Oh, we don't? j/k

Guess amphibian is back to vacation

oh boy!

Doge will overtake Litecoin one day, possibly this year, although 2015 is more likely.

Can anyone confirm the source code of BBR on github is safe to download and compile? Has the issue that affected XMR been fixed in BBR if BBR was also affected?

Why transfer them to Bter if you bought at NXT AE. Buyers would just get the amount of UNITY tokens corresponding to how much they bought of TOKEN tokens. It's safer to buy on NXT AE too, we don't have to trust Bter, only trust James. If we buy on Bter, we have to trust them both, which is less reliable. In any case, I consider this a donation to the cause of crypto currency movement and don't expect any returns. If there is a return, it'll be a nice bonus.

Why would it matter where management and control is for an Internet company? And where is management and control of Bter by the way? It could be anywhere in the world

Bottom of the page on Bter says: Address: British Virgin Islands

I wouldn't count on it.

Oh no, now NEM is blamed for unfair distribution! Who would've thunk this is possible?! This is never gonna end! Life is unfair, deal with it. Where do you guys even get these ideas of fairness from? And where did you ever see them work in real life, in any country or at any time? Amazing!

go go doge!

So his point is, to eliminate legal issues under US law, it must be a crowd sale of tokens redeemable for consumable products or not redeemable for anything as a donation as a safest bet. This makes them different from tokens that offer financial returns, which would be considered securities/equity and which would be highly regulated. It's all about wording

If that makes Bitcoin like DOS, then it's a break-through for Crypto 2.0 technologies.
I guess the main point to understand about all this is crypto currencies have to stay in permanent development mode, because they are software. Or die. No long term status quo is possible if development stops. Not even for first movers.

To fund a new account the sender must put the recipient's public key in the sending form. This is needed only for the first transaction, for all subsequent txs to that recipient the sender only needs to put the recipient's account address and the public key of the recipient is already known to the network. They introduced this requirement about 2-3 weeks ago. You could receive your asset before this requirement was introduced.

Bter + NXT AE

QQ tokens had limited use cases and were centralized, issued by QQ company. How do you squelch crypto 2.0? Throw people in jail for using it? Ban Internet? These are possibilities, of course. It's all high risk investment and wild west. We'll see how it unfolds.

People's perception of law in developing countries is not the same as perception of law in developed countries. If something is banned, it doesn't mean it'll stop happening, it'll just go underground, which is true for developed nations too, but to a lesser extent, as citizens are more law-abiding. Besides, they didn't ban Bitcoin in China to the point of putting people in jail for using it. It's not even banned.


Well, the average person doesn't have to understand all the facts. They just need to know and understand how to use the platforms and see examples of use cases from others. One example is crowdfunding opportunities that decentralized exchanges present, which is especially attractive to small companies that can't do IPOs on traditional stock exchanges. One example we can observe now is the cryptomessenger, which will be released in the next few days. It got the funding through NXT AE, and if it gets to be successful, many other examples will follow. Yeah, it's a long road. Crypto is software, it has to innovate or die. There is no point sitting on Bitcoins waiting for them to grow to sky.

Well, I am talking about decentralized crypto 2.0 technologies.
You're posting about some digital fiat by Ecuador and other developing nations.
Other than that, we seem to agree that Bitcoin won't last too long.

To make my point more clear. I don't think Bitcoin can be a store of value longer than the next 5 years, probably even less than that. This will be a transition period to crypto 2.0 technologies, where Bitcoins work as seed capital to develop those crypto 2.0 technologies (IPOs to distribute stock, development costs, etc), decentralized companies and a full-fledged economy based on those. This stage already started last November. By the end of this transition stage Bitcoins will stop appreciating, because a) it will have used its full potential and being just a store of value and a money transfer mechanism would not be good enough; and b) yes, it will be fully centralized by then, with all the inconveniences that centralization causes.

The average person cares about price rise. When supply of a useful commodity is predictable and cannot be increased at a whim, the price tends to rise. That's when an average person takes a notice and wants to take part in the action. The side effect of this is he can learn about supply, inflation and other stuff.