Who decides how and which issues are organized and presented to the voters; and is that influence effectively centralized control?
The algorithm does. Any token holder can submit a proposal and open proposals are displayed in descending order by the amount of deposit paid. To release the agreed bounty, a quorum of neophyte investors will vote to on whether the pull request submitted by the contracted programmer meets the requirements of the specification we originally approved by a prior vote? We will not depend on any experts to advise us? This will magically all coordinate itself in a decentralized manner without any de facto leaders emerging? You asked one question, and I answered it. Now you are asking another question, which unfortunately can not be answered in an objective manner because the answer lies not in code but in speculation about future events. |
|
|
|
I don't see why would AMD/Nvidia sell cores to someone at a discount when they can sell a nice card with premium.
Because GPUs are not a special purpose device i.e. magic money machine. AMD and Nvidia price their chips to maximize their return on investment across a wide range of applications, not based on how many BTC they can mine. It conceivably could become the case that if Bitcoin were GPU mined and became much larger, mining would be the primary use for GPUs in which case they too would become in effect application specific integrated circuits. That's a long way off if ever. |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the correction @ROBERTO, I've edited above
|
|
|
|
Also note that max supply is 8.58 Billion
Max supply isn't necessarily that important if it will only be reached after a very long time. If I recall correctly, ducknote started with 320 320 000 coins/block with halving every month, so this coin distribution is much, much slower. The relatively high interest for hodling adds another different dynamic to it as well. Anyway, I'm wondering what are the plans for this coin. Is it XDN with a different distribution curve, or is there more planned? (I didn't read the whole thread.) EDIT: Thanks to ROBERTO for the correction on the initial XDN reward |
|
|
|
Ethereum verification costs are vastly higher than Bitcoin
Vitalik disputes that, mostly by pointing out that ECDSA verification costs dwarf what ETH scripts typically do, here |
|
|
|
This alarm bell went off in my head as well. Why now?
Pretty simple to answer. Ethereum trading volumes are sky high, competitors such as Gemini are already trading it. You don't even have to consider anything about Bitcoin to see this makes sense for Coinbase to do, at least viewed short term. |
|
|
|
Who decides how and which issues are organized and presented to the voters; and is that influence effectively centralized control?
The algorithm does. Any token holder can submit a proposal and open proposals are displayed in descending order by the amount of deposit paid. |
|
|
|
Aaaawwwww jesus is gone.
why do all people call him soooo smart? he is not.
he is a forum addicted troll and not genius.
in comparison to Vitalik he is just a fart in a tornado.
I hope he is really gone, but all addicted come back.
They're both pretty smart, but very different in style. They also both have people saying they aren't so smart. At some point that sort of distinction comes down to a matter of interpretation. Clearly neither is stupid. |
|
|
|
Bitcedi ANN: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1474935You can either escrow already-agreed trades, or fund a open order by sending the BTC or BXC to me (PM for an address) with a price and I will complete the trade directly once a counterparty is found. Available funded offers will be listed in the OP. Fee is 1% for all escrow trades, paid in BXC. No fee if there is no trade. Escrow fee is temporarily 0%. Tips acceptedPlease edit your thread posts with p2p offers to keep them current. Orders listed in bold are pre-funded (contact OP to trade). Other orders with a username can be found in the thread -- contact the user directly to trade. Sells3000 @ 50000 sat (traumschiff) 500 @ 2000 sat (hashmaster1) 700 @ 2000 sat (btcluka) unk @ 2000 sat (Ayers) 20k @ 1750 sat (deore) 765 @ 1500 sat (onnz423) 300 @ 1450 sat (Dossis) Buys5000 @ 1000 sat (chen miao) unk @ 700 sat (Bank_sy) 5000 @ 500 sat (ROBERTO) 1k @ 70 sat (robelneo) 3m @ 25 sat (CjMapope) Other offersFademigo (looking to buy 10000) Completed trades2016-05-19 14:52:58 1800 @ 1750 sat (reported by Nik4691) |
|
|
|
Can anyone comment on the privacy solution offered by BTCD? They have termed it Teleport and Telepathy.
Teleport seems to have components of XMR's solution to privacy:
"In a mantissa attack you are identified because of the exact size of your transaction.
That makes your transaction distinctive among others and it is easy to spot you on the blockchain.
To remove this threat the telepods use standard denominations, i.e.100, 50,10, 5,1 and so on."
I've seen comparisons of XMR with other anon-centric coins but not with BTCD.
Unless it has been reworked from the dark paper last year, it is worthless and doesn't solve any of the problems that blockchains exist to solve. You send your telepod to the recipient. The recipient can either submit it on the blockchain, it which case it ends up looking exactly the same as if you spent it yourself. Or they can pass the telepod on to another recipient, which in theory delinks you from the first recipient (though you are now linked with the second, which for all you know might even be worse, and vice versa). What is to keep first recipient from passing the output on to two parties (effectively a double spend) or to keep you from double spending the output while it is being passed around? Nothing. So: 1. Ignores the need for double spend protection 2. Transactions are still strongly linked to some actual recipient on the blockchain (even more so than coinjoin), by at best a small number of hops, maybe none. Other stuff in BTCD like the asset exchange might be worth something -- I haven't evaluated it -- but the privacy stuff is just nonsense. If there is something new going on, I'd need to see a new paper, though frankly I'm not sure I would put in the effort to read it. Getting through the dark paper was excruciating. |
|
|
|
I've been taking some time off from Math and Computer Science to work on my degree in Gender Studies[/i].
