you expect people to pay a minimum of $500 for a card game(0.5bop)
and expect players to pay on average $40k-$60k

you make me laugh
i think you should spend less nights on this and instead sleep a little more. maybe you would think straight.
if you wanted a viable gaming model. its $5 amounts not $500

lack of sleep or greed. im not sure what the OP has, but it is funny

asking for so much, is not a sign of wanting to run a legit business or release a game worth playing. but instead get just a couple suckers to hand you funds enough to cover a month of living. and then leg it while concocting a new scam under a new name ready for next month

the real question is to first define mainstream

some define mainstream as able to buy toilet roll and a pack of bacon from any 7-11, by spending crypto (retail mainstream)
some define mainstream as being traded on the NYSE (professional investment mainstream)
some define mainstream as being being able to bye crypto from many places to hold (amateur investment mainstram)

i would say lack of regulations are preventing professional investment. but when you get into the details. its BUSINESSES handling fiat that get regulated and they can apply any time they like and then handle crypto as part of that business.

but for everything else regulations for crypto are not needed, nor should they be promoted to be required. this is because getting businesses to snoop on the businesses own customers(regulations) is just adding admin onto the business, costs and also not helping the customer. just to get a "certification" that doesnt mean anything. apart from getting to say "we are professionals"

what would be something worth promoting is consumer protection. where authorities are not just handing out certificates(licences) but actually policing the businesses to ensure they do no harm to the customers. that way businesses act morally and ethically and customers will then be more willing to use them

regulations push average joe away due to headaches of applications forms and submitting life stories... consumer protection welcome more people due to being more relaxed that te business cant just run off. or is already hiding on a secret island

i find it real strange how so many people think letting a business that handles our funds should have the right to hide its identity. but require every customer who gives a business money has to identify themselves.. that is a silly reverse reason for anonimty.
businesses should identify themselves and allow the customers to not have to be scammed, stolen from and identified

most postrs on this topic have no clue. they just too stuck in the reddit propaganda...

marchants use merchant tools like bitpay/coinbase. so its not the merchant that tells the customer what to use. its the shopping cart service. in many cases the merchant doesnt care and doesnt see what currency a customer is spending. all a merchant see's is "paid in full"

places like bitpay and coinbase decide what are the choice of coins to include. and in most cases its based on the most lively coins they add on their platforms and ones with highest value of the markets

im not even sure why some people try turning this into the kardashian drama aboutbitmain, yet those bringing up the kardashian drama dont even check out the simple things like merchant tool services.

vanity gen is for when you want to create an address such as 1elect.....

tags is a option on blockchain.info to tag an address. for when some one looks at the adress on blockchain.info
https://blockchain.info/tags

though i see LN still has flaws and is not the unlimited superfast thing they promised that solves scalability and can handle every user type. lets not concentrate on trying to promote LN as the candidate for the future of bitcoin on this topic

anyway as for this topic
for general purposes of economic strategy for businesses to make money from its customers i would say do BOTH

netflix for instance knows that a user uses its service for an average of 1 movie or 2 tv show a day
so if $10 breaks down as ~35 cents a day

possible netflix promotional material: "15 cents a tv show 30 cents a movie.. or for $10/month, unlimited use"
 
starbucks averages 1 coffee a day per regular customer
possible promotional material: "$x a coffee  or for $xx/month, unlimited refills"

newspaper article
"2 cents and article or $xx unlimited reading"

briefly??
core were stuck at the 35% from december 2016 until august 1st 2017.. (over 8 months)
it only BRIEFLY jumped to 100% once the bilateral split occured UASF and split events were occuring on august 1st+. then for 2 weeks wait period to lock in. and then a further week or so to activate.. thus was only 95%+ for 3 weeks.. and only at that level due to the split
. not due to community desire or economic majority, due to full mining pools support.. but purely due to selective vote counting of only supporters to get 100% and banning the opposition from voting
so please if your going to make a reply. atleast back it up with some damn facts (review the code)(look at charts)
oh and before you ven scream propaganda.. here is a chart from your king(sipa)p.wuiile himself.
notice the orange blur of 20-40% between 01/01/17 and 01/08/17 (8 months). then on august first mega jump to 100% (the blue purple and orange all merge and jump)

