|
41
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Speculation (Altcoins) / Re: PRL Price Prediction once Pegged
|
on: February 20, 2018, 12:49:27 AM
|
I have not been dealing much with PRL so far. What I understood, it is a protocol based on IOTA (and somehow also utilizes the Ethereum blockchain). Were the 70 million tokens distributed through an ICO? And what about the remaining undistributed 40 million tokens (according the figures of Coinmarketcap)?
According to a post on reddit, nearly all the coins have been mined and exist in the 12.1k wallets. I'm not sure what amount had been distributed via the ICO. Also note, that a coin burn of 10 million tokens is set for March 1st, setting the total supply at 98mm. Thanks, where does the 10 million coins to burn come from? I believe they said it's coming from Bruno's holdings. Correct, main dev wallet: https://medium.com/oysterprotocol/oyster-pearl-team-update-4-f2cc22eca1a7 |
|
|
|
|
51
|
Other / Off-topic / Re: Come on people, start giving out your merit!
|
on: February 14, 2018, 02:19:56 AM
|
|
It's a dumb system that was created because too many people are ranking up and the signature campaigns are clogged. Soon there will be merit based campaigns with big payouts and most everyone will be locked out of them.
|
|
|
|
|
52
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Tokens (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][ICO] UniversalCoin - The Free Digital Currency
|
on: February 14, 2018, 02:10:47 AM
|
I read that there was an error with the UNV distribution contract and some UNV was sent out early. I think 600 people received about 131k.
Hmm. This is the first I am hearing of this. Thanks for mentioning it. Do you know how they are planning on making this even for the people who did not receive this extra distribution? Yea, check the recent transactions from a few days ago, people each got over 131k UNV: https://etherscan.io/token/0x1440147231cf81f08734e20bf171a48820527306There is no way for them to roll back the extra distribution. According to a post on reddit, they are considering sending out everyone who was signed up for the first distribution an extra 131k to make it even. The last thing they want is to ruin the experiment. I think they are going to solve this issue the best way possible and make it fair for everyone involved. That would be nice if they could find a way to make it even. Fingers crossed |
|
|
|
|
53
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Speculation (Altcoins) / Re: [PRL] Oyster Pearl predictions
|
on: February 14, 2018, 01:58:39 AM
|
I think this idea has some serious flaws. In fact, I believe the project will fail because people don't want their CPUs being used for mining. Period. They don't want adds, but they want to mine Cryptos for someone else even less. Just look at the recent headlines about crypto-currency mining adds. I know they aren't the same. However, when people hear about this, they are going to equate it with the same thing. If it ever makes it mainstream, their will be major backlash.
That's what I thought at first. Then, I realized that current advertisers and websites are already quite intrusive. They used data from your search habits, and they insert files into your browser (cookies) that keep track of your activities. I think that Oyster's CPU-borrowing can become commonplace in the same way that cookies have. If I had a choice between current ad trackers that snoop on your browsing history, or giving up a small % of CPU then I would definitely chose the CPU. |
|
|
|
|
56
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Long read: An Institutional Investor's Take on Cryptoassets
|
on: February 14, 2018, 12:52:21 AM
|
My first issue, even without reading the paper, is that in order to be a store-of-value, there must be some value to store. If Bitcoin is nothing more than a store-of-value, then it has none. Now, on to the paper. The author claims that PQ (in MV = PQ) is the the cost of running the system (mining in the Bitcoin case), and concludes that the value of M can be primarily based on its use as a store-of-value, with little regard to its utility as a payment system. Unfortunately, that is both circular reasoning and contradictory in the Bitcoin case. The truth is that the cost of mining depends on M because of the subsidy and on the utility as the payment system because of the fees. Please note that M, in this case, represents the value of the money supply.M depending on PQ when PQ depends on M is circular reasoning. Actually, both depending on each other is reasonable if you consider it to be something like a feedback loop, but in that case both M and PQ must then depend on other factors. M depending on the cost of mining, which in turn depends on fees, is a direct statement that M depends on the utility as a payment system. Thus the conclusion that Bitcoin's value can be unrelated to its utility as a payment system is a contradiction. How about the case of gold? Isn't that almost purely a store of value just because its shiny and society puts a value on it? I do see your point about the fees being a driving force for miners to mine, but if BTC had 0 fees tomorrow and only block reward payouts then would mining come to a halt and price crash down? What do you think about his distaste for protocols and the theory that constant forking will occur to dilute them down to purely the cost of computing? |
|
|
|
|
57
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Speculation (Altcoins) / Re: [PRL] Oyster Pearl predictions
|
on: February 13, 2018, 08:01:40 PM
|
I think this idea has some serious flaws. In fact, I believe the project will fail because people don't want their CPUs being used for mining. Period. They don't want adds, but they want to mine Cryptos for someone else even less. Just look at the recent headlines about crypto-currency mining adds. I know they aren't the same. However, when people hear about this, they are going to equate it with the same thing. If it ever makes it mainstream, their will be major backlash.
I think it will be the opposite. There might be some short term public outrage, but after the 24hr news cycle moves on to something new then everyone will forget about it. The only ones who really pay attention will be people like us, which makes up a very small percent of total internet users. |
|
|
|
|
59
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Speculation (Altcoins) / Re: Crypto market cap doesn't need new money to moon
|
on: February 13, 2018, 12:40:11 AM
|
My point is clear, let's use another example, one which you might have heard about. Bitconnect, or most recently Davor, when they closed their lending programs, that's terrible news, suddenly all the buy orders that were pending are cancelled, the sellers start placing lower buy orders, trying to outsell each other, suddenly the highest sell order is $25 down from $400 and so far no order has been filled and therefore the price remains the same. Say one person believes $25 is a good buy and he buys Bitconnect worth a penny. The price on the exchange now records because that was the last order filled. Did the amount of money pumped into the market previously get taken out? Certainly not, yet the price is now $25! So my point is that it's not really the amount of money pumped into crypto that necessarily drives the prices up. It will initially do so while people are buying, but the moment bad news is heard, the money that was initially put in, could still be in the market, yet the market cap can drop below that value. Say a trillion dollars gets injected into crypto today, and the market cap rises, tomorrow news that the US has banned crypto spreads, the market cap can drop to two hundred billion without $100 leaving the market. If this does not make my point clear, I rest my case.
Let me help you with a simpler example. Say the entire marker is only held by 2 investors... InvestorA own 10 billion of crypto coinA he bought at $0.01 each. InvestorB own 10 billion of crypto coinB he bought at $0.01 each. Both invested $100million for a total market cap of $200 millionIf investorA sold one token to investorB for $1, and likewise investorB sold investorA one of his token for $1. At that instant, the market cap went up to $20 billion with only a dollar injected to the market.Absolutely correct and it would be interesting to know how much supply of a given coin is actually moving in a day. Also shines a light on the term Market Capitalization and is it really a good measure of value (yes, I know it is widely accepted in all financial markets around the world, but still)? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
really interested what he have done when reached 1M 
