Is there anything like the DASH masternode share setup for BSD? I think a masternode share market could have a stabilizing effect on price and on the masternode count.


Don't jinx it. I don't even utter those words anymore.


What does that mean, exactly?

You and I may not have much sMerit to give. But from the way I've seen some folks throwing it around, that's not true for everyone. My guess is, the distribution method isn't going to end well:

Good luck with that. That's not how people tend to use social media; not sure why it would be any different here. On one hand, I think people will use the merit system as they would "like" buttons. "Likes" reflect social preferences and group norms. On the other hand, people are already treating it like a commodity.

That doesn't leave much room for "high-quality posts." Just my opinion...

How do we know that merit holders are actually going to reward them based on posting quality?

The supply implications (e.g. decay and how actively people use the merit system) also aren't obvious. So, even if people do use them as intended (as a reward for quality posts), we don't know how well-distributed they will be. For example, it's theoretically possible that once the initial sMerit awarded yesterday is mostly spent, that sMerit mostly circulates within limited social networks that revolve around merit sources.

So there's little guarantee that the system will be equitable. As a Hero Member, I won't complain, but TBH this just feels like an extension of the flawed Default Trust system. We don't technically know who merit sources are, but my guess is that it will become obvious that there is a lot of overlap between DT and merit sources.

In my world, that price is very high. Good for my portfolio, bad for my masternode prospects. At this rate, I doubt I'll ever be able to fund a masternode. The rising price is a pretty good consolation prize, though.


Indeed, it's much like the price action in Bitcoin. Early holders eventually distribute, price corrects downward, new holders accumulate. And the cycle continues. As long as Bitsend remains fundamentally sound, I believe it will outperform Bitcoin and much of the altcoin market over the next year or two.

Despite all the Telegram activity, it's tough to gauge sentiment on the project (since there is little activity outside of the Telegram group). The premise is interesting. How does this whitelist work? Do we need to join the Telegram to participate in the token sale?

I've mostly been sticking to CFDs and futures contracts with no-KYC brokers. I trade futures on BitMEX. They offer markets for BTC, BCH, DASH, XMR, LTC, ETH, ETC and some others. Mostly big cap altcoins.

I don't like giving up my documents, so I've been shifting away from centralized exchanges in general. Decentralized exchanges like BarterDEX (Komodo) and Crypto-Bridge (Bridgecoin) interest me a lot.

If you're looking to invest in or trade altcoins with low market caps, you're limited to where the coins are listed. I use Cryptopia, Poloniex and Bittrex as needed. But I don't keep funds there; I just use them to exchange and withdraw.

I day trade BTC and the higher cap altcoins on BITMEX. They have futures and swap markets where you can use pretty high leverage. No KYC and US customers prohibited, so good from a regulatory and privacy standpoint.

Have you seen the bitcoin price lately? No one wants to pay out BTC right now with the price going parabolic. The exception seems to be ChipMixer, whose operations and profits are denominated in BTC, so I guess they can afford to continue their impressive marketing push. There's one open slot at the moment, but dozens of people have already applied.

If Bitcoin crashes and stabilizes at a lower level, I imagine the campaigns will pick up again. Might be better to hunt some altcoin bounties if you have the patience to wade through all the crap in that forum.

Interesting article. Apparently, Bittrex hired two former Homeland Security officials. And not just anyone...one of them is former Inspector General John Roth.

They say that "cryptocurrency can promote national security."

True, but this can be difficult when trading all sorts of shitcoins. Both Binance and Bitfinex are adding fairly obscure coins at this point that I don't recognize, so I'm pretty sure I'm not downloading their core wallets either.

I'm pretty weary of Bitfinex after everything that's happened over the years. The ongoing Tether/banking FUD continues, which doesn't help. Binance seems like it's got some room to grow before it hits a wall with scaling limitations and it becomes the next Poloniex.

On a throwaway machine, sure. I wouldn't download anything from bitcoingold.org on a computer with access to valuable private keys. The malware they were hosting for ~36 hours wasn't flagged by any antivirus software. Most wallet stealers won't be.


Coinomi is safe. I extracted my BTG and sent it to Bitfinex with it. It's closed-source, so I wouldn't trust it with significant funds. But to sweep empty private keys for BTG, it's fine (in increments if needed).

I'm having a hard time understanding where a scam took place. If you didn't hire Edwardard and you didn't pay for the campaigns, then it looks like you got free advertisement. Clearly someone paid for the campaign, otherwise the bounty hunters would have complained. And you can check the threads/signatures/content -- they were advertising DMarket, linking your official sites and mediums.

