Bitcoin Forum
July 03, 2022, 06:02:45 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 23.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 »
1  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Who needs Satoshi Nakamoto principles? on: December 13, 2019, 11:45:04 PM
"Proof-of-work is essentially one-CPU-one-vote."
Satoshi nakamoto





As we all know, mining is now completely centralized. Big money buys expensive equipment in the form of ASIC / GPU / FPGA devices and deprives everyone else of the right to participate in the issue of cryptocurrencies.

Questions:

Does the modern cryptocurrency community need this principle of Satoshi Nakamoto?

Maybe it's time to abandon it and admit that ONLY money should always release new money?


Huh

No they don't need all of Satoshi's principles, his system isn't perfect, no system is. Bitcoin wasn't designed to last forever, it was a proof of concept for Blockchain, and an alternative financial system to traditional banking, why do you think the entire project is open source?
 It's open source so that others can build upon or off Blockchain and Bitcoin protocol, to enhance it and add to it, making it better. Bitcoin is only the prototype protocol. There are better Blockchains and cryptocurrencies on the market.

No there isnt.

Name one.
2  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 'Cryptocurrency' a misnomer for Bitcoin? on: December 09, 2019, 07:23:01 AM
In finance/economics, the two terms are completely different.

Bitcoin has intrinsic value.  The damage and drawbacks created by traditional "currencies" goes against almost every single one of Bitcoin's founding principles.

That is why it is important.  By getting the messaging through that it is MONEY and not CURRENCY will make a bigger impact on people, particularly people with financial/economics backgrounds.

Ok, here are the definitions from Investopedia. They imply to me that "money" is a technology, and a "currency" is a specific manifestation of that technology, but I see no distinction based on intrinsic value.

Quote
Money is an economic unit that functions as a generally recognized medium of exchange for transactional purposes in an economy. Money provides the service of reducing transaction cost, namely the double coincidence of wants. Money originates in the form of a commodity, having a physical property to be adopted by market participants as a medium of exchange. Money can be: market-determined, officially issued legal tender or fiat moneys, money substitutes and fiduciary media, and electronic cryptocurrencies.

Quote
Currency is a medium of exchange for goods and services. In short, it's money, in the form of paper or coins, usually issued by a government and generally accepted at its face value as a method of payment.
Currency is the primary medium of exchange in the modern world, having long ago replaced bartering as a means of trading goods and services.
In the 21st century, a new form of currency has entered the vocabulary, the virtual currency. Virtual currencies such as bitcoins have no physical existence or government backing and are traded and stored in electronic form.

Perhaps you can convince us that your definitions are those used in finance and economics by providing a source.


These definitions are proving my point?

Currency is an expression/denomination of money in the form of paper or coins.

Also here you go, a much better souce:

Money: A medium of exchange that functions as a unit of account, a store of value, etc

https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199229741.001.0001/acref-9780199229741-e-2370?rskey=aDLoqH&result=3181

Currency:  Any kind of money that is in circulation in an economy.  Anything that functions as a medium of exchange including coins, bank notes, cheques etc.

https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199229741.001.0001/acref-9780199229741-e-895?rskey=dcjCKo&result=1161

Currency has no requirement to be a store-of-value.  A store-of-value can only be achieved by an asset that has an underlying intrinsic value like bitcoin.
3  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 'Cryptocurrency' a misnomer for Bitcoin? on: December 08, 2019, 09:27:29 AM
In finance/economics, the two terms are completely different.

Bitcoin has intrinsic value.  The damage and drawbacks created by traditional "currencies" goes against almost every single one of Bitcoin's founding principles.

That is why it is important.  By getting the messaging through that it is MONEY and not CURRENCY will make a bigger impact on people, particularly people with financial/economics backgrounds.
4  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / 'Cryptocurrency' a misnomer for Bitcoin? on: December 08, 2019, 03:20:59 AM
I've been annoyed by the application of the term 'cryptocurrency' to Bitcoin.

There is a distinct difference between Currency and Money and these terms are not interchangeable:

Currencies do not have intrinsic value (i.e. fiat paper money, promissory notes) and by extension, are poor stores of value.  There have been thousands of currencies in existance, all have become worthless because there is no intrinsic value to support the price, instead currencies rely on its users to give it value.  As a consequence many currencies may have fallen with their empires succumbing to regulatory bans, some have died simply because its users did not deem it worthwhile to use and I have no doubt a significant portion are hyperinfalted by their central authorities out of existance.

Money on the other hand has intrinsic value (i.e. gold and silver coins), a gold coin from ancient Eygpt still retains the same purchasing power today.

Bitcoin falls into the category of money, its intrinsic value is supported by its scarcity, verifiability, fungibility, portability, durability and divisbility.  While it might not be 'tangible' and useful for physical use cases like jewerly, it also has benefits Gold does not offer, for example, instant settlement of any amount of 'money' over long distances. Further, no central authority can print bitcoins into existance.  Bitcoin has also become a legitimate store-of-value which can be attributed to its supply cap and emission schedule, its been profitable for 94% of its existance and has not lost its purchasing power which would be consistent with the traditional definition of 'money'.

All-in-all I think it is incorrect to call Bitcoin 'cryptocurrency', it should be 'cyptomoney'.

Thoughts?
5  Other / Off-topic / Re: Explain to me why you think you are more knowledgable about bitcoin than me on: December 08, 2019, 02:48:45 AM
I've had a slew of recent vulgar responses from my posts recently and I figure, if everyone think's they're so smart...Post here.  Why do you think you know more about Bitcoin than me.  I made 20,000 dollars trading it right in 2017 and ever since then the forced buys have gotten out of hand.  I have experience and I know there's a problem with buys even if this forum wont admit it.

I implore you if you're not going to be an ass.  Please ...tell me why I need to consider your opinion especially if it's rude and vulgar?  And besides that.  if you aren't, state your experience if you would like.

I could claim to be an expert and it would be valid but I don't.  There seems to be a lot of other people here who claim to be experts just because they harass people though.

If you reply with a reponse I do not agree with however I do warn you I will respond and refute your claim.  This is how real life works.

I've never noticed your posts but I did a quick scan of your posting history.

Based on your posting history only, and I apologise if it hurts your ego, a significant portion of the community would have a greater understanding of Bitcoin.  You seem to have an extremely superficial understanding (if you can even call it that) of Bitcoin that has been looked solely though the lens of price and market movements.

Your understanding on the following key topics have not been demonstrated and are likely to be low based on your posting pattern:
- Proof-of-work: how it works, its postives, its drawbacks and its needs basis
- Byzantine Fault Tolerance
- Second layer scaling solutions like the lightning network
- The history of money from adoption based on its properties to the impacts caused by government interference
- Austrian / Keynsian / Chicago / Marxist schools of economic thought and its relationship with bitcoin
- BTC emission schedule and its significance including the current relationship between block rewards and transaction fees
- Longest chain rule and its significance
- Hard forks / soft forks
- The hashing difficulty and its significance

How much money you've made is irrelevant.  Many people holding from early 2007 have made 20,000 + anyway (again this doesnt mean anything) so your 'achievement' means nothing.
6  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin: The path to $0 dollars per coin on: December 07, 2019, 02:12:18 AM
I'm the biggest bitcoin bull on fundamentals but it wont get anywhere near that under non hyperinflationary scenarios.

$50,000 in the short term (within 5-10 years) would be realistic.

Think on this:

1. There are 105 wallets with 10,000+ BTC and 2027 with  1,000+ BTC
2. If BTC hits $100,000, there will be up to 105 new Bitcoin only billionaires.
3. If BTC hits $1,000,000, there will be up to 2132 new Bitcoin only billionaires.
4. There are only 2,100 billionaires right now.

The expected wealth transfer that would have occur in one generation for BTC to reach $100,000 and $1,000,000 let alone $10,000,000 is ludicrous and won't happen.

For the wealth transfer to happen, people have to be stupid enough to buy bitcoin at it's overly hyped price.
That amount of stupid people does not seem to exist at this moment in time.


Reason the price has been dropping since $20K, is they ran out of rich dummies.
Their is literally nothing bitcoin can do function wise that litecoin can't, and litecoin does it faster and cheaper.
      

You must be retarded.

Litecoin is a fork of a BTC that sacrifices security and decentralisation for slightly more throughput.  First mover SOV won't be displaced.

BTC is here to stay and the prices will continue to grow (as long people use inflationary FIAT currencies).
7  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: BItcoin: The path to $10,000,000 ten million dollars per coin on: December 07, 2019, 01:59:05 AM
I'm the biggest bitcoin bull on fundamentals but it wont get anywhere near that under non hyperinflationary scenarios.

