I wouldn't worry about it too much. I think it is the same group of shills that have been attacking Monero. My guess is that it is an organized effort from another Cryptonote coin, Darkcoin, or Bitcoindark to discredit other anonymous cryptocurrencies.

I think that's neat. It is only fitting that a cryptocurrency focused on a renewable energy source such as solar power switch to PoS. 

You are either bias, clueless, or in denial. I'm not sure which one, but I am done debating with you sense you lack logical reasoning skills. At least I am able to admit PoS has flaws, but to you PoW's shit doesn't stink and you are clueless as to how cryptocurrencies derive their value on the free market. You need to be more open minded to perceive reality accurately.

So you're just going to ignore kodtycoon's very valid arguments? PoW does not give a coin value, otherwise there wouldn't be many worthless PoW coins. Just as PoS does not give a coin value, otherwise there wouldn't be many worthless PoS coins.

You are completely ignoring network effects, features, utility, infrastructures, ease of use, communities, innovation, developer dedication & skills, and resources (large market caps to pay for development/infrastructure).

There are many clones of Nxt and most of them are pretty much worthless. Only the ones with large communities and the most innovative ones have even a fraction of Nxt's market cap.

Furthermore, Gold has many other dynamics in play as to how it derives its price, just like cryptocurrencies.

FWIW, I am pretty entertained. 

Will do.. I am headed out for Barbeque and football today though, so Ima take a break from this thread.

Catch you guys later!

I think the problem is that a lot of people bring up invalid arguments and don't realize there are multiple incarnations of PoS. So, I have been quick to brush off a lot of criticism as uninformed opinions. I do think there are a few valid points that have been brought up against DPoS though, and I need to address them or admit those are flaws. It is hard to dig through all the anti-PoS arguments because most of them fall under the former, and I am basically one guy debating a lot of people.

Again, I do hope to address or agree with all valid criticisms eventually when it comes to DPoS as I agree it does have flaws. The main thing I think is although DPoS has some flaws, so does PoW, and the lesser of the two evils needs to be decided upon. I guess it is one of those things where some people will agree to disagree, but I want to make sure misconceptions are cleared up at the very least.

By the way.. I wasn't saying that there isn't risk in Bitassets, as it is an economic experience after all. I just think user issued assets have much more counterparty risk than Bitassets. That's not meant to be a jab at Nxt/Counterparty/Mastercoin though, as BTSX will eventually have user created assets also. I think it is just a nice feature of bitassets in that there is limited counterparty risk.

This is a little backhanded.

FWIW, BitsharesX doesn't want user issued assets being traded on its market at this moment in time, that is why the fee is really high. BTSX is still making a lot of changes to the way bitassets work including adding interest and coming up with ways that the market peg can be more accurate.

After all of that is mostly figured out, and more Bitassets are being traded (no bitasset commodities are being traded yet and there are more crypto's/FIAT bitassets to be traded at a future date) then BTSX has plans to roll out a separate market for user traded assets where they can be issued for much cheaper. Also, the features needed for user issued assets to my knowledge aren't coded in yet such as stock buy backs and dividend payments.

Also, the point in the high fee for user created assets is that they don't want trustless assets being traded amongst assets with counterparts risks. You have to admit almost all of the assets in the Nxt asset exchange (and counterparty/mastercoin) suffer from counterparty risk... even the coin token ones until they are officially released.

I stand to gain very little by pumping BTSX here. My main goal here is to convince some of the hardcore PoWers that there is at least one viable form of PoS, and that PoW is a flaw not their "best feature" as some put it. I want to see Bitcoin fixed, as before I was an alt coin supporter I was a Bitcoin supporter. That is until I woke up and smelled the coffee that Bitcoin is severely flawed in more ways than one. I didn't realize that until innovative alt coins started coming out.

My post was sarcasm.

I hate that cbeast even brought that up, as starving children in Africa have nothing to do with the PoW vs PoS debate.

What some call FUD, others call an honest attempt at making a point.

Imagine the amount of food that could be bought for the starving children in Africa with the amount Bitcoin miners spend on electricity every year if it used a PoS variant.

In December of 2013 it was estimated at $15 million USD a day, and look at how much the difficulty has grown since then.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/12/03/fascinating-number-bitcoin-mining-uses-15-millions-worth-of-electricity-every-day/

I'm sure Bitcoiners would spend it all on a good cause if they switched over.

You are kidding yourself if you think Bitcoin isn't full of social networking, social engineering, and politics itself.

Social networking, politics.... What do you think everyone is doing on these forums 24x7?

Relying on authority.... core developers & ASIC miners

Central banks get a cut in the Bitcoin ecosystem via exchange's cooperation with banks, crypto debit cards, fees regarding regulations, and taxes

I haven't seen a Bitcoin army around other than religious Bitcoin zealots... I doubt they have WMDs though and they aren't really all that intimidating considering they mostly hang out on the interwebs.  

I know he said DPoS, but that criticism doesn't make any sense to me. A decentralized consensus algorithm can do nothing that central banks usually do.

If he is referring to the BitsharesX then I think he is twisting the truth a bit, because BitsharesX does not engage in fractional reserve banking. Collateral is held (they aren't printing money) and the position is released if someone runs out of collateral. Also, BTSX itself cannot perform most functions that a central bank can.

There is one resemblance to a central bank in that interest rates are programmed into the client for the Bitassets. The Bitassets (bitUSD, bitCNY, bitBTC, bitGOLD, etc) gain interest by giving owners of those bitassets a portion of trading and transaction fees. Other than that, the only main relation to a central bank is that it can peg a Bitasset to the value of FIAT, but even then the value of that is controlled by central banks and not by BitsharesX itself.

Oh.. I am blind xD

FYI you can get that info in the future here under the asset tab: bitsharesblocks.com

You are missing Mastercoin also.

Care to elaborate?

Do you mean BitsharesX, or DPoS ?? It sounds like maybe you meant BitsharesX. DPoS could be implemented without a decentralized exchange and market pegged assets, or without any features at all for that matter.

I've spent more time debating this than I'd like to in the past (days and days), but I just thought I'd say... this crypto nerd disagrees with you. There is also a difference in between innovations and gimmicks, knowing how to tell the difference is the key to ALT coin investing. Most coins people suggest as being innovative are simply not, and even if they are it has to be innovative enough to break network effects. Relying on only one or several small innovations will have trouble competing with network effects, unless it is just truly revolutionary. Yet, an Alt coin needs a good combination of innovation and marketing to be successful. Leaving one or the other out is a recipe for disaster.

I don't know of anywhere that has the volume for BTSX yet. The client doesn't have it and no 3rd party services are tracking it. The following info is known though: