|
Needs proper date formatting to be in the News Section.
Thanks...
|
|
|
|
|
Needs proper date formatting to be in the News Section.
Thanks...
|
|
|
|
I wonder how long it will take before everything starts to come down to more realistic prices. At this point the hype around Ethereum is too big and it shows as the price is insanely high with so many circulating coins. I don't think that Bitcoin miners will invest too much in extra hardware to go big into mining Ethereum as they also know that the price will start tanking significantly once everything is cooling down. They see it as a welcome extra bit of income.
Price of Ethereum might not be flawed. Some papers are valued 100$ in the USA. Why something reliying o,n a strong technology couldn't be worth a little 14$ ? It consumes tokens for performing computations, that's why. This means they'll have to increase the supply at some point, unless they want everyone to abandon their "DAPPS" because the per-token price is too high for them to do anything with it. That's the fundamental problem with ETH, not to mention the flawed "Decentralized Autonomous Organization" voting scheme, which encourages people not to vote for a given proposal, so they don't "lock" their ETH up. Its just a nightmare of a mess, and the only thing keeping it going is the pumping squad trying to get a few more shakes out of it before it all falls apart. |
|
|
|
|
Renaming to GDAX (Mt. Gox German Index, lololol) is probably one of the most idiotic things I've ever seen.
|
|
|
|
|
BitQuick v2.0, the search for more money...
Who would trust these people after being fleeced the first time?
|
|
|
|
|
This is a complete bullshit article.
If you don't pay for network resources, you don't get any - so your transaction takes as long as its going to take, with no guarantees.
If you pay the extremely small miner fee, you get included in the next block rather handily. I myself have done this, and paying what amounts to be a small fraction of the total transaction is worth it to me - and is far lower than standard processors, such as credit cards and payment oligopolies.
Circling back and saying that Bitcoin isn't recognized by governments (it is, in Japan and a few other places) is just icing on the ignorant e-journalist cake. Emphasizing regulation, which at best impedes growth and at worst encourages fraud (See the revolving door between the SEC and major Banks, Primary Dealers, etc..).
Just another "shiticle" that is out there for the page views, not the facts.
|
|
|
|
|
This is why e-journalism is a joke.
ETH is based on decentralized computing. The token itself is used to power these computations. ETH are consumed by operations, which means at some point there will have to be more created/released if computation on the platform increases at all. This puts it at odds for being a "store of value", because frankly, it isn't DESIGNED TO BE ONE. I wish these journalists would get it right, because it is a rather important distinction.
There are other factors that will weigh on ETH price, such as competition for compute-per-cycle from conventional technologies. While ETH likes to think that everyone wants a decentralized hammer for their computing problems, the honest truth is there are piles of nearly-free hammers lying around in the form of open source code and diving prices in cloud computing platforms.
But that doesn't stop the endless Ethereum articles, does it? Its almost like someone knows that the underlying narrative is bullshit, but they need to pump it as an investment -- not as a computing vehicle.
That should give you pause, at the very least. ETH was never designed to be an investment, period.
|
|
|
|
There is a plan, but the thing is that most people that have put money in this are in it for the potential short term -and riskless- profit. That's until a proposal is out and I suppose those won't go out unannounced. So we'll probably see an exodus sooner or later after a proposal is announced.
No such thing as "riskless", my friend. Good luck with the fundy thing of funds funding other fundy things that may make funds for the original funders. LOL. |
|
|
|
Would it have killed you to actually post the descriptive text? Empirically, what benefits result from Permissionless Implementation (in contrast to Miner privatization)? When Bitcoin's messages were made more flexible by Ethereum, what new services were made possible as a result? The answer is disappointing: the new uses were mostly of a single new category -- the Casino. The entire remainder could be grouped into a mere two additional categories -- Oracles and Names. The Blockchain has been referred to as "The Trust Machine". However, a Casino involves a different type of trust than a Bank. Casinos [1] consume disposable income to provide a brief experience, [2] they exist in a competitive environment, and [3] they have custody of a small amount of funds for a small amount of time. A Bank (comparable to Bitcoin) is almost the exact opposite -- [1] stores up funds for further use, [2] has monopoly power over their customer's funds (if you fail to withdraw from a frozen Barclay's account, you cannot "take your withdrawal business elsewhere" to Bank of America), and [3] holds a large amount of funds for a large amount of time. Money is sent to Casino-types ("value-accepters") in many ways, but it is sent to Bank-types ("value-storers") in very few ways. In fact, the structure of a blockchain -- everyone downloads and verifies everything -- implies that they will only be efficient where "what other people do" affects you. With Money this is true (as no one wants to end up holding a counterfeit bearer asset), but with Contracts it is false (I couldn't care less about my neighbor's car payments). This argument is applied *< nasal honk >* to Slock.it, which *literally* does not require a blockchain. Moreover, the features of the blockchain -- censorship resistance, regulatory arbitrage, anonymity, open access, etc. -- contradict the concept of visiting a physical place at a known time. These conditions favor solutions which are *specific*, and not *general*. Of course, all views are my own and do not necessarily represent Bloq's or anyone's, and so forth ( http://www.truthcoin.info/#disclaimer ). Essentially, Sidechains will be second-rate to the blockchain that secures it. |
|
|
|
|
As usual, government lags cryptographic proof.
Its already "authentic", the gasbags just have to wrap their minds around it and proclaim it so. So now what, we get notaries on the blockchain? We had that back in 2011 or so.
|
|
|
|
|
"Hey guys, lets pile all that money into a nebulous 'fund' that will do fundy things and fund other fundy things and maybe it will be cool, but I don't know, maybe not."
So, zero plan, and its a pile of money sloshing around that maybe will do something. Great. So much innovation, I might have to call Silicon Valley VC's and get them to fund their funds into the fundy thing of funds.
Or not.
|
|
|
|
|
What a bunch of yellow-journalism crap.
I guess they needed a "clickbait" title to bring up their website hits. "Skyrocketing" fees my fucking ass, you think 30 cents is a big price to pay for being able to send almost any amount, ANYWHERE, at ANY TIME? What the everloving fuck is wrong with the retards running these e-coin sites.
Try sending a non-trivial amount to someone else using Western Union or SWIFT, I guarantee the fees are much higher.
|
|
|
|
|
Enough of this stupid bullshit, seriously.
There's nothing good to be had hounding people as if they were Satoshi. Just let it go, you idiots...
|
|
|
|
|
Probably Hearn asking for more money, lol.
You mean a cabal of corporate jackals can't decide to get along? Oh no! What will Mike do when they run out of money to pay his stupid ass?
Does this mean R3 is a "Failed Experiment"?
LOL.
|
|
|
|
|
Gotta keep pumping that Ethereum story, before people forget all about it!
Current ETH/USD price hanging two bucks above their soul-crushing lows, due to head lower yet again.
|
|
|
|
Well, Erik Voorhees is an American / Panamanian startup founder. Not a big surprise.
You're acting as if someone who is in Panama would automatically use the same law firm that creates tax-shelters. I find that rather dubious, there's obviously more than one law firm in Panama. The implications are quite interesting, however. |
|
|
|
Guess who showed up in the "Panama Papers" database? Erik Voorhees - https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/12224872Charlie Shrem - https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/12224871Invested in the same company, lol. There's been some rumors swirling that the "hack" was really a inside job perpetrated to get information for possible future action against Bitcoin services. Funny how his name is in the very leak that has implicated many others in dodgy dealings... |
|
|
|
|
Needs proper date formatting to be in the News Section.
Thanks...
Appreciate you updating to the standard.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
