Coinsolidation. Multi quoting is a real pain and hard for people to follow so I won't do it but perhaps a few bullet points:
- Production costs are not a known variable at any one time. I have ASICS that I have to ROI. My electricity cost is different to yours, etc. One can go off hash rentals as a base price I suppose but as a miner I need to look at ROI. Should I mine BTM or LTC or DOGE or whatever to pay the bills. At the moment, I have faith in you and what you are trying to achieve but I'm taking a gamble that eventually BTM will be several times more profitable than mining other coins as is just about everyone else mining the coin. Never forget that. Eventually everyone has to pay the bills and without a medium of exchange to pay the bills, miners will go elsewhere.
- ATM, difficulty is not a measure of demand but a measure of speculation. There is no demand, not a single BTM has been bought or sold. People are gambling on there being a future demand.
- Exchanges don't create artificial demand unless they happen to be big bag holders (insider trading). I do agree that the intrinsic value of a coin and it's price rarely are the same but that is the nature of all free markets.
- The rest of your post regarding getmarked all makes sense but without a published tradeable value it is all supposition.
You could just hold an auction for any coins that you need to sell and let the market decide. Someone was wanting to buy BTM in IRC last night. There are people willing to buy. Maybe I'm missing something, but in regards to your first point, aren't production costs trivially calculable based on whatever the current network variables are and your own electricity costs? I know I've seen Mark/coinsolidation make many calculations of the current production cost of BTM based upon the average rig rental rate of 0.001 MH/day. |
|
|
|
Bitmark's Value
A currency with no initial price tag, and which earns value over time? No exchange? What is it's value?
Perhaps I'm putting my miners hat on, but is the title of the post actually addressed by the rest of the post? As you know I'm fully supportive of all your endeavours here but until there is an actual value placed on BTM, then it is hard to evaluate the whether the other projects like getmarked will be viable. People, social media, websites, etc, will only adopt getmarked if it carries a tangible benefit. It's all well and good to build all these systems but at the end of the day, if giving or earning Marks has no intrinsic value, people won't bother. The coin needs to dip it's toe in the exchange market sooner or later to establish a foothold. After all, if you can't buy or sell BTM then it really does have no value. My best suggestion is to continue to expand the nethash mining the coin. The IPM project is a good way of doing that. Exchanges keep a track of these sort of things but a low profile coin like BTM can get lost in the blizzard of "Look at ME" new releases. A smart exchange like Bittrex will pick up a promising coin (although sometimes they need a nudge). Well, even though we haven't pushed to list BTM on any exchanges prematurely and no one other than tdokta has offered to sell his BTM(for a very legitimate reason I might add) there is still a minimum implied value which is represented by the cost of production. Which is probably somewhere around 0.00015 BTC at the moment. That is a very rough estimate and someone else can give you a better number but for the most part anyone offering to sell BTM would only want to sell at a markup to that price. If someone were to come on here and offer x amount of BTM for 0.0001 BTC I'd imagine people would be lining up to purchase it at the discounted price. In reality if the real ask price for people who need BTC now for other reasons is probably around 0.0002. The only reason someone wouldn't buy at that price is the fact that it's currently cheaper to produce your own via mining. But if there was some reason that a person preferred not to mine it's almost certainly a great price that will show a return. edit: the network is expanding rapidly and the difficulty is rising with it as I can see so my numbers are old and wrong. But the general point still stands. Someone else who's currently in the mining game can probably give you some accurate numbers. |
|
|
|
It guessed my owner. deadmau5.
You're being owned by deadmau5? How come? What do you have to do when being owned by him? He's a cat. Mr. Meowingtons. |
|
|
|
Wow. Haha. Soon! One other good thing about using this software is if it takes off and becomes the next standard of forum/discussion software online having getMarked as a plugin from the start means that it could eventually become standard everywhere discourse is used. The timing is eerily good right now, with them just releasing v1 and us gearing up to start getMarked. |
|
|
|
Problem is that it's very difficult to find the hashing algorithm that would be really ASIC resistant, not to mention GPU. For instance, Primecoin which included large integer algorithms that should be difficult for GPUs was soon transferred to GPU mining. All scrypt algos are prone to GPU mining. I tried to find some hashing algorithms that would favor RISC processors, since they dominate modern smartphones, but I've failed to find any. If anybody has some info about such algos it would be very nice to share that info here.
