Tempus as always explained everything perfectly. Thank you for your hard work.  It's not hard work. It's Sunday, I'm bored, my thoughts getting clearer if I write and I learn english that way  |
|
|
|
For me, the normal price would be at least $20 per 1 factoid. It will, but not soon. If Factom catch up Ethereum, the price will be $70-$85 per 1 factoid. Many do not rule out that it is quite possible that the Factom caught Ethereum approximately through 1 year. Today factoid 100% is very undervalued. The current price factoid is just a shame for the Factom team. The future will show.  Well it's about a dollar right now so $20 is not really that outrageous. In winter, I talked about that in spring factoid should cost $3 (this price we've seen), in summer factoid should cost $6 to the end of the year from $9 to $11. This forecast I make in February this year. This is not going to happen. Remember, FCT price need to be low so people can get access to entry credits which is important cause it s the sole purpose of Factom. Personally, I do consider to sell everything and move to Etherum. Much more cooperative development team and they do have an interest to increase the price. The price for Factoids has no influence on the price for Entry Credits. The amount of used Entry Credits has an effect on the price of Factoids. It's not even needed to buy Factoids to be able to purchase Entry Credits because it's possible to buy EC's with $. For customers it's not even needed to know about existence of Factoids. Factoids is something like a technical Factom-Currency. And, just by the way: Some say the holy grail in Crypto is a bulletproof anonymous system. But I believe the holy grail in Crypto is a system in which customers don't even need to touch Cryptocurrencies. ;-) Factom found a very elegant solution to make that possible. Let's say you want 1 Mio Entry Credits. Scenario 1: You buy it with Factoids, so you have to buy Factoids first.
1 EC = $0.001 (fixed at this price) 1 Mio EC's = $1000 You buy 914 FCT's (currently each $1.094) and you send those to your EC-Address = 1 Mio EC's. Scenario 2: You buy EC's with $.
You use your Credit Card to buy it in the Factom-Store (or from somebody else who offers this service) and they send Factoids on your EC-Address. In both Scenarios the used/converted Factoids are "burned" - out of the system. The thing about it is simple: The higher the price of Factoids the less Factoids are needed and "burned". If the price for Factoids is down more Factoids are needed for Amount x of Entry Credits. What does that mean for the Factoids-price and why could it be a good investment? The more the system is used, the more Entry Credits will be used. The more Entry Credits = the more Factoids will be "burned". At the same time, after Milestone 3, there will be about 73,000 new FCT's each month (payment for federated server). That means: If Factom should become successful, and let's say there would be a demand for about 1 billion EC's per month, a price of $13.7 per FCT would be needed - otherwise more Factoids per month would be burned than new created. Calculation: 1 billion EC's * $0.001 = $1 Mio $1 Mio / 73,000 = $13,69 I can't know if that (a huge demand like that) will happen and if, nobody knows when. But if you think about possible use cases you'll find out: It can be used for a ton of different purposes. And if you read about "Big Data" you'll find out: There is no lack of data and there are a lot of problems to organize data, to secure data, to connect data - in time. Factom offers solutions for all kinds of problems with data - for companies but also for private persons. Conclusion: It's all about the question if Factom will become successful or not. And I believe that there won't be a way in the middle. If they will become successful I believe: It will be about tons of data and huge amounts of Entry Credits. The reason why I believe that is what is called network-effect. The more it's used the more incentive to use it for others. The more it's used for one purpose, the more incentive to use it for other purposes as well. Because data, especially data-in-time, is nearly always connected in some ways with other data. That's the case for one company and that's the case for whole economies. That's even the case for private persons. Second Conclusion: If the Factom-team is able to develop it the way it's planned, I see no reason why it shouldn't become successful. The only reason I can think of are competitors with better solutions. But it's not easy to make it better because the base-principle is about simplicity. It has to be stable. In the announcement-post they say: "Factom is most easily understood as a protocol that provides unlimited books of blank paper." That's a nice comparison. Doesn't sound like the next big thing, but blank paper is really useful and it's pretty hard to make it better than blank. ;-) The rest is a question of applications which has to be userfriendly - but a company that wants to use Factom will develop applications for individual purposes or pay members of Factom to do that. In my opinion Factom could turn out as the first project in Crypto that will be really useful, solve real problems. Ethereum is a great project but I believe it's possible that it will turn out as "scientific-project". Needed as experience to find out what's possible and what is not and how something like that (smart contracts) can be done or not be done, and where the limits are. In the end it could turn out as not stable enough. It has to face a lot of problems because it's much more complex by design. Factom is like a stable base on a stable base. At the same