$50,000 in the short term (within 5-10 years) would be realistic.

Think on this:

1. There are 105 wallets with 10,000+ BTC and 2027 with  1,000+ BTC
2. If BTC hits $100,000, there will be up to 105 new Bitcoin only billionaires.
3. If BTC hits $1,000,000, there will be up to 2132 new Bitcoin only billionaires.
4. There are only 2,100 billionaires right now.

The expected wealth transfer that would have occur in one generation for BTC to reach $100,000 and $1,000,000 let alone $10,000,000 is ludicrous and won't happen.
8  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: I've come full circle, BTC is the only worthwhile cryptocurrency on: November 20, 2019, 09:55:05 AM
If there was somehow, a far better piece of decentralised distributed ledger that is invented in the future, this can just be forked into the Bitcoin network and the existing data is retained, or the Bitcoin data is transfered to the new distributed ledger.

exactly this was suggested when "Directed Acyclic Graph" chains were newly proposed.


Proposed by who? A Core developer?

no, it was Sergio Demian Lerner's concept. Although arguably it's just an evolution of the "tree-chain" concept, which was proposed by (former?) Bitcoin dev Peter Todd


Quote

A big problem was how to mine using a chain that's really structured like a tree, how do you arrive at consensus on newly distributed money? And of course, the answer was to start with a satoshi style PoW uni-chain, mine all the coins, then fork to a DAG chain once there are no new coins left.


That proposal is a little naive, isn't it? We've already seen what kind of drama the community had with the scaling debate. That proposal would be like nuclear war if taken seriously.

that was my idea Grin (but maybe Peter Todd suggested it as part of tree-chains? Not sure Undecided ) But it's really just a potential solution to the "2140 problem"; when the block subsidy ends, how do we incentivize mining new blocks? So it would seem like inducing armageddon for no reason if it was proposed to be rolled out any time like today, but 2140 is not today Wink

There is no need for that:

https://i.ibb.co/L0dBWKB/2.png

Bitcoin is organically replacing block rewards with higher transaction fees - this bodes incredibly well for its future. BTC doesn't stop surprising, its almost as if the more one learn about it, and the more that unfolds, the more magic that happens.

At this point, I can only look at this piece of technology with absolute awe and I have never had this feeling about anything else in my lifetime.  Dare I say, I've become 'moved'?
9  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: I've come full circle, BTC is the only worthwhile cryptocurrency on: November 19, 2019, 09:24:51 AM
After 4+ years in the space and countless hours of research, it is becoming increasingly apparent that BTC is the only worthwhile project.  Also by the thread title, you can probably tell its not my first rodeo.

Some of my strongest reasoning is specified below, it is by no means comprehensive.  While I may have typed the below with conviction, I am openminded to other views (my wallet compels me so) - please put forth your opposing views.

  • PoW is the only true Byzantine Fault Tolerant consensus mechanism.  PoS is not BFT at this point in time and I do not see how it gets there.  At the end of the day, under PoS and the many other consensus mechanisms, one needs to trust a third party to relay them the correct data and that is assuming that one can be certain that the delegated node holds the majority of the voting power – this is not trustless and re-introduces third parties.
    With PoW, I can verify the hashes and the longest chain is the correct one.


Correct is a subjective term,
what you can verify with PoW is which Chain is the longest chain with the highest hashrate.

Now prepared to be shocked,

With PoS, you can verify the longest chain with the most coins and highest difficulty.  Shocked

Because all you are doing is comparing chains.





The longest chain in a PoW has the most 'work' commited to it.  Changing a block in the past will require all subsequent blocks to be somehow remined at huge energy costs - the earlier the block, the higher the energy cost.  This is simply not the case with POS as you are effectively told what the longest chain is.

By extension POW has much better immutability which is perhaps the most important feature of any decentralised ledger technology.
10  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: I've come full circle, BTC is the only worthwhile cryptocurrency on: November 15, 2019, 08:08:30 AM
  • There cannot be a ‘next Bitcoin’ and the paradox of replacing a store-of-value (SoV) applies.  Any successful replacement of BTC will forever undermine the credibility of any successor.  We are instead made to forever question the replacement of a SOV.  How is an investor to know it won’t happen again?.  Any other attempt at digital money ‘fails by succeeding’, it fails the eco-system by replacing Bitcoin and ultimately fails itself.  By way of example, Gold is the precious metal SOV of choice, most governments/institutions warehouse little or no silver.  If silver supplants gold as a SOV, then I’m all out of precious metals because one cannot trust silver will maintain its SOV dominance.

