|
I watched the first when I was in college. Really liked it and watched it a few more times.
... and then they followed it up with two shite films.
|
|
|
|
People here have made a good point. Spend a lot of money on a miner and electricity and get bitcoins, or spend a lot of money and get coins made in POS. For a person not used to crypto, the whole mining thing is confusing at the least and totally unnecessary. Why not just buy the coins directly instead of doings some crazy POW work around?
Month after month the top 10 fills up with more POS. By next year, there might be only one POW coin left on the top 10. A lonely giant at the top.
Again, I ask you to show me any POW that is even half as slick and half as many options as NXT. (except the original)
mining is so 2012-2013
I don't think PoW will last long. It will be here for some time because of the vested interests and all the big investments already made, but eventually will be replaced by some good PoS (there are already a few candidates). |
|
|
|
What's interesting is that he's been online recently, too, but hasn't posted. I hope I don't regret joining this campaign..
I think he is legit. The downsides are a lot for not paying up. Besides jdebunt says they are sound so I think they are. |
|
|
|
NXT and Monero, these two are completely different coins and they cannot be compared IMO. Which one has a better chance of becoming a successful alternative to btc/ltc?
I'm sure Darkcoin or(and) Zerocoin/Zerocash will overcome Bitcoin someday. Why can two different coin technologies not be compared? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each tech? Monero is maintained for anonymous transactions but it has some flaws in its code and other problems like being botnet raped. NXT is the first pure PoS coin written from scratch. It brings asset exchange and some other features but suffers from unfair distribution. Which one is better and how to compare them is up to you. What sort of flaws have been discovered in the code for Monero? I do know that NXT is mainly criticized for the initial distribution of it's coinbase. But if the technology is superior that doesn't mean that another coin based off NXT couldn't come along and solve that problem. If NXT's PoS system is superior to the CryptoNote PoW system that's vulnerable to botnets then that's a big plus for NXT. NXT is a scam. No matter how you do it, distributing coins via PoS is unfair and will always be unfair. Those who get in on the "IPO" are the ones who always come out richer. I think of NXT not as a currency....but as a platform to trade currencies, like Ripple. ...as opposed to distributing to big firms who waste electricity to earn the coins. |
|
|
|
I still do not get the difference between TF and DPoS. They seem equivalent to me. Just newspeak so to say.
Very similar. DPoS lets you vote against delegates, has a cap per delegate, and and delegate order is determined once per round rather than after every block (you can't try to pick a "good" block to get you more than N blocks in a row if you don't own more than N delegates) So, it is basically the same. Thank you. IMO, the cap means its very different, as I can see the same pooling problem with TF as in PoW. But it seems not many agree with this viewpoint. |
|
|
|
Again, disclaimer: I'm not an expert.
I would dare to say no, it's not an improvement over Bitcoin. With bitcoin's poW, mining pools don't have any special powers that solo miners don't also have. So while the hashing power is "pooled", consensus isn't really "delegated" beyond the same protocol rules that affect everyone.
If you are talking about supernodes solving the nothing at stake problem because they can check signatures in real time, that is definitely taking a step toward trusted authorities. In contrast, proof of work acts as it's own timestamp.
The miners contributing to the pool doesn't have any power. The pool owner decides what transactions to include. Also, keep in mind that the miners are not the same as the actual users of the coin. Theres a overlap, but it would have been so much better if all those using it are actually the ones participating. |
|
|
|
Its like this, you can always get a single individual/group to set up up multiple pools in PoW/PoS, or multiple delegates in DPoS and grab more share than what it seems. But the hard cap means that it is more complex to get the same control.
Say, Ghash sets up another couple of pools anonymously (or maybe even does), or makes buddies with a couple of other big pools, then it already has control. In DPoS on the other hand, he/she/they have to go through a lot more trouble (some 50 delegates in case of BTSX) to get the same control.
Besides, say, a pool offers incentives, then everybody will naturally flock to it. Sure, at some they might start getting worried and not go, but as we have seen in the Ghash case, appealing to the better sense of the mining equipment owners doesn't work to well. They might not even be too worried about the long term health as they might be just looking at it as a business. In DPoS, the hard cap means such a scenario is not possible, and you have to also keep in mind that the users of the coin are the ones who are voting.