time it's very flexible, can anchor in multiple blockchains, can connect with all kinds of useful Applications, and it's even possible to build different Factom-systems on top of Factom - it can grow into other use cases. That's why I believe Factom is the project with the highest potential and, in comparison with ETH for example, it involves less risk. P.S.: I didn't write this just for you. I believe that a lot of people still don't really understand the "Factoids --> Entry Credit - principle" and how to see Factom in general. Heh. Thx for this explanation and especially P.S part. I could argue a lot about this especially the part about the team, potential success and competitors. However, since I m also a Factom holder I m not going to sabotage my own investment based on my understanding of the problem. Nothing wrong to point out your critics. And I doubt that it would have much effect on the price, because those points ppl are critical about are also reasons for an "Investor-selection-process". What I mean with that is: Some are critical about the communication-side. That the team doesn't post too much. Some believe they don't even care much about their Investors. Some believe they should be faster or at least give some more informations about time estimations and so on. The thing is: Everybody who believes they do it wrong, or at least "more wrong than right" is free to sell and some did that. Those who are too lazy to make deeper research and therefore not being able to see the potential don't even care. It's a take-it-as-it-is-project - or leave it. One sells, another buys, the Factom-team doesn't need to think much about that. This is not a cryptocurrency with the need for a wide distribution. It wouldn't hurt anything if there would be only 50 Factoid-holders. At the same time: The value of Factoids is totally tied to the usefulness of the system itself. They can't do anything better for Factoid-Investors than working on the system and that's what they do. And they also speak with potential customers and they talk to big companies. That's already proven. Even countries. And it's also a safe bet that there is a lot going on they can't talk about. Take a look what Tiana Laurence says here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBnZoZtkoa8&feature=youtu.be&t=37m"So much is happening, we just can't talk about....you are such a jerk...!" ;-) I really like that part. It's about non-disclosure agreements which means: Negotiations they are not allowed to talk about - until there is an agreement and then there will be an announcement. Or take a look here, what Paul Snows says: https://youtu.be/1noFK6M8ktU?t=1h6m14sOut of Investor-perspective there are just 2 questions: 1. Are they honest? 2. Do they have the skills to deliver? Yes and yes - that's my opinion. More is not needed. And what I also believe: If you think about their perspective: They work hard... why should they work for those who just want to make a quick buck. If they would want it, they could cause a buy-panic and the price would go x 5 in 24 hours. Wouldn't even need much work for that. It's just a question of enough people who say the "right" things. Paycoin was pretty good in leading people into buying their crap. It doesn't need much more than a smart use of words like "soon" and "big things are coming" blablabla. If the Factom-team would want that, it would be easy for them. Wouldn't even need fancy design or expensive PR. And different to Paycoin they wouldn't even have to lie. Smart communication-skills plus some hints on what's going on plus "soon". The rest would be about quantity (many people and all communication-channels) not more. 2 hours work for them and the price would shoot up. Maybe even just one post of Paul Snow. If I would recognize them doing something like that I would sell into the pump because I would consider it as a sign that there is something wrong. |
|
|
|
For me, the normal price would be at least $20 per 1 factoid. It will, but not soon. If Factom catch up Ethereum, the price will be $70-$85 per 1 factoid. Many do not rule out that it is quite possible that the Factom caught Ethereum approximately through 1 year. Today factoid 100% is very undervalued. The current price factoid is just a shame for the Factom team. The future will show. Well it's about a dollar right now so $20 is not really that outrageous. In winter, I talked about that in spring factoid should cost $3 (this price we've seen), in summer factoid should cost $6 to the end of the year from $9 to $11. This forecast I make in February this year. This is not going to happen. Remember, FCT price need to be low so people can get access to entry credits which is important cause it s the sole purpose of Factom. Personally, I do consider to sell everything and move to Etherum. Much more cooperative development team and they do have an interest to increase the price. The price for Factoids has no influence on the price for Entry Credits. The amount of used Entry Credits has an effect on the price of Factoids. It's not even needed to buy Factoids to be able to purchase Entry Credits because it's possible to buy EC's with $. For customers it's not even needed to know about the existence of Factoids. Factoids is something like a system-Currency. And, just by the way: Some say the holy grail in Crypto is a bulletproof anonymous system. But I believe the holy grail in Crypto is a system in which customers don't even need to touch Cryptocurrencies. ;-) Factom found a very elegant solution to make that possible. Let's say you want 1 Mio Entry Credits. Scenario 1: You buy it with Factoids, so you have to buy Factoids first.