This is the one that the most people seem to have the most difficulty with and I truly don't understand why it's so hard to wrap one's head around it.

Even now you still see that fucking Myspace/Facebook comparison when all it took to skip across was a couple of clicks and the only thing you had at stake where some whiny essays and a few duckface pics. I just don't see how people can fail to acknowledge the fundamental difference.

Having said that the tricky bit is if Bitcoin ever needed 'replacing' out of necessity, a concerted attempt to murder it or some unforeseen tech disaster, rather than some fantasy usurping. Even then the incentive is there to preserve and reboot that pile of data rather than any alternative.




Spot on.

If there was somehow, a far better piece of decentralised distributed ledger that is invented in the future, this can just be forked into the Bitcoin network and the existing data is retained, or the Bitcoin data is transfered to the new distributed ledger.
11  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: I've come full circle, BTC is the only worthwhile cryptocurrency on: November 15, 2019, 07:57:48 AM
I wonder, if you will feel the same way , if bitcoin only goes down in price from now on.

PoW aka Proof of Waste has too many failures to be sustained in the long run.

And you are depending on the top 4 mining pool operators, they are all that stands between you and a daily 51% attack.
Scratch that the Top 3 mining pool operators now hold ~56% combined.
https://www.blockchain.com/en/pools

So 3 guys now control bitcoin fate.  Cool
and #1 is listed as unknown, so it might really be only 2 guys.  Tongue




You misunderstand bitcoin.  If the pool mining operators attack the network and its not in the interest of the individual miners, then the individual miners will exit the pool and mine for a operator that has their best interest at heart.

Lets pretend even if there was 2-3 entities that can attack the network, well the network will just fork and the chain that is accepted by the majority of the users will be the real bitcoin. 

A large mining pool would have to be completely irrational to 51% attack a network they and their users are heavily 'invested' in anyway.

PoS is not BFT, and is not comparable to the hardest and most secure cryptocurrency - Bitcoin.  In any case, POS/DAG etc coins are far more centralised than bitcoin with the vast majority of tokens held by the top few (the bell curve would actually look far more skewed than that of Bitcoin's).
12  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: I've come full circle, BTC is the only worthwhile cryptocurrency on: November 11, 2019, 08:51:50 AM


All your points are valid and I'm happy to see that there are users who understand the fundamentals of cryptocurrency instead of parroting the narratives created by altcoins' marketing teams.

I think that there are 2 kinds of altcoins that currently have some uses and as the result hold some value. The first type is privacy coins - Bitcoin's privacy is pretty bad, and the most common solution to it - mixers, requires some trust. If Bitcoin will solve privacy, privacycoins will become obsolete.

The second kind is coins with relatively good security and adoption. They can be used as a plan B when Bitcoin's fees temporarily skyrocket. They can be used for small transactions or for moving value between services to save on fees. But again, when Bitcoin will solve scalability, these coins will become useless too.

Will bitcoin ever solve scalability? It's now nearly two years since the fee and mempool problems of 2017 and still the mempool gets full even with much reduced transactions.

If bitcoin can't solve scalability, either cryptocurrency as a whole dies a death, or another scalable alt will take it's place.

Bitcoin can survive as an SOV alone with the currentl transaction limitations.

Gold as the precious metal dominant SOV would have very little transactions across a day, and I am certain the amount of transactions in gold per day can easily be matched and surpassed with current Bitcoin infrastructure.

A 2nd layer scaling solution like the lightning network is just a cherry on top.
13  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: I've come full circle, BTC is the only worthwhile cryptocurrency on: November 10, 2019, 06:58:38 AM
........


I will address three fundamental flaws with your reply.

Quote
bitcoin is not a store of value, bitcoin is FIRST a CURRENCY and then because of a dozen reasons it can be used as a store of value.

Bitcoin is absolutely a store of value and designed as such with a emission schedule imitating that of gold.  The base layer has throughput limitations that preclude it from being a 'currency' useful for general/micro transactions.

It's borderless, secure, censorship resistant, immutable and decentralised.  There is $30 trillion in tax havens and swiss banks, using BTC as a SOV is a no brainer.

