 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
|
Has anybody received payouts from p2pool.vtcpool.co.uk:9555?
Also, how come there is no page to check statistics for it?
|
|
|
|
|
If there are external services that can take care of anonymity, then why the need for it in the base protocol? As much as I wanted zerocash, now I realize that it could be dangerous for VTC. Would governments tolerate it?
But then again, what could governments do? And if VTC did implement zerocash, you can expect a huge surge of users coming from BTC- particularly those who use it for transactions on TOR, and transactions of that nature. Furthermore, would it really affect public perception, particularly in a negative way? I wouldn't think so. VTC would just become the "BTC how it was meant to be"- decentralized, fair, and especially, inherently anonymous. Anonymity, after all, is usually mentioned as one of the great supposed benefits of crypto-currency.
To elaborate on the effect on public perception: I don't think it would really matter. Piles of dollar bills conjure the notion of drugs and drug dealers, arms trades and so on, yet this does not stop people from using dollars. Why should it stop people from using VTC? People will use VTC if it has strong support, and it would get strong support from the community of investors and miners who are interested in cryptocurrencies because they are anonymous.
I am split.
There is a saying "security is not a product, but a process." Depending on a protocol -security through a product- to be anonymous is dangerous. Usually there is a way to exploit any technology. However, if one is to use lots of different addresses, not associate them with their real identities, use coin mixers, and so on -security through process- then VTC could just as well be anonymous.
Update
Apparently fedoracoin has already implemented coin mixing, and yet this has not done much for the coin's success. Maybe implementing zerocash won't do much for VTC either, except for the things the devs fear.
|
|
|
|
Is the logo need to be changed ? The new one would be more of context. Really great job btw !  The "new" logo does not belong on something like this. Keep using the logo thats already on this graphic for now. As a community we need to decide on a much better logo than the "new official" one, a number of people with professional experience in design have already commented on the problems with it (including myself). Most of the discussion about that is on reddit. What??? I understand you don't like or agree with the new official logo, but it is the new official logo and it should be used everywhere. We need to unite and stand with a unified brand that has been laid out by the official developers and maintainers: http://vertcoinforum.com/gfx/Vertcoin_styleguide_rev_01.pdfI've been here since the beginning, I want vertcoin to succeeded. That being said, I think this "official" logo is bad and will hurt vertcoin. Lets talk about "official" as well, that word implies a sense of centralisation, the point of cryptos is decentralisation, control is in the hands of the community majority. We should be consistent, though, don't you think? Consistent, yes. But not to the point where one "official" person says something is good when its not and everyone else blindly follows. I think the logo is fine, but if it's not, what do you think the logo should become? Can you make a draft? |
|
|
|
Is the logo need to be changed ? The new one would be more of context. Really great job btw ! The "new" logo does not belong on something like this. Keep using the logo thats already on this graphic for now. As a community we need to decide on a much better logo than the "new official" one, a number of people with professional experience in design have already commented on the problems with it (including myself). Most of the discussion about that is on reddit. What??? I understand you don't like or agree with the new official logo, but it is the new official logo and it should be used everywhere. We need to unite and stand with a unified brand that has been laid out by the official developers and maintainers: http://vertcoinforum.com/gfx/Vertcoin_styleguide_rev_01.pdfI've been here since the beginning, I want vertcoin to succeeded. That being said, I think this "official" logo is bad and will hurt vertcoin. Lets talk about "official" as well, that word implies a sense of centralisation, the point of cryptos is decentralisation, control is in the hands of the community majority. We should be consistent, though, don't you think? |
|
|
|
|
Could it be that silly fiend Wolong purposely trying to keep the price of VTC down, since his shitty pandacoin joke is just a clone of VTC and therefore VTC is really its greatest competitor and threat?
|
|
|
|
Sidenote: I'm thinking about removing Vert from the poll. This one is too risky considering that it hasn't gone up in price since it was listed on cryptsy. There might be claims of it being 'undervalued' because of this, but this coin has a lot of tell-tale signs of just being a hyped coin that got pumped and has bagholders still talking about it..
The reason the price dropped so much is because at the price it was at, it was incredibly profitable to mine. At the current price it is still near the top for profitability. |
|
|
|
|
What's so good about this coin? It's just a shitty clone of Vertcoin, which actually has some very intelligent, experienced developers behind it, and a great, eager community. Pandacoin is just a premined joke by some rich Chinese investor who is trying to get even richer.
Why play into this game?
|
|
|
|
|