1 EC = $0.001 (fixed at this price) 1 Mio EC's = $1000 You buy 914 FCT's (currently each $1.094) and you send those to your EC-Address = 1 Mio EC's. Scenario 2: You buy EC's with $.
You use your Credit Card to buy it in the Factom-Store (or from somebody else who offers this service) and they send Factoids on your EC-Address. In both Scenarios the used/converted Factoids are "burned" - out of the system. The thing about it is simple: The higher the price of Factoids the less Factoids are needed and "burned". If the price for Factoids is down more Factoids are needed for Amount x of Entry Credits. What does that mean for the Factoids-price and why could it be a good investment? The more the system is used, the more Entry Credits will be used. The more Entry Credits = the more Factoids will be "burned". At the same time, after Milestone 3, there will be about 73,000 new FCT's each month (payment for federated server). That means: If Factom should become successful, and let's say there would be a demand for about 1 billion EC's per month, a price of $13.7 per FCT would be needed - otherwise more Factoids per month would be burned than new created. Calculation: 1 billion EC's * $0.001 = $1 Mio $1 Mio / 73,000 = $13,69 I can't know if that (a huge demand like that) will happen and if, nobody knows when. But if you think about possible use cases you'll find out: It can be used for a ton of different purposes. And if you read about "Big Data" you'll find out: There is no lack of data and there are a lot of problems to organize data, to secure data, to connect data - in time. Factom offers solutions for all kinds of problems with data - for companies but also for private persons. Conclusion: It's all about the question if Factom will become successful or not. And I believe that there won't be a way in the middle. If they will become successful I believe: It will be about tons of data and huge amounts of Entry Credits. The reason why I believe that is what is called network-effect. The more it's used the more incentive to use it for others. The more it's used for one purpose, the more incentive to use it for other purposes as well. Because data, especially data-in-time, is nearly always connected in some ways with other data. That's the case for one company and that's the case for whole economies. That's even the case for private persons. Second Conclusion: If the Factom-team is able to develop it the way it's planned, I see no reason why it shouldn't become successful. The only reason I can think of are competitors with better solutions. But it's not easy to make it better because the base-principle is about simplicity. It has to be stable. In the announcement-post they say: "Factom is most easily understood as a protocol that provides unlimited books of blank paper." That's a nice comparison. Doesn't sound like the next big thing, but blank paper is really useful and it's pretty hard to make it better than blank. ;-) The rest is a question of applications which has to be userfriendly - but a company that wants to use Factom will develop applications for individual purposes or pay members of Factom to do that. In my opinion Factom could turn out as the first project in Crypto that will be really useful, solve real problems. Ethereum is a great project but I believe it's possible that it will turn out as "scientific-project". Needed as experience to find out what's possible and what is not and how something like that (smart contracts) can be done or not be done, and where the limits are. In the end it could turn out as not stable enough. It has to face a lot of problems because it's much more complex by design. Factom is like a stable base on a stable base. At the same time it's very flexible, can anchor in multiple blockchains, can connect with all kinds of useful Applications, and it's even possible to build different Factom-systems on top of Factom - it can grow into other use cases. That's why I believe Factom is the project with the highest potential and, in comparison with ETH for example, it involves less risk. P.S.: I didn't write this just for you. I believe that a lot of people still don't really understand the "Factoids --> Entry Credit - principle" and how to see Factom in general. |
|
|
|
Can't speak for scam, but me, I don't think so. It's not worth that much to me. (mind you, you sure are grumpy, even to neucoiners  ) I think you have probably been a bit mercenary. You were drafted in later on? * When the others left? You were paid well? Or offered a commission? You must have seen what a bad set up it was? Before you joined? Are you still holding neucoin? How much did it cost you? Was neucoin a good career move for you? Yeah, like I want to satisfy your curiosity after all the personal attacks and everything. Except for Dominick Veltre (Gekko363), I don't know you, why should I disclose my personal infos ? What I think is surprising - or not really surprising: Nobody seems to know who is left, who is working on the project. Do you know? How many and who and what they do? Who is leading this? Dan Kaufman? Did he ever show up anywhere to talk to his community? In the official forum they talk about "enemies", as if the price would be a result of attacks on it. Nobody seems to be interested in asking the tough questions, about responsibilities of the team and what they do and not do and what they did and not did. What was your reason to leave btw? |
|
|
|
Whiteorg72, were u the one dumping 30k batches at the beginning of this month?