I love reading your posts and value your input as much as the next bullish xmr guy on this forum... but I'm sorry I gotta say it, what the hell??? Sorry to go off the topic, but how can a Math/Computer geek such as yourself be trying to get a degree in Gender Studies? I would've put 100 moneros on something in the STEM fields.... Pretty clear you are reading too literally. Think analogies: Crypto : Math and Computer Science :: ________ : Gender Studies |
|
|
|
Admins, mods, please consider unbanning AnonyMint! I'd like to have him back too!
If you want to make the argument you have to post that in Meta. They are not terribly likely to read some random thread in the Alt section. Why is this post ban worthy? Why delete it? Can one of the mods please explain their reasoning?
Probably because he was already banned when he posted it. That's generally an automatic delete. But I'm just guessing, you'd have to ask the mods (in Meta). |
|
|
|
No disrespect meant, but I don't know who this guy is. Can someone drop that knowledge briefly? Also where did he originally post this?
And he's not the first one to quit like this and he makes a few good points and I don't blame him for leaving.
If you click the quoted post it goes to his netcash/vibes thread where he probably originally posted it, but it got deleted by forum mods. As far is who he is, a smart but troubled guy who has been posting here prolifically for the past 3 years or so. You can find his past posts under AnonyMint, TPTB_need_war, and a few others. |
|
|
|
7. As I’m trying to find what to do next, I click the 3 line button right of the Crypto Kingdom label (upper left). This button needs more highlighting as it’s not so intuitive that it’s a central button in terms of functionality. At least to me.
Called a hamburger button or a hamburger menu. I hate them but apparently there is some controversy about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamburger_button |
|
|
|
My advice is to get yourself back to the US, preferably to a large city with good medical services, and seek the modern and competent medical attention and treatment that you so obviously need. The oregano oil isn't working for you.
Good advice, but TPTB should still release his coin too Yes he seems to have some very original ideas. |
|
|
|
Correct, you cannot yet bet on the Ethereum network with real currency. The test net is just like the live net - same code and everything, just no one mines on it and its currency is worthless... you can bet there to play around with the mechanics of it and that is where they are putting it through its paces to work out any bugs.
Aweomse, thank you! Is there any specific ETA for when we will see Augur roll out live? Or is 'sometime later this year' all that anyone knows at this point in time? It just so happens I looked around on their web site the other day and I saw nothing on their blog or elsewhere other than beta release from a while back. They seem to have a lot of speaking engagements scheduled soon, if you want to guess about one of those being a launch announcement, that might not be crazy. http://blog.augur.net/2016/05/16/new-team-members-upcoming-events/ |
|
|
|
except to try to attack us with the appeal to hypocrisy fallacy.
The hypocrisy of claiming Monero is not a coordinated entity from one side of your mouth, then defending your tribe "us" out of the other side of your mouth. Excuse me? "Us" referred to ArcticMine and myself, the only two people I remember on this thread that make your constant references to Monero remotely sensible, even though it is still a nonsensical argument. You succeeded in hoodwinking AnonyMint and destroying his reputation by convincing him that he would be on the successful side by speaking out against ICOs, premines, etc.. So that the former reputation that AnonyMint had became unusable when it was time to use it.
Excuse me? I convinced TPTB to do nothing. He's his own person, capable of objectively evaluating reality and making his own decisions, or at least he was until this recent breakdown. You've laid so much waste in your wake. And potentially destroyed the one person who could have actually fixed crypto for all of us.
I hope you are proud of your result.
But I wouldn't be too smug. AnonyMint is one clever mofo. I am sure he will no longer use words.
In fact, I know his next plan. And he will turn the definition of mining inside-out and upside-down. And you will bow at his feet. Keep your television tuned. The fireworks haven't yet begun.
At this point I find myself largely in agreement with altcoinUK, I'm afraid. My advice is to get yourself back to the US, preferably to a large city with good medical services, and seek the modern and competent medical attention and treatment that you so obviously need. The oregano oil isn't working for you. |
|
|
|
...
The Howey test doesn't concern itself with the issuer, rather only the economic reality of whom is securing the investor's expectations.
So you propose a security without an issuer? In the case of Monero, hypothetically, the "issuer" would be whoever is orchestrating the scheme to funnel investor money for their benefit with some investor expectation of a future return. Whether someone is "orchestrating" Monero as a scheme to do anything depends who you ask. Like if you ask ceti or Spoetnik, its all being run behind the scenes by Risto or me (or I am Risto). It's obviously nonsense, but if someone were to make the case, that's the argument they would make. In the case of this thread, it is clear that there is a scheme with two coins, one with an ICO (i.e. clearly funneling investor money with some investor expectation of a future return), and various relationships between a number of involved parties, some anonymous. The scheme is laid out, at least in general terms, on this very thread for all to see (or maybe the posts I read are on another thread). Yes, but even the the above example "the scheme" rather than Monero itself would be the security. There is a subtle difference here. A good example is Ethereum. Many would argue that Ethereum is a security because of its initial ICO, but in reality was the security the promise to deliver the Ethereum at a future date or the Ethereum itself? Another example would be a promise to deliver gold at a future date, The promise to deliver gold at a future date may very well be a security, but that does not make the gold itself a security. I think I agree with that. Not sure the relevance to this thread, but then I saw no relevance to Monero having been brought up at all, except to try to attack us with the appeal to hypocrisy fallacy. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