I find it hard to believe that any form of PoW mining (regardless of algorithm) on a smartphone would ever be popular given battery life considerations. I don't understand why people try to make coins ASIC resistant. Nothing is ASIC resistant. You mean nothing is ASIC proof right? Things can be ASIC resistant. |
|
|
|
A ("the") fundamental problem is that Turing-complete insures viruses will appear and mess up the state (i.e. on the block chain).
Or someone exploits their VM code and breaks out. That alone would give me nightmares if I were using Ethereum. |
|
|
|
My understanding was that Mark was going to continue working on the Bitmark core project unless GetMarked was funded with 8 BTC.
Just want to point out if/when getMarked is funded he said that month would cover any and all work on Bitmark Core. Full time focus on both is the package as I understand it. Also as a separate topic unrelated to the above quoted post: As anyone who hangs out in IRC knows Mark is away 95%+ of the time working on things. And has been answering peoples questions and doing calculations regarding the IPM. He's also been running all the pre-launch rounds of the IPM and dealing with all the rig rentals and seeking out miners from anywhere scrypt miners hang out to form a syndicate to cut costs. I literally told him last night that he should take a a couple days off since he's been going non-stop since this thread was started over a month ago(he declined). So it's not hard to imagine why he's has some family concerns that play in to the current situation. I'm just writing this in case someone is interested in the perspective of someone who hangs out in #bitmark 12 hours a day.  I know that no one was questioning Mark's work and I'm not replying to anyone or any post in particular. Sometimes this thread isn't sufficient to get all the spontaneous ideas and other stuff that goes on in chat, which is the main reason we're seeking out a new medium in addition to this thread. Mark often copy pastes chat logs and such but having an indexed forum type of thing would probably be better. So on that note I suggested http://www.discourse.org/ as an option for a forum that we could potentially integrate with the getMarked system. It's open source and created by one of the guys who started StackExchange(he's also guy who runs the blog CodingHorror). https://github.com/discourse/discourseThoughts on potentially using discourse for discussion on our website? |
|
|
|
Maybe we need something more like StackExchange, with specific topics and questions tagged and arranged, a clear view of unanswered topics, and the most active or currently being discussed displayed at the top.
You mean the ones that are marked the most at the top? |
|
|
|
Problem is that it's very difficult to find the hashing algorithm that would be really ASIC resistant, not to mention GPU. For instance, Primecoin which included large integer algorithms that should be difficult for GPUs was soon transferred to GPU mining. All scrypt algos are prone to GPU mining. I tried to find some hashing algorithms that would favor RISC processors, since they dominate modern smartphones, but I've failed to find any. If anybody has some info about such algos it would be very nice to share that info here.
What about Slimcoin? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=613213.0"New Block Generation through Proof-of-Burn Even a Raspberry Pi can competitively mine, fast hardware offers no advantage" Pretty interesting. Hadn't heard of it before. Just peaking at the last few pages of that thread it looks like a technical disaster though. |
|
|
|
6. - I believe it has been mentioned in this thread; a Bitmark Forum. Would this be a good way forward, clearly linked from this thread? bitmark.co/forum ? It could be much better organised into Topics, Subject Areas, Groups et al?
I think this has come up before and one issue that was mentioned was the risk of isolating ourselves from the outside community. I definitely agree that it would be nice to have a forum though and that it would be much more organized. I'm not sure there is an easy answer to the question of how we maximise our public outreach while still striving for the best intra-community communication we can. Forum is definitely inevitable at some point either way. No question about that. |
|
|
|
Well, one might say that Maddoff's fund was a legitimate HYIP :-)
Depends what one considers legitimate.