I think I see which direction you are coming from. But I do not clearly see how a hard-cap is going to solve the problem of a second pool under control of the very same real-world entity. "A lot more trouble" Why? Are existing pools preferred before new ones? Thats because you can in PoW, say, put up two pools and grab control. Here you need to set up some 50 odd delegates. Of course, the developer may decide that its popular and its needs more and then the number of delegates can be increased. |
|
|
|
|
Please add
BTC adddress 1Q4jmiMCsWuUvyyTfYcpiUAQqZcHTPn4yW
posts 1097
|
|
|
|
|
30 days done, 50+ posted.
|
|
|
|
New car and new house and there you go $1mil gone.
It goes quicker than most people thing these days.
Yep, its not that much, really. I would want atleast $10m before deciding to splurge big. |
|
|
|
You really gotta try real sex. It is pretty cool.   real girlz never seen like webcam girlz  They feel a lot nicer for sure. I never quite understood "cyber sex." but its a lot less effort. Plus you don't have to leave your special chair and monitor  |
|
|
|
Miner is the one who decides what transaction to include or exclude. In effect it is controlled by 10 or so miners. 55k or whatever running their machines is immaterial. I guess you can see the problem now.
Pooling won't happen with DPoS. Sure, somebody can set up multiple delegates and keep his identity hidden, but pooling as such directly is not possible.
Besides in DPoS, anybody transacting is playing is part in securing. So in effect the shareholders has a direct say. In PoW like Bitcoin, the users don't have any say.
You need just one miner to include the transaction in block.. You may wait more though... Dont understand DPoS (I ll have a look) but the rest of PoS are flawed in the core idea and will be controlled by the rich of the coin always... Can the hard cap idea of DPoS fight the total control of the rich over the coin? What is the advantage? You're missing the entire point. Effectively 10 people have the power to choose what types of transactions to include. For instance tomorrow Ghash and 2 others may decide to leave out all Counterparty transactions, which means they are screwed. Do you, as a Bitcoin user, have any say in it? They aren't screwed. The tx will still be included in blocks by other miners. Also the excluding miners will lose the tx fees and that will make them less competitive relative to other pools and if the actual miners disagree with that loss they will leave and the pool (and pool operator's profits) will shrink. Today fees are relatively small but as a % of total miner compensation they will only grow. A system like XCP which is relying on the 10 minute blocktimes (even which is slow for a decentralised exchange), will be in a lot of trouble if the biggest miners decide to exclude their transactions. Point is the Bitcoin users, or even the ones running the mining equipment doesn't have any say in it. It just requires a couple of the miners to decide to leave them out and then XCP is in big trouble. Just look in the XCP thread here where there was a big argument about this. I am not saying XCP is right or the couple of pool owners who engaged in the discussions were right. The point simply is there is no accountability, and the actual users and miners are dependent on the whims of a few. |
|
|
|
IMO, the hard cap is very important which others doesn't seem to find a key feature. [...]
Point is, why? Its like this, you can always get a single individual/group to set up up multiple pools in PoW/PoS, or multiple delegates in DPoS and grab more share than what it seems. But the hard cap means that it is more complex to get the same control. Say, Ghash sets up another couple of pools anonymously (or maybe even does), or makes buddies with a couple of other big pools, then it already has control. In DPoS on the other hand, he/she/they have to go through a lot more trouble (some 50 delegates in case of BTSX) to get the same control. Besides, say, a pool offers incentives, then everybody will naturally flock to it. Sure, at some they might start getting worried and not go, but as we have seen in the Ghash case, appealing to the better sense of the mining equipment owners doesn't work to well. They might not even be too worried about the long term health as they might be just looking at it as a business. In DPoS, the hard cap means such a scenario is not possible, and you have to also keep in mind that the users of the coin are the ones who are voting. |
|
|
|
Miner is the one who decides what transaction to include or exclude. In effect it is controlled by 10 or so miners. 55k or whatever running their machines is immaterial. I guess you can see the problem now.
Pooling won't happen with DPoS. Sure, somebody can set up multiple delegates and keep his identity hidden, but pooling as such directly is not possible.
Besides in DPoS, anybody transacting is playing is part in securing. So in effect the shareholders has a direct say. In PoW like Bitcoin, the users don't have any say.