My dear friends, I do not sell factoids. I'm waiting for the normal price and I think it will not be soon. As I said before pass away to wait 2 - 4 years until the Factom project attains its strength. So do not worry I'm not dumping factoids and sell their factoids not going for at least another 2 years. tempus, I do not keep my factoids on the exchange. So, I do not push the wrong buttons. Wise decision and glad to hear that! ;-) P.S.: In two years, pls send me a short warning per PM (24h) before you push the sell-button. |
|
|
|
4% of the total Factoids stake?  This would be more than 320k Factoids which are worth around $400k. Now I can understand why you are afraid of the negative price development. tyz, I already have more than 4% of the total amount factoids. I think that I have enough of what I have and do not plan to buy more. Thank you. I'm not afraid because of Factom. I'm scared that whiteorg72 could click the wrong buttons on Polo!  |
|
|
|
Really interesting is this interview with CSW from mid 2014: Part 1: http://vimeo.com/149035662Part 2: https://vimeo.com/149115042Part 3: https://vimeo.com/149119154At least it shows that he is a visionary and that he knows what he is talking about. I still don't understand his first blog-post but what I believe is: If he is not Satoshi he is or was close to him. At least he knows a lot about it all. With other words: I'm not that sure that he is just a con-man. |
|
|
|
Also, have in mind Factom is one of the most bot infested markets I ve ever seen so far. Why is this, I have no idea.
a market without any miner sellpressure is better to predict maybe just wonder why same bot activity is not for example on NEM/XEM because thats a zero inflation top 10 coin too but significant less trading volume The Volume has to do with Lending and Margin-Trading. It's possible for Factom and some others: https://poloniex.com/lending (list is on the right side) https://poloniex.com/marginTrading#btc_fctIt's not possible for NEM/XEM. |
|
|
|
Yep. It's still interesting that they try to whitewash everything but never asking the relevant questions. They don't seem to care too much about the question if anybody is working on the project. They don't care about the question where all the 8000 new users per day are. They don't seem to care about the question what happened with the ICO-Bitcoins. They don't seem to care about responsibilities in general. Currently: 1 Neu < 300 sat. Real marketcap: Buyside = 5.4 BTC = $2400 |
|
|
|
|
New all-time-low today... below 300 sat.
Looks abandoned.
|
|
|
|
Whatever the reason(s) why Gavin believes in Wright might be, I don't believe in bad intentions. And he has (had) to handle more impressions and informations then the rest of us, also more subjective information (direct communication) etc. And the situation with Wright most likely was convincing.
With other words: I don't blame him for believing it. What I see as a mistake is that he (Gavin) wrote a blogpost. That was premature and I'm sure he regrets it.
No, it isn't just an example of a simple mistake , but gross negligence with extreme levels of credulity after a great amount of evidence discrediting Wright from last year, now more evidence from many different sources discrediting wright further with clear explanations on how and why Craig Wright is a likely fraud and at minimum lying with evidence provided.... and after all this Gavin still suggests he believes CW is Satoshi. This is far beyond any mistake , and raises some serious questions to either his competence or authenticity. Either way, both classic and core should permanently revoke his commit access. I'll wait for the next days to see if G.A. distances himself from his post and gives further explanations. For now I think it's a wild mixture of impressions and a more psychological not-easy-situation. Can't explain precise what I want to say in english. But in general my opinion is: Gavin did a lot for Bitcoin and I never had any doubts about his integrity. In this case he was too credulous and with a lack of professionalism. But: Bitcoin is not a company, G.A. is no "CEO", everybody is free to believe and free to say his opinion and also to change an opinion. And I believe that will happen if Wright doesn't show real proof for the public. |
|
|
|
4. I think Gavin et al are victims of another scam, and Wright’s done classic misdirection by generating different scams for different audiences.