Additionally, BTC's deflationary nature does not encourage transactions and by extension lends itself to hoarding which would be more in line with an SOV.  People in this forum hate Keynesian economics (and perhaps for good reason), but its proven deflationary assets experience lower use and becomes hoarded.

Quote
and there can be "next bitcoin" but it doesn't have to replace bitcoin! it is like saying there could only be room for only one CPU (Intel) and there is no room for another one (AMD).
if some day a better innovative idea came along that could be as good as bitcoin, it will simply grow to bitcoin levels and is used alongside of it.

Bitcoin as a SOV is fundamentally different to two different companies delivering mass market products - we would be comparing apples with oranges.  There can only be one dominant SOV which is explaned in my original post.

By way of analogy, Silver has more market uses than Gold, why are governments/institutions hoarding gold over silver?, why has government/institution inventories of silver dropped precipitously to almost non-existant levels?

Both these articles are excellent and reinforce my point on Bitcoin as the dominant SOV and the problem with utilities:

https://medium.com/john-pfeffer/an-institutional-investors-take-on-cryptoassets-690421158904
https://medium.com/john-pfeffer/doubts-about-the-long-term-viability-of-utility-cryptoassets-db04350b1f55

Quote
not everything is about illegal activities. most of the times it is about not wanting to bend over to the corrupted  centralized power. look at India for instance.

I never claimed this to be the case.

My point is that there is pretty much no point in decentralising uses aside from money (MoE) and perhaps illegal market places.  All other uses are better suited to centralised databases where the market (operators and users) are happy to bear the risks cumbersome and expensive decentralised platforms seek to eliminate.
14  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: I've come full circle, BTC is the only worthwhile cryptocurrency on: November 10, 2019, 03:03:32 AM
After 4+ years in the space and countless hours of research, it is becoming increasingly apparent that BTC is the only worthwhile project.

All your points are valid and I'm happy to see that there are users who understand the fundamentals of cryptocurrency instead of parroting the narratives created by altcoins' marketing teams.

I think that there are 2 kinds of altcoins that currently have some uses and as the result hold some value. The first type is privacy coins - Bitcoin's privacy is pretty bad, and the most common solution to it - mixers, requires some trust. If Bitcoin will solve privacy, privacycoins will become obsolete.

The second kind is coins with relatively good security and adoption. They can be used as a plan B when Bitcoin's fees temporarily skyrocket. They can be used for small transactions or for moving value between services to save on fees. But again, when Bitcoin will solve scalability, these coins will become useless too.

In a way you are correct but, not all Altcoins are bad. The supreme cryptocurrency is Bitcoin, there is no doubt about it. But, you cannot ignore altcoins like Ethereum and exchange coins like BNB. You will need them as long as they have a platform which needs them. You cannot ignore these Altcoins .

The more I read and think about ethereum, the more unanswered questions I have.

The most concerning being:

1. The vast majority of DApps are better off on a centralised database (see original post).
2. The only use case that may benefit from being on a decentralised platform is an illegal marketplace.  Ethereum has proven to not be immutable with the DAO hack and I think it's no longer a candidate for this use case.
3. Eth has a 'utility' basis for value. The cost of utility (gas) act as a ceiling to price.  An increase in fees results in more competitor chains becoming attractive.
4. Exponentially increasing blockchain size and decreased ability for one to run full validating nodes.
5. PoS is not BFT

Eth may fill a niche market for smart contracts but why you would speculate in ETH over something that:
  • is the perfect storm of being the first mover, most decentralised built on the back of guiding principles in security, stability, censorship resistance and immutability
  • benefits immensely from the network effect of a sound store of value, where an increase in price only creates additional demand and legitimisation
15  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / I've come full circle, BTC is the only worthwhile cryptocurrency on: November 10, 2019, 01:17:19 AM
After 4+ years in the space and countless hours of research, it is becoming increasingly apparent that BTC is the only worthwhile project.  Also by the thread title, you can probably tell its not my first rodeo.

Some of my strongest reasoning is specified below, it is by no means comprehensive.  While I may have typed the below with conviction, I am openminded to other views (my wallet compels me so) - please put forth your opposing views.