come on.. think about it 100% vote happening all of a sudden on august 1st.. thats impossible election result unless they are throwing the count
http://bitcoin.sipa.be/ver9-small-ever.png



secondly... your missing the whole point..
NO ONE
NO ONE
not core not cash not one has economic claim to brand bitcoin

are you that ignorant of the meaning of decentralisation.

like the dollar if anyone says they want dollar... it must be asked
is that U.S dollar(USD) or A.U dollar(AUD).. like what happens in the fiat world to avoid confusion

if anyone says they want bitcoin... it must be asked
is that bitcoin core(BTC) or bitcoin cash(BCH).. like what should happen in the crypto world to avoid confusion

you continue to think everyone that detests cores centralism must love ver...

core and ver are the same family!!!
stop playing into the kardashian drama that there should only exist kardashian fanclubs of only 2 teams all related to each other
you are too obsessed with a 2 member of the same family drama you dont notice or care about the billions of people that want nothing to do with any member of the family.
and yes kenye west(gavin) is also an oldie now but still part of the kardashian family

ok
final chance
imagine someone wipes snot onto a lump of cheese... then cuts the cheese in half... and sends his 2 kids out to hand them to you.. and says
slice A is healthy. it builds your immunity by a special system called herd immunity(you ingest the germs and become immune to it in the future)
slice B is nasty snot
only one can be branded as bitcheese, you choose

either way. your still eating snot and you have been fooled into eating it. and either way the person handing you both slices gets the brand name bitcheese
stop eating the snot handed to you by the same person. demand that there should be more on the menu from diffrnt people. stop settling for only snot cheese

anyway im still laughing that carlton banks had no clueso spewed out some bip buzzwords in the segwit compatibility topic about flip flopping from 91 to 141 but he aint sure if any used 91 (meaning he has no clue.. but as long as he mentions a few bip number it atleast sounds like he is technical)

then he and others mention if certain parties hated core why did they jump to mine cash then jump back to core... the reason being is that pools realised that it was all kardashian drama and not a real second option away from the family. thus they just gave up

again BCH and BTC are one big family. but neither deserve the name as they both diverted off track.
as for carlton pulling out a statement about addresses beginning 1 cannot be used. no he is just making up stories that people say things they didnt even say.

anyway. segwit tx's are not validatable to legacy nodes.
and a legacy node would not be accepted to broadcast a segwit tx thus segwit is not interoperable with legacy.
thats why legacy nodes are deemed as downstream nodes (separate from the peer to peer network) and segwit blocks need to be filtered.

gmaxwell, lukejr and even p.wuille talk about and admit to it (actual devs)... not the achowe carlton fanboys that just kiss ass
achowe, carlton banks and othrs like lauda. are not real devs. they are just fanclub crowd control handing out glossy leaflets

as for carlton denying there is any proof of an agenda to cause a bilateral split.. gmax literally pleaded for one.

but as always.. all i can see that you will reply with
"wrong bercause you love ver"
which in itself is wrong and has not content to counter the actual details.
you are turning into carlton because its the game he played in 2017
and the game achowe played in 2016

so maybe if you are unsure about the details. its maybe worth not stating things you dont know. and find a topic you do know about and have researched. (proper research, EG reading code. speaking to the actual devs. reading things from the actual devs.. not their crowd control)

poor windfury. core defense cap wearer of 2018
ive shown code. ive shown links to websites showing where the funding of both sides comes from.
and yet.. windfury you only reply with "think what you want"
wow.. so much evidence you provided to counter..