It's hard to believe you were unaware that such a high profile campaign was happening, especially because it was happening during your token sale. What a bizarre thread...

Interesting... thanks for the info. I figured that Bitmain quite liked the EDA, since they could paint it as "low fees guaranteed" when it effectively just decreased block time on average in favor of mining rewards. I agree that the hyperinflation angle is exaggerated, but you can't blame bitcoiners for taking that position, can you? If you asked BCH supporters before the fork, I'm sure all of them would reject the idea that BCH should be mined faster than Bitcoin.

So are they just removing the EDA entirely and returning to the old difficulty algorithm? Probably smart and good timing for the market as we head into the November uncertainty. If the 2x chain is the "corporate takeover" and the 1x chain is unusable due to low hash rate and high fees, Bitcoin Cash can step right in and profit from all the confusion and uncertainty.

Is anybody following what's happening with this? Last I heard, opt-in replay protection was being removed, but the BTC1 folks were discussing strong replay protection via the OP_RETURN script. I certainly hope they add strong replay protection because people are inevitably going to try to split their coins to sell the B2X. And using nLocktime + RBF is really not intuitive for novices.

That's one of the annoying things. I feel that Poloniex adding Ethereum Classic last year spawned a whole new animal. Now Bitfinex adds altcoin after altcoin, token after token, no matter how scammy they are. And they have a clear interest in contentious forks -- they generate fees off the coin split contracts, the coins backing those contracts must remain locked on their exchange (they love that, especially if they are insolvent), and they stand to make considerable fees off coin split wars post-fork. They have a big incentive to see our community cannibalize itself, unfortunately.

I imagine you're right. But for now, there remains a fairly unified front. Surprising, really.

I think we need to consider Bitmain's interests. Do they want to cause as much chaos as possible (kill the legacy chain, force its users to emergency hard fork) in a bid to promote Bitcoin Cash? Seems risky. But this seems to be the position that many BCH supporters are taking: support Segwit2x because it means that "Core loses control of the repo and will lose the block size debate." And I suspect that Bitmain has a lot more hash power at its disposal than we'd like to think.

I think we should probably assume that there will be more hashrate behind the Segwit2x chain at fork time. And the list of Segwit2x supporters (besides miners) has some heavy hitters. Major exchanges, payment processors, wallets, services, etc:


That's a scary list. And if both chains are viable, I think we can expect other exchanges (like Bitfinex) to start adding trading pairs for both forks. It'll be chaos.

It's not clear where BitGo stands. They were originally included as a signatory, but apparently that was erroneous. Mike Belshe (CEO) seems supportive, Ben Davenport‏ (CTO) is clearly opposed. Cryptic exchange between the two here:


Not sure how the market will react and which companies will get cold feet, but from the look of things right now, the Segwit2x backers are nothing to sneeze at. They can have a serious influence on the market.

There's actually two forks in question here. The Gold hard fork is slated for October last I heard. It's a spinoff fork like Bitcoin Cash and will have replay protection. I think it will have minimal effect on the market -- same as Bitcoin Cash. People attribute the price rise to the fork, but it was actually due to BIP91 signalling and lock-in, which ended all market uncertainty around the potential BIP148 split.

That brings me to the second fork. Unless things drastically change (with Segwit2x backers backing out of the deal), there will be a lot of uncertainty heading into the fork in November. In that case, I definitely expect a dip.

The forks are definitely making the ecosystem more chaotic. They're confusing investors, for sure, and causing significant uncertainty for the market. Services supporting the forks aren't helping. The logos for BTC and BCH in the Copay wallet are nearly identical. It's almost like they want people to mistake BCH for BTC.

It'll be interesting to see what happens in November -- whether we'll see miners and businesses defect or not. For now, it seems like the NYA signers are moving forward with the fork.

Not sure what LTC has to do with anything. I've thought LTC was going to die a hundred times, but it keeps proving me wrong.

Replay attacks go both ways. Let's say you only run a Core node. Your funds on the legacy chain are safe, but when you send a transaction, the funds on the forked chain may be lost. The converse is also true. If you run a Segwit2x node, your funds on the Segwit2x chain are safe, but your funds may be replay attacked on the legacy chain.

Users should take care when trying to extract Segwit2x coins (e.g. to dump them). If there is no replay protection, you might lose your BTC in the process if you aren't careful.