chain" is linked to how it works (geekspeak) - but has nothing to do with what it accomplishes. Might sound impossible but to me a perfect name doesn't include fiat & doesn't include geekspeak. There's some precedent to naming one form of energy partially after a previous form. electrical power / current |
|
|
|
It feels like a better solution to have a fixed number of block validators like 101 (or other number), such as DPoS, then whales have to collateral bid for those positions. In other words, a fixed number of validators + variable collateral bids instead of fixed amount of collateral and variable number of validators.
That's a fragile approach, though. If some force targets all 101 block producers, the network is unrecoverable. A permissionless system is less fragile. Quite frankly I'm amazed they're even considering changing their consensus algorithm. The kinda interesting thing about the consensus algorithm is how long they spent trying to eliminate the possibility of pools (there were several hypothetical iterations of PoW that were discarded). But within weeks pools represented most of the hash power on the network. |
|
|
|
How did you get your negative trust Spoetnik? People hatin' on you again for yelling at everything |
|
|
|
Whatever if people agree or not....
the resistance is strong and price climbing....
Anything below 0,003 is still a very good buy in the circumstances
What I don't get is why it didn't track bitcoin on the rise. It seems a few alts track fiat more than BTC ... |
|
|
|
trees. I honestly think you need to develop your lateral thinking. Or for better productivity, team up with someone who has the opposite problem He would need to find someone he respects and views as his equal for that to work. |
|
|
|
|
I have a few random thoughts on this.
First the government doesn't really seem that interested or get involved to the level of paranoia people have unless people... And a lot of people are outright raped with things that are illegal regardless of crypto classification. Paycoin, BFL and mtgox. Their actions seem to indicate that they are interested in prosecuting people for the most famous outright scams to try to encourage a tiny bit of accountability.
I have been overseas for six months in three very different countries and I have an entirely new respect for how the government protects the dollar and attacks those who threaten it. Foreign entities with monetary policies and domestic entities trying to remain private.
If the government is as bad as you say then if and when they take aim at crypto - the swipe of a pen by some appointed official can and will make things in crypto they want to be against the law illegal regardless of what is / isn't legal now. You may have the chance to abide by the new rules (report all your Bitcoin keys, etc), exit crypto and pay taxes or become a target. I'm not sure abiding by current rules is going to save or help much with a government that already is in violation of its own constitution and numerous other laws on a consistent basis. If they decide to attack crypto on a whole - today's legal standing will not matter. Crypto will exist inside of their new rules or be strong enough to stand outside of them. I do not perceive existing laws to be any type of protection against fighting against the USD if the government decides their is a big conflict of interest.
At this stage I think tracking the blockchain provides them with far more value than threats when it comes to illegal activity (or that is their impression)
|
|
|
|
I am torn on the transparent vs non transparent blockchain.
I'm nearly 100% certain that a transparent blockchain for currency would not exist if non-transparent blockchains were developed first. (Possibly, blockchains for things like land title records might be made transparent, if those things make sense at all.) First mover advantage does exist though. I agree with this. Bitcoin was the "good enough" version I guess. |
|
|
|
|
People don't like having more than one thing to deal with. Or maybe it would be more appropriate to say the market tends to pick one winner that's "good enough"
There's a reason why cash can buy a car, a house or a coffee.
My tendency is to think we will gravitate towards one currency. I am torn on the transparent vs non transparent blockchain. But outside of that I think it only makes sense to have one.
Maybe I'm not wrong. But people like put up "We can used centralized services for these things, blockchain for this etc etc". Value lies in blockchain solving all friction problems (or as many as is possible). This includes transaction speed, privacy, transaction sizes, programmable blockchain etc.
I strongly believe crypto will slowly die off or bitcoins days are numbered. It has completely lost it's ability to improve and knock out more of these points of friction (privacy, transaction speed, Scalability, smart contracts)
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