In what universe could Madoff's scheme ever be considered legitimate? |
|
|
|
bitcoin is not volatile. FIAT is
I don't think you understand what volatility actually means. Compared to a basket of world currencies, BTC is very volatile. Compared to stocks, its volatile. Compared to triple leveraged ETFs, its volatile. Compared to the VIX (volatility index), its volatile. Compared to bonds, its extremely volatile. Volatility = measure of price variability compared to other tradeable assets and commodities. I know people here want to love everything about bitcoin so badly and demolish any criticism of it, but when does fanboydom actually outweigh the quest to understand reality, and why? Thank you for bringing some sanity to this thread. Clearly Bitcoin is volatile. Even without calculating it it's obvious to anyone who can look at a graph. |
|
|
|
Does anyone want to add any coins?
Not yet, but Bitmark launched around 10 days ago and it's going very well so far. Check out this proposal for a social karma/tipping system based around using crypto(Marks, ie 0.001 BTM): getmarked.org |
|
|
|
Personally I think there will be room in the market for balanced currency like this.
The economics of money are ruthless. If there is no niche to be filled, the thing withers away from its use as currency. Worldwide, not many niches are available. Perhaps. We'll see how the crypto market evolves. So far the target seems to be non crypto users in a sort of 'blue ocean strategy'. If the market can be expanded and capture people before Bitcoin can by making it easy to use and accessible then I think there is a chance. edit: Also, improving the Bitcoin API and such to better suit the needs of merchants who already accept Bitcoin. So not just non-crypto users. I think there's still lots of innovation that can be done in this space. It's an entirely different approach than XMR et al. (at least at the moment). XMR will focus on use and adoption at some point soon, but I think the focus now is getting the new technology up to speed(block chain size reduction, more GUI options and such, adding the anonymity upgrade that's been talked about here recently, similar to the one that BBR is doing). |
|
|
|
The classical altcoins do not offer anything relative to Bitcoin, except maybe a different hashing algorithm. An important thing to remember is that there is no long-term market niche for two coins with the same algo. The hashing power of the larger coin is constantly threatening to destroy the smaller one. Even if that does not happen, there are network effects in play that favor the larger coin and suppress the smaller.
Look at Bitmark: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=660544.0It's a 1-gen altcoin using scrypt PoW, but the dev has a real interesting attitude to this coin's future. Bitmark project is very well organized. Much better than LTC in my opinion. I've been pointing my old scrypt asic to it  Bitmark looks pretty cool. The super slow distribution curve, weak testing block rewards right now, weak marketing have kept me away from now. Also the lack of real innovation as far as I can see. But seems like an honest project. I have my eye on it. It's a very interesting and promising project in my opinion and I've been following it closely since its inception. It certainly different than the vast majority of projects I've seen here. The focus on long term value, stability and adoption as opposed to the typical fast run up pump and dump mentality that is the norm is a big positive I think. The latest Bitcoin Core customised for scrypt, focused development, no premine, no IPO, fair distribution including an innovative IPM(investor public mining: https://github.com/project-bitmark/bitmark/wiki/IPM-Pool ) idea, fully funded by voluntary donations with all Bitmarks donated locked until next year. I'll repost my original thoughts from the main Bitmark thread here: As to where Bitmark stands in the cryptocurrency market, I see the current situation as a spectrum with the 'bleeding edge' coins like NXT, Qora, CryptoNote coins leading the way on the far left side with brand new code and ideas. And Bitcoin on the far right side of that spectrum acting as a solid reliable base with little to no innovation. Bitcoin development being more defensive since the stakes are much, much higher and there is no mandate on the developers end to do anything other than protect the integrity of the Bitcoin protocol and associated code.
So with the coins on the left side of the spectrum pushing forward with new untested technology there's obviously more risk than there is with Bitcoin which has been around for about 5 years now and been thoroughly tested by millions(probably?) of people.
Now since the nature of the cryptocurrency community is one of open source and shared ideas and innovation and that gives an advantage to 'second movers' so to speak who can also benefit from new technology as it's developed. Not only is the technology itself open and freely usable, but by the time it's proven to be useful it's also been tested in real world conditions enough to have a much lower probability of having some catastrophic issue that would derail it.