so anyway
funding.. im sure you didnt click the link so here is a image for you to gloss over and pretend doesnt exist


bitcoin core - bitcoin core
bips - luke JR moderated - blockstream paid("founder and consultant") - funds from DCG
mailing list - rusty russel moderated - blockstream paid("founder and consultant") - funds from DCG
fibre - matt corralo - blockstream paid("founder and consultant") - funds from DCG
segwit - p wuille - blockstream paid - funds from DCG

bitcoin cash - bitcoinABC
jgarzic - bloq paid - funds from DCG
gavin A - bloq paid - funds from DCG
ver - blockchain.info paid - funds from DCG

as for the hyperledger
well lets take coindesk (media site owned by dCG.co)
https://www.coindesk.com/blockstream-10-new-firms-hyperledger-blockchain-project/
yes. read the disclaimer too
"CoinDesk is an independent operating subsidiary of Digital Currency Group"

anyway lets allow you to have a few hints about fibres workings.. as a way of ensuring no opposing blocks get around the network

quotes from fibre


ill give you a hint. core complient pools create and validate core blockdata banning opposing blocks. send valid blocks to fibre that distribute it out super fast to other core nodes.


plus i do laugh when u went and asked if segwit was backward compatible and they told you
"Segwit transactions are not validated by legacy nodes because legacy nodes CANNOT correctly validate them."
they also told you a segwit node translates the data to make it a anyonecanspend

ive been mentioning about the anyone can spend incompatibility since early 2016 even before segwit got a maiinnet candidate release. so 2 years on and it still makes me laugh

again. if you cant copy the blockchain (copy and paste file folders) like for like. and it requires translation.. and that translation does not result in a tx that is validatable if the network needed to downgrade.. then its not compatible with downgraded clients.

lets put it simple.
a french person writes a book. in french. your old and unbale to learn french. french people tell you its ok the book is english compatible. ... just make a special request and we will make a bespoke copy of the book in english that is 4 times short and doesnt have any of the juicy details in it.
you accept the bespoke book. now. you try to hand that book onto someone else that is french. they reject it because it doesnt have the juicy details..
or
its like compressing and converting data from an sd card to floppy disk. and the the old pc user seeing it holds data but cant validate it so just assumes the person he got it from validated it.. thus no self validation..
and then finds he cant just hand the floppy disk on to someone with a sd card reader because they dont accept floppy disks and will reject it

segwit it not backward compatible... its not allowing an old(legacy) node to be part of the relay of full data. (i shown you before the image of the "doenstream filters" where by the old legacy client is not a part of the upstream p2p network(bitcoin core network). you cannot simply pass on the bespoke data to a segwit client, as the segwit client wont see it as a anyone can spend(invisable) they would see it as a segwit tx with no witness.
and if your not able to validate transactions then you are not part of the p2p validation network.


P.S
you are so deep into loving core that you really believe anyone not loving core must love ver.. (you are really stuck in the kylie vs khloe drama mindset of only 2 choices) you cannot see true decentralisation of no team ownership because all you keep thinking is if they dont love A they must love B... SHAME ON YOU

core had 35% opposition had 65%
yet the 35% still think that core is the prime network

it was a bilateral split that insured the 65% became invisible so that although there were less pools and nodes to count.. the pools making blocks that core seen as visibile instantly became 100%

try reading bip9 bip 148 do some research on bilateral split. and you will see that real true fair consensus was not used. but vote rigging was

you have not really checked out how things have changed since 2013 have you.

did yu know that due to FIBRE the only blocks being pushed out of the ring of mining pools is blocks that strictly follow cores rules. all other blocks get rejected in under 2 seconds. if a pool attempted to make blocks that differ. and keep doing it. they get banned from the network until they comply, thus Fibre forces the pools to follow the rules of core or nver get a block to be part of the chain and thus they are mining without ever getting a reward that matures to be spendable on the chain.

other developers who make nodes. if they did nake their own github and their own bip list and promote a upgrade that differs from cores roadmap. first needs to follow cores rules to just be allowed and seen by the networ and can only flag their desire. but has to flag using a bip9 process that core have to acknowledge. then it has to get enough nodes and enough pools to also run that same codebase to out power core..