I would not characterize Gavin as a victim... . For some reason, the way that this scenario is playing out, Gavin seems to be lacking good judgment and is coming across as wanting to be scammed. Whatever the reason(s) why Gavin believes in Wright might be, I don't believe in bad intentions. And he has (had) to handle more impressions and informations then the rest of us, also more subjective information (direct communication) etc. And the situation with Wright most likely was convincing. With other words: I don't blame him for believing it. What I see as a mistake is that he (Gavin) wrote a blogpost. That was premature and I'm sure he regrets it. |
|
|
|
Validating Satoshi (Or Not)
SUMMARY: 1. Yes, this is a scam. Not maybe. Not possibly. 2. Wright is pretending he has Satoshi’s signature on Sartre’s writing. That would mean he has the private key, and is likely to be Satoshi. What he actually has is Satoshi’s signature on parts of the public Blockchain, which of course means he doesn’t need the private key and he doesn’t need to be Satoshi. He just needs to make you think Satoshi signed something else besides the Blockchain — like Sartre. He doesn’t publish Sartre. He publishes 14% of one document. He then shows you a hash that’s supposed to summarize the entire document. This is a lie. It’s a hash extracted from the Blockchain itself. Ryan Castellucci (my engineer at White Ops and master of Bitcoin Fu) put an extractor here. Of course the Blockchain is totally public and of course has signatures from Satoshi, so Wright being able to lift a signature from here isn’t surprising at all. 3. He probably would have gotten away with it if the signature itself wasn’t googlable by Redditors. 4. I think Gavin et al are victims of another scam, and Wright’s done classic misdirection by generating different scams for different audiences. (...) https://dankaminsky.com/2016/05/02/validating-satoshi-or-not/
|
|
|
|
kann mir jemand erklären, welche relevanz diese ganze scheisse auf den preis hat?
Das müsste investoren doch am allerwertesten vorbeigehen wer nun schlussendlich das ganze erfunden hat...
Es gibt mehrere Gründe warum das Einfluss hat. Die Ansichten des realen Satoshis (allgemein gemeint, da ich noch nicht überzeugt bin dass Wright es wirklich ist) hätte logischerweise viel Gewicht, u.a. auf die umkämpfte Blocksize-Debatte. Das Image des "realen Satoshis" hat zumindest psychologisch große Bedeutung auf Bitcoin insgesamt... Wright z.B. ist ja nicht unbedingt Nummer 1 auf der Wunschkandidaten-Liste. Eine Person die derart viel Angriffsfläche bietet kann eben auch für den Versuch genutzt werden um Bitcoin insgesamt in ein schlechteres Licht zu rücken etc. Plus: Der echte Satoshi hat (falls die Schlüssel nicht verloren sind) kann den Kurs crashen wenn er auch nur 0.1 BTC aus seinem gigantischen Vermögen bewegt. Sollte Craig Wright tatsächlich Satoshi sein und das zweifelsfrei beweisen wollen, etwa indem er Coins bewegt, wirds noch rauer. Ich denke, die nächsten Tage werden eh etwas stürmischer. |
|
|
|
I think, at least it's safe to say that it won't be boring. Another interesting article about a great potential use case: The Future of Medical Records: Two Blockchain Experts Weigh In
(...) Peter Kirby, CEO of Factom, a company that employs blockchain technology to change how businesses manage data and keep records, describes the medical records space as “one of the biggest, hairiest record keeping problems on earth, especially in the U.S.” In fact, Factom just brought in a VP of Products who is a former medical records professional. Kirby says that the only medical records applications being pursued at Factom are very early prototypes. “The thing that we are starting to mess around with center on producing a cryptographic proof of the record that demonstrates who had the most recent version of it. The medical record problems at its core are ‘what happened when’ and ‘who has access to that information’ problems. While these are the types of issues that lend themselves well to blockchain technology, the difficulty comes in striking a balance between privacy and transparency, all within a sea of multiple systems.” Kirby goes on to note that when security breaches are discovered “what one (isn’t aware of in terms of vulnerabilities) is just as critical as what one (is already aware of).” That’s the really scary stuff. The old way to monitor this was to have a dot matrix printer and one of those continuous chains of paper printed out with (security) logs on it. The blockchain essentially brings a whole level of improvement to this.” (...) https://btcmanager.com/news/the-future-of-medical-records-two-blockchain-experts-weigh-in/ |
|
|
|
The Parallel 2016 US Presidential Election
(...) Austin-based Factom have launched various products to assist startups and institutional clients deploy and build blockchain-based applications. Due to the transparency of these networks, the solutions from Factom can be adapted to almost any organization. The organization also believes that its infrastructure could be implemented by governments, to develop decentralized and automated voting systems. Factom have showcased their “Blockchain Apparatus” platform by conducting straw polls after GOP Republican debates around the USA. The voting platform creates non-financial distributed ledger records, and can be customized to accommodate different clients and their needs. (...) http://bravenewcoin.com/news/the-parallel-2016-us-presidential-election/
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
