I'd be surprised if they were even that far to be honest.

I think crypto 1.0 currencies can still work with the right community and right infrastructure built on top of them to make them easier to use as currencies for regular people.

Crypto 2.0 style currencies are great, but there is also an added element of risk considering they are still new and yet to go through the rigorous testing that Bitcoin has gone through over the the past 5 years+. That can't be dismissed completely I don't think.

Bitcoin isn't the China Bitcoin?

And wouldn't a CN coin be much more likely to succeed in China as they could clearly benefit from anonymity?

Why is Litecoin still on Bitcoin 8.x.x anyway? Why is the Github deadish?

300mil market cap going down the drain because of no one actually caring enough to do anything about it.

Yes, it seems some people from China have taken an interest in mining Bitmark.

At some point having some of our documentation translated would be good.

I think the website is one that tracks local Bitcoin businesses for you on a map.

What other than the name is illegitimate about BBR?

I deleted the post. I don't post in any of the other rpietila Bitcoin discussion threads so I forgot that this thread is about a specific subtopic.

My mistake.

No one will listen to you.

Cognitive dissonance is easier than accepting reality.

Everything is just peachy.

No one interested in discussing adoption or lack there of?

Does anyone here believe that crypto currencies should focus on people using them in their day to day lives at all?

I wrote this article. I was amazed at data revealed by Peter R in his post. And I'm wondering if anyone sees it differently.

Do people focus too much on anything they perceive as new? Is it all just a game between speculators and the resulting bag holders?

Do you personally care about actual use, or are you only in this for the daytrading?

I'm obviously biased in favour of Bitmark since I'm involved in the project, but I'm more interested in discussing the concept in general. This doesn't have to be about Bitmark at all.

---

From: http://bitmarknews.com/2014/08/12/why-bitmark-will-be-important/

I came across an interesting post by Peter R on the Bitcointalk forums that really helped put Project Bitmark into perspective for me.

The people who use the currency drive it's price tag: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=400235.msg6025866#msg6025866


This might seem obvious to some people. But seeing data to back up what you've been thinking is always nice. And confirming that we've been focusing on the right thing from the start makes what we're doing with Project Bitmark even more important.

Most, if not all, cryptocurrencies that have emerged this year have focused on developing novel technology that differentiates themselves from Bitcoin. Anonymity, Proof of Stake, exotic Proof of Work algorithms. These are all real technological improvements that have been achieved to varying levels of success so far in 2014. Their value proposition is that they are "better" than Bitcoin. But people seem to be forgetting what makes a currency a currency is the people using it. And making it fun and easy to use is what motivates people to actually adopt a currency and spend it. Not as just an investment, but as money.

A currency focused on adoption is more likely to succeed in the long term than one that focuses on the latest trend on Bitcointalk. Giving people an easy way to use their money is the most important thing that enables a technology to be adopted as an actual currency with utility. Other additional technology that proves useful to that end can be adapted for use when it's proved to be both stable and useful. That should come after, not before, giving people something they can spend. People will continue to pioneer these emerging technologies, and once they have proven themselves, they can be integrated into Project Bitmark. But only if they actually provide value.

The priority of Project Bitmark is to create a technologically stable, easy to use, daily use currency. And that's the focus of our effort. The proof that providing value in that way also happens to also provide price tag value is illustrated in Peter R's chart. Knowing this helps since it enables people to be comfortable in the fact that supporting, growing, and helping Bitmark do what it set out to do will provide real financial benefit. Knowing that you're on the right path, and that you'll be rewarded for it helps toughen resolve.

I want Project Bitmark to be the first alternative to Bitcoin that actually drives toward creating a real large scale network effect driven by actual use of Bitmark as currency. In my opinion Dogecoin has been the only currency thus far that actually put in an effort and flirted with the idea. But they focused on building a community around Dogecoin itself, while we focus on bringing Bitmark and Marking to existing communities instead. Showing people something that provides value and can be adopted by millions of communities that exist already is, in my opinion, a much better strategy than trying to recruit people into a specific subculture based around a meme. It's not that they did anything wrong, their community sprung up organically and will continue to exist indefinitely. But by providing the tools for people to build their own communities(Discourse + Marking being one example) we can spawn thousands of organic communities rather than just one.

It's still very important that we continue to reach out and continue to build our own core Bitmark community. We need more people participating on all levels. Development, design, any value anyone can provide is greatly appreciated. Even just being interested and following the project is valuable. But the core cryptocurrency enthusiasts that surround us are not going to be what defines Bitmark. That will be up to the people who see the value in it and adopt it. People will define the use of Marks in anyway they see fit. Payment, reputation, tipping, content filtering, anything you can imagine. Marking can be used in a infinite amount of ways. It solves lots of problems and breaks down barriers that exist on the web today. People don't have to be into Bitcoin, or be an altcoin trader to use Marks on their favorite website. But the door will be open to them if they decide they are interested and want to learn more.

So if you're new to Project Bitmark, or you've been here from the start and wonder if adoption really is the most important thing a currency should focus on, the proof is there with Bitcoin. Bitcoin has yet to have a real competitor when it comes to competing against it as a currency. Every time a new store takes Bitcoin, that's a new store that now has the technology in place to accept Bitmark as well. And we can find out what their problems are and solve them directly with Bitmark. Give them another alternative and tailor our value proposition to them. Bitcoin is clearing the path and making it easier for us. We're in a very good position to take advantage of that.

 

A. Marha

Bitmark Community Manager

 

Project Bitmark is 100% community supported through donations. No IPO, no premine, no instamine, nothing unfair. Just a bunch of people who want to make a useful currency. Come join us on Github, IRC, or our Bitcointalk thread:

https://github.com/project-bitmark

http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=bitmark

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=660544

I think we already have servers.

Plus they're donating 10% to the Bitmark Foundation which is going to be much more valuable than a VPS.

Innovators are going to reap rewards from speculators, no doubt about that. Coming out with a new solution to a mostly solved problem(anonymity) every week is a profitable enterprise, as we can see . But real people using the currency(i.e. Bitcoin) is more important in the long run I think. Your post earlier which linked to Peter R's post inspired me to write an article about why I think it's more important to focus development and community on user accessibility and ease of use rather than cutting-edge features that appeal to the altcoin markets.

I know your stance and the problems that you feel need to be solved. And Bitmark doesn't solve the scaling problem or the transaction fee issue(yet anyway). But I honestly feel that focusing on getting average people to use crypto, even if you have to backdoor them into using it through easy to use webapps, is the best approach.

Generous offer.

Great to see Bitmark based businesses.

That's pretty interesting. I hadn't seen those alternative implementations before.

Given Satoshi's original writings on Bitcoin you would think that anonymity would be considered noteworthy to Bitcoin's cause.

I think it's a valid point but compared to something like mining centralization it's relatively minor. It's much easier to have thousands of full nodes all over the world running on VPSs and enthusiast machines than to actually have a healthy distribution of miners.

I know you didn't ask about miners but even having 1000 people running full nodes that enable people to use thin clients is still pretty good while I see mining as the major bottleneck that causes the most centralisation. Much more than lack of node distribution I think.

Having a million nodes would be good too though. A million people running full nodes solo mining on their cell phones would be pretty decentalised.

Well from our discussions earlier in the thread a lot of people have come to the conclusion that blockchain bloat just isn't that much of an issue. Or at least in won't be in the future when a blockchain reaches sizes we consider 'bloated' now.

You two really think that Gavin et al are ever incorporating any major features that are found in an alt in to their 8 billion dollar baby?

If it's not something that solves a direct threat or major problem with Bitcoin I would put my money on 'never'. Or at least not in the next 5-10 years.

Everyone always says it would be easy to for Bitcoin to do xyz, but in reality even the simplest things are bogged down in politics.

That's not to say that the Bitcoin's devs aren't doing a great job at what they set out to do: Develop a stable codebase. Competing in the market as a product isn't how I think Bitcoin is run right now. That could change of course, but its not likely to for a long time if ever.

http://www.jl777.org/darkpaper-teleport-revealed/

The formatting is painful 

No, the receiver got 0.0001. The amount that was supposed to be the fee.