With Bitmark I see it sitting in the middle of that spectrum building off the foundation that Bitcoin provides while also observing and analysing the evolution of cryptocurrency technology. This way Bitmark can implement innovation with much lower risk while still being far beyond Bitcoin since Bitcoin is more or less constrained by its own size.
As far as what's being done to further adoption offer value so far, the first major subproject which is being crowdfunded by donations now is named 'getMarked'. Which aims to be a karma/tipping system used through out the web that is based on Marks(0.001 BTM). The long term goals being introducing new people to cryptocurrency in a frictionless and riskless manner(similar to a faucet) while hopefully evolving into a off-the-chain micropayment system that can be used for anything. http://getmarked.org/Most of the innovation will be done by attempting to 'create a useful daily currency' while still adding any technological innovations that have proven themselves a useful and stable addition to modern cryptocurrencies. Personally I think there will be room in the market for balanced currency like this. I know this is pretty much the Monero core adopters vs other anonymous challengers thread but I thought I'd get my thoughts in here since someone brought it up. It's certainly not typical, pretty much the anti-pump and dump. I don't even think there has been a single BTM sold since release interestingly enough. It either earns its value over time from development and the community or it doesn't, and so far things have been going extremely well. Main thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=660544 |
|
|
|
For an actual "anti-ASIC" social contract, you could wait for the first algorithm to be entirely ASIC monopolized, then soft fork to have an additional algorithm for distribution, Myriadcoin style, but you limit it to either 3 or 4 total PoW algorithms. The idea is just to maximize market penetration for the coin distribution. If Bitcoin did something like this originally, altcoins would either not exist, or only have 1/100th of the current number. There would be much higher interest in BTC as well, since ordinary people would actually have some.
Would ordinary people have some though? Data centers and optimized racks would still push the average person with their celeron or atom processor on their laptop way out the mining profitability range. |
|
|
|
When it comes to ASICs I don't know what will happen either way.
ASICs represent a threat of centralization and ledger control orders of magnitude beyond what form of consumer hardware ever could. That depends on the lay of the land as and when we get there. If, for instance, the performance gains are not substantial over a CPU with AES-NI, and if we have a sufficiently widely distributed mining network that is a mix of GPUs and CPUs, then ASICs won't provide enough gain. Certainly they would be no more of a threat than GPUs - any entity able to purchase millions of Dollars worth of ASICs can definitely purchase millions of Dollars of GPUs. In fact, if CryptoNight plays out the way dga and the rest of us expect it to, the addition of ASICs to the network will be substantially less bumpy than with Bitcoin and Litecoin. On the other hand, if ASICs are able to be built that are many orders of magnitude more efficient (both on a cost-per-hash and watts-per-hash basis) than CPUs and/or GPUs, it may dictate a necessary change in PoW to ensure centralisation of mining power does not occur. These are decisions that don't have to be made today, though, as this requires time to play out. A stated policy of continued ASIC resistance by algorithm modification if necessary should be enough to deter anyone thinking about putting up the large upfront cost of designing chips, no? Also, if Monero becomes wildly successful I would say that it would be much more of a potential attack target from a bad government actor than Bitcoin would be. Being anonymous and all. The probability of that actually happening might be miniscule though. ASICs or not any government could take down any crypto if they chose at this point. None of this ASIC resistance policy would have any effect on an attack from a government though, I'm not trying to say that the two things are linked. |
|
|
|
You may want to read http://getmarked.org/ getMarked provides instant one click viral crowd funding for everybody in the world at web scale.Awesome stuff.  Thinking it over a bit if I were to start up a web project that involved getMarked it would actually make more sense to use Wordpress considering it's the most widely used CMS. And since it's likely going to be high on the list of things that we would want to integrate getMarked with it just seems to be a better idea to start with that instead of trying to get fancy using a newer CMS. Still have a lot of thinking to do on exactly what I want it to be. But I'll probably just start out with some articles or something a long those lines and go from there. Eventually though I would definitely like some sort of discussion forum type thing that uses Marks. I think that can be a great application of getMarked. |
|
|
|
|
Who was running the Fastbluff campaign? Is it one of the regular campaign runners that we see around here posting under a new user name or was it a Fastbluff employee?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