You need just one miner to include the transaction in block.. You may wait more though... Dont understand DPoS (I ll have a look) but the rest of PoS are flawed in the core idea and will be controlled by the rich of the coin always... Can the hard cap idea of DPoS fight the total control of the rich over the coin? What is the advantage? You're missing the entire point. Effectively 10 people have the power to choose what types of transactions to include. For instance tomorrow Ghash and 2 others may decide to leave out all Counterparty transactions, which means they are screwed. Do you, as a Bitcoin user, have any say in it? |
|
|
|
For you 64 bit users, waterfox is a pretty cool version of firefox. At least for my 64 bit pc, the memory management was better by ages than the regular firefox.
Didn't know that, will try it out. I use a 64 bit Win 7. |
|
|
|
NEM has got to be the most boring, lead by committee coin I have ever had the misfortune to read about on here. I actually have some stakes.....a few of them actually, fairness my ass. Pages and pages of discussions and google documents and voting etc with no actual product. Man I yawn even thinking about it. The leader seems to be under the illusion he is some great leader for goodness, fairness. A Marxist wet dream basically. When he seems to me to be a typical lover of bureaucracy, having power and control. I assume a childhood where he was controlled by parents or others. In contrast the Qora developer is fast, works almost alone and delivers everything he promises without committees and fuss, very refreshing. So why the multiple threads about the possibility of a future wallet and coin when new developments from completely new code have come out in the form of Qora. Why hope when you can have? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=522102.0The motivation becomes clear as we approach the end of the post. You have us all fooled  |
|
|
|
All PoS coins are backed up misinformation, hiding facts and trolls.
Unlike bitcoin which clearly states all the attack vectors and problems on the wiki. I would prefer fiat than current PoS coins.
If you must choose one choose the one with most trolls and hype.
Just stating attack vectors without any solution is hardly useful. How would you solve the problem of Bitcoin being controlled by 10 or so miners? Why is hardly useful? It is very useful. I may not be smart enough to find solutions or may not exist without compromising on decentralization. Decentralization is tough and I m sure has limits. Not sure where you get your info but recently I read somewhere there are 55000 miners. (I think it was in the recent bitcoin conference in one of the videos) Is this what you mean? https://blockchain.info/pools?timespan=24hrs If yes these are pools and pools are not miners and pooling will happen with both PoS and PoW. If not can you point me to your sources? I would be interested.. Miner is the one who decides what transaction to include or exclude. In effect it is controlled by 10 or so miners. 55k or whatever running their machines is immaterial. I guess you can see the problem now. Pooling won't happen with DPoS. Sure, somebody can set up multiple delegates and keep his identity hidden, but pooling as such directly is not possible. Besides in DPoS, anybody transacting is playing is part in securing. So in effect the shareholders has a direct say. In PoW like Bitcoin, the users don't have any say. |
|
|
|
Stole from me too. It was such a smart scam. I have a feeling that maybe even Joerii was involved and pretended to be on our side. Trust me Jeorii is no scammer. He is a nice guy and still active on this forum. Well, hope so. But he was about have some legal recourse, what happened to that? What happened is that we all tried to trace those two scammers and the Legal resources Jeorii was talking about were found to be fake. JohnCar's credentials were faked too? What do you mean by 'we'? Did you personally try anything? Oops I used that word by mistake. Well I personally didn't do as much as Jeorii And MaGNet Did. I repeat, you said Joerii hid a dead end, does that mean JohnCar was fake too? |
|
|
|
I use Firefox, don't really trust google to use Chrome.
The default Interent Explorer is still there for gmail use.
So you want to say "Chrome is on it's way"? I don't get the joke. Reference? |
|
|
|
So what does the analysis say now?
Is the the multi year bear market scenario forecasted by masterluc still valid?
That was always extremely stupid claim. Luc knows his job but sometimes act as troll. To claim Bitcoin is set for multiyear bear market in the year when it is gaining attention from all sides, when it is set to be regulated and as such safer investment, when it is set to hit Wallstreet is just out of this world. I'd like to hear Luc's view on current situation but that one was very stupid one. He predicted based on his wave analysis, and I am just wondering if the current trend is still holding the pattern. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