well guess what. bitcoin ABC(cash) got 65% core got 35% and core simply done a bilateral split on the whole process.. and people still think core is "the network". so by core removing the 65% opposition. it automatically got cores BIP9 to see the remaining nodes co-operating and being seen by other core nodes equalled over 95% although there was in reality far more nodes/opposing pools that were simply invisible to bip9

core having 35% (letss say 7 pools out of 20(cant be arsed to count the pools with less than 1% block mining network hash power))
now imagine samson mow (UASF/blockstream) and bloq deciding to make a second choice to drama the sheep into another field.  and made it so pools that didnt flag for segwit moved over too



thus on that day if pools were not scared and continued to refuse to join the 7 core loyalist pools they would get their blocks rejected.

so when the rejects occured and fibre simply ban hammered the pools off the core network of those not UASFing.. all that was left mining the core network were segwit supporting pools. and on that day far less than 20 pools were mining (for example 7 pools out of 7 pools=100%)
..all the core support nodes got to see was blocks made by segwit supporting pools. thus although the pool count dropped, the percentage support jumped to 100% hense why segwit got locked in and activated only a few weeks after august..
it is real funny people think after months of 35% community consensus. it jumped to 100% in a couple weeks. and people still think that it meant evryone loved it.. no the majoirty were just made invisible so that only one fanclub could be seen

yes core done a rigged election
the users had no consensus election. all the users seen was 35%-100% jump.  
its really worth you actually reading some code and looking at some stats. ahd how things like bips, and fibre work. it will completely shock you how things have changed since 2013

not a game as in a game. i mean a VR environment to have a 3D world of a shopping centre that users can make a market stall and advertise their real world products that get delivered to real world home addresses.

second life kinda had this where people within the environment were buying things via the gui. which got delivered to there actual physical brick and mortar house.

imagine ebay/openbazaar.. but seen via a 3d rendered shopping mall. where the evening/next day after buying things from your sofa wearing vr goggles.. you hear a amazon/dhl delivery guy knock at your actual house door

technical analysis??

no TA stands for TREND analysis.. or my preference trend anals
they dont actually look beyong historic prices to explain real world events that cause certain things. they just look at prices in the past.

take the 2013 price surge. the actual reason this happened was that in october 2013 ASICS came onto the public consumer market and so with everyone buying asics. mining became more expensive(higher difficulty). and with pools not selling coins below cost it caused a price surge..
then in early 2014 MTGOX knocked the price down again..

but TA's do not look into these details. they just see that over a winter peried price jumped then crashed in the new year.. soo years later it will happen again..
.. um no.. there has not been another mining invention release. there has not been a major exchange disaster so the event should not have occured.

but because the trend anals screamed it should happen. the sheep blindly speculated it and it was the sheep that caused it. now because the sheep caused it. those sheep now treat the anals as prophecy preachers and will follow anything they say.

its like the blind leading the blind to cause more people to be blind purely to have more blind leading the blind

so lets be a trend anal
"tomorrow will be a disaster. many people will die you will live if you jump off a bridge"

loads of people jump off a bridge.. many died coz of it.. those who survive will thank me for telling them to jump off a bridge and will now follow my next near death request
.. so who wants to jump off a cliff if i told them to

sounds like you are promoting something but have not personally used it.
have you set yourself up. if so
how many channels did YOU open
how much funding did you put in per channel
how much did you set aside for yourself and how much did you set to be used to route others payment.

when making a paymnt to a end node you never had any prior contact with. how easy was it to get it route to.

ima guessing your reply will be you havnt used it but you heard its good and getting better

that article is only under the premiss of cheap fee's

but actually using LN. you will find that first of all you ned to set up a channel with someone else. (joint bank account) and hope that other peron also has a joint bank account with someone else. and they have a joint bank account with someone else .. and so on until it reaches pizza hut.
(hop model) it also means that all those people have to be online and have funds in each hops account to hot potato your request to buy pizza
costing you a few millisats per hop.
EG if it requires 20 hops to get to pizza hut thats 20x minimum fee to make a payment.

however the reality is a HUB model. where by people make a joint bank account with local pizza hut branch (yes pizza hut become bank2.0 branch(hub)) where they co sign your funds
and you selectively also have joint accounts with other regular retailers where you channel with your local walmart branch (walmart becomes a bank2.0 branch(hub))
thus costing you 1x minimum fee instead of 20+ to buy pizza from pizzahut or walmart

the hop model latency can have delays. people offline. needing to find route via other joint accounts(channels) and then they seeing and accepting to use their funds for your payment to route. so its not as fast as a NFC contactless debit card payment

the hub model can be faster but the drawback is that by using LN in general you need to pre plan your spending habits and input enough funding to cover your expected utility plus a extra reserve to use for penalties, fee's and also some to be set as a rserve for others to use as a route. as many participants wont connect to you if your unwilling to act as a route for them. thus it costs you time and preparation and funds to set it all up

at the moment LN devs are only caring and testing that connections can be established. they have yet to run real life scenarios about the limitations of utility and the headach of setting up and regularly find the channels.

LN is not a near instant limitless utopia.

i see LN as a background arbitrage system for exchanges. a ebay merchant account.. a google adsense micropayment service with ongoing loyal websites... but not so much a service catered to random payments to different people at differnt times

LN has got limitations. as people will learn if they actually ran scenarios

actually it does the opposite
by depicticting office working females as sex objects is making perves think that any female in a suite should be propositioned.
what i meant was dont depict all crypto women as sex objects. but instead do it as a crypto accepting porn site calender. thus advertising the porn site that accept crypto. thus not generalising all women in crypto as sex objects.

EG
lets say someone wanted to sponsor an american football team. instead of just showing a crypto logo. it would show a logo for bitpay or coinbase.
EG
dollar isnt advertised. but a payment gateway for dollar is. such as visa or paypal, HSBC, bank of america

so if you want to advertise sexy women of crypto. you wont just do sexy women with a crypto logo, you would advertise the specific place peopl could find them. otherwise they will think all women are propositionable

plus it also helps you by advertising porn sites when doing a porn calender as those sites would pay you for making the calender because its advertising them. thus you get funds from the source (the models employer) and funds from those buying the calender.

those attending these conferences have already got some knowledge on the subjct and bought their tickets so you wont find much action after.
most of the time its the speculation that something will happen that self prophecises the movement

EG
a shop doing special event on a limitd stock item. speculation is that the item will sell fast. so the shops staff buy the product befor the sale day. thus before people even rampage into the shop the stock is sold out, bar a couple. then everyone fights over the last product available ramping up the price.
if only the shop staff didnt react, the customers wouldnt rampage and everything would be business as usual

most of the time its the speculation of an event that causes chaos. not the event itself

many people dont want to sexualise crypto like some teenage gimmick
blockchain is already male dominant and there have been times at conferences that many female attendees would be treated as sex objects. there have been reports of women being propositioned for sex when all they were trying to do was have civilised crypto conversations.

many conference spokes people such as andreas antonopolus refuse to go to conferences or events that do not treat females with professionalism and dignity.

i personally dont see much point in a calender of blockchain babes.. after all the dollar doesnt advertise dollar babes.
maybe if you have a porn site that accepts crypto.. you make a calender to advertise the porn site as accepting crypto. but no point turning the whole of crypto into a sexist gimmick

there are many layers..
the protocol = centralised all nodes have to follow cores roadmap or get ban hammerd
the token currency authorisation = distributed (some funds are centralised into exchange privkeys some are decentralised into individuals sole control
upgrade proposals = centralised. consensus is no longer used, its cores way or bilateral forked
the ledger = distributed. across many nodes but those nodes are using cores rules to deem the blocks as worth of being stored/logged

what if i told you this:
theymos(bitcoin.org) was kylie jenner
ver(bitcoin.com) was khloe kardashian

they want everyone fanboying one or the other. but the ultimate aim is try getting everyone to hand brand kardashian over to one family
yes they are all the same family.

bitcoin cash was made by BLOQ devs
bitcoin core(2013+) was made by blockstream devs.

both blockstream and bloq are paid by DCG.co/portfolio/#b
its like having people who hate kylie jenner. be invited to be fans of khloe as the alternative. as the fake distraction that outside of the box shows they are all the same family.