  • PoW is the only true Byzantine Fault Tolerant consensus mechanism.  PoS is not BFT at this point in time and I do not see how it gets there.  At the end of the day, under PoS and the many other consensus mechanisms, one needs to trust a third party to relay them the correct data and that is assuming that one can be certain that the delegated node holds the majority of the voting power – this is not trustless and re-introduces third parties.  With PoW, I can verify the hashes and the longest chain is the correct one.

  • Bitcoin as a base layer focuses on censorship resistance, immutability, security and decentralisation.  Second layer solutions (scalability/escrow) can be built on top.  Claims by other ‘cryptocurrencies’ to be ‘better than bitcoin’ are ignoring trade-offs involving BTC’s key features.  Any appreciable increase in throughput will reduce security, decentralisation, immutability and censorship resistance.

  • There cannot be a ‘next Bitcoin’ and the paradox of replacing a store-of-value (SoV) applies.  Any successful replacement of BTC will forever undermine the credibility of any successor.  We are instead made to forever question the replacement of a SOV.  How is an investor to know it won’t happen again?.  Any other attempt at digital money ‘fails by succeeding’, it fails the eco-system by replacing Bitcoin and ultimately fails itself.  By way of example, Gold is the precious metal SOV of choice, most governments/institutions warehouse little or no silver.  If silver supplants gold as a SOV, then I’m all out of precious metals because one cannot trust silver will maintain its SOV dominance.

  • Medium of exchange(MoE) aside, I can’t think of another legitimate use case for ‘decentralisation’.  At a stretch illegal marketplaces may benefit from decentralisation given the risk of censorship or seizure of assets.  All these other uses cases like smart cities, record keeping, supply chain, fundraising etc are far better managed through centralised databases where it is not unacceptable for the user/operator to bear some of the risks cumbersome decentralised platforms seek to eliminate.

  • If (and it’s a big if) smart-contract enabled platforms finds widespread commercial use, the ‘utility’ basis for value for many of these smart-contract enabled platforms acts as a ceiling to price.  An increase in fees to use the network will result in competitor chains becoming more attractive.

  • For smart-contract enabled platforms, infrastructure limitations decrease the ability of users to run fully validating nodes (compared to a cryptocurrency targeting a MoE use only).
16  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Why are big Bitcoin miners not destroying Alt coins with a 51% attack? on: August 11, 2019, 05:09:53 AM
Two reasons:

1. Not financially worthwhile to commit resources to destroy something when that resource can be better spent mining BTC.
2. You can't "destroy" things in crypto.  A 51% attack will just result in a hardfork/rollback.  Your resources are wasted and their legacy crypto continues as previously intended.
17  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / When a true DEX is invented, will all fiat to crypto exchanges be banned? on: June 25, 2019, 12:07:51 PM
As we can see with the new FATF rules, exchanges are scrambling to comply with mandatory KYC set to be introduced for anyone wishing to transact over $1,000 worth of crypto.

When a true decentralised exchange is invented (i.e. something that boots up like a bittorrent interface with no centralised server), having centralized exchanges with KYC is redundant.

Someone can just buy crypto off a centralised fiat exchange, and exchange it for moneros on a dex destroying the audit trail.  They will be able to do as they please with the crypto (laundering, terrorist donations etc).

Can anyone explain to me how crypto/fiat exchanges won't get banned when a true dex is invented?
18  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Why has most chinese projects dumped harder compared to the market average? on: March 14, 2018, 10:36:21 AM
Market ATH was $825b. Currently, it is $365b so a drop of roughly 56%.

Here are the drops from various Chinese projects from their Jan/Feb ATH to current figures:
CPChain - down 56%
Achain - down 84%
IOT Chain - down 80% (using $4.85 not the telegram pump ATH)
Bottos - down 69%
Neo - down 59%
INT - down 85%
HPB - down 77%
Aelf - down 75%
Nuls - down 66%
Matrix - down 66%
WTC - down 58%

Better performers:
Elastos - down 50%

Does anyone have an explanation as to why the more prominent Chinese projects have dumped harder than the market average? Some of these coins are actually quite promising too.
19  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Will Bitcoin Cash beat BTC? on: December 15, 2017, 08:50:49 AM
No, BTC has majority of the development and will always be recognized as the default blockchain.  Segwit will allow updates like lightning network and rootstock.
20  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Why do you ❤️ crypto??? on: December 10, 2017, 02:36:04 AM
I love immutability.

I love a store of value where i am protect by financial divorce rape.
Pages: [1] 2 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!