..
anyway. lets talk about the bankers..
both blockstream and bloq are involved in hyperledger(bankers project) which requires segwit and LN for the bankers to then run their bank branches(hubs) on

the reason for segwit moving to bc1q addresses instead of sticking with '3' addresses is because the next stage is that bc1q identifies it as a bitcoin core fund. ther will be USD1q addresses for the american bankers fund(their fiat2.0) AUD1q addresses for australia GBP1q for british fiat

..
i know some will get excited and throw in their hat to allow core to centralise bitcoin purely to allow the bankers to integrate and allow fiat-btc swaps. but thats just going to end up with LN being the network where people need to deposit funds into addresses that require a bank manager(hub channel counterpart) to authorise transactions. and also end up needing to do AML/KYC.

in average joe blogs speak. to open a "account" (channel) you need to have a minimum balance per channel to cover all chargebacks(penalties) and have funds locked in and unspendable outside the banking system for a certain length of time (ln's CLTV+CSV)

have a nice day

it is DISTRIBUTED.. there is a difference
the other nodes have to fully comply to CORES policies and rules, or get ban-hammered out of the network
this is why there have been no orphans(caused by consensus competition) on cores network since last summer
https://blockchain.info/charts/n-orphaned-blocks
because anyone that tries to send a block that differs gets rejected in 2 seconds and thrown out the network
the only time there is any discrepency is due to block timing of what block a pool seen first to build apon. (not due to consensus rule competition)


yes you can call a node by a different name. writ it in a different language but if you intend to make the codebase propose a differnt rule set and want to form a consensus that opposes core.. you will see the REKT campaign begin.

the only way to desire to change the rules or add a feature to cores network is first via their moderatd IRC
then their moderated mailing list
then their moderated BIP list

core hates consensus. thats why any node wanting consensus gets handed a bilateral split or REKT unless the non cor roadmap node does its own unilateral fork. purely to keepcores roadmap ontrack as the sole/only route forward

craig wright.. adams mirror..     kardashian families khloe to kardashians kyle... is saying the same thing. that craig wright helped bring bitcoin possible

they are all part of the same family..
again check out who funded both blockstram(core) and bloq(cash)
dcg.co/portfolio/#b

its all a big drama event to get everyone to love the kardashian family(dcg portfolio group) so that its all centralised.
craig wright never wrote a line of code in 2008-2010 for satoshis invention.. neither did adam back
theymos is vers mirror
.org is .com mirror
bloq is blockstream mirror
btcc is antpool mirror
wu is samson mow mirror

but if you just stop defending one or the other teams and stop thinking the only choice is team A or team B and just say neither.. you begin to se where the problems began about centralisation (2013)

in 2013
hearne and gavin "prtended" to run away from core to make it apear that there was still a free choice of core/xt/classic all happily using the same network protocol and using consensus of a single network to show a fake resemblance of free choice to upgrade to cores roadmap or another roadmap

the agenda was to REKT out xt/classic using social drama so core can win centralisation. (the big picture even gavin and hearn were in it to achieve the core roadmap)

take a look at hearne. he went to R3 to work on hyperledger(bankers project).
take a look at gavin he went to bloq to work on hyperledger
take a look at blockstream who went to work on hyper ledger

then you will see why segwit is so important and why the segwit address identifier and LN is crucial to those paid devs. its to become the bankers network for hyperledger.
they dont want bitcoin core network to be a payment network. they want LN (bankers network of bank branches(hubs) to be the payment network)