I think tonight is a Champagne night.  well a reefer and a few ales at least  |
|
|
|
|
Thanks DeathAndTaxes for your time.
My initial scenario was only on dead or dying coins that had a valid use case, but taking it further, does seem an interesting train of thought. The three methods you describe all obviously require huge levels of co-operation between coin holders and miners; some more than others. However the potential here seems huge teams of developers and miners who don't want to give up on their beloved coins could join forces.
Its a truly complex subject way beyond my pay grade, but i'm imagining almost a league system with teams of equal here and in many cases the whole may never equal sum of the parts xCoin, yCoin, and zCoin but if a coin was dying, joining forces and taking the best features from both might work out very beneficial.
The dichotomy is that any method here seems to require huge consensus and could really only be solved with a centralised 'Union' for want of a better term, something cryptocoins struggle with.
To my mind any method of merger would need to kill the original chains. I wonder if it could be weaponised?? if the consensus was high enough and there was sufficient motive a 51% attack could be performed as a kind of scorched earth policy on the chains. Anyone who had not already sent their coins to the 'dead end' and hence registered for the 'newCoin' would have serious motive to do so before the final deadline.
These Unions of coins and developers may be onto something here?
|
|
|
|
nice article on coindesk about UNOCS Coindesk UNOCS I'm not a coder or cryptographer so bear with me a little if this has an obvious answer... but it got me thinking, would it be theoretically possible to merge three or more blockchains together? say calculate a future block point for each of the chains create 'NewCOIN' now with the best features selected from all three chains. ? Obviously you'd have to get a massive % consensus from all miners on each chain. I was thinking 'newCOIN' would represent proportional value ratio of each 'oldCOIN' based various preordained coefficients. I see the alt coin space as very fascinating but obviously getting new coins off the ground can be a challenge. The ability to merge chains and thus create a development and mining coalition to keep dying but promising alt chains/features alive, would be useful indeed. |
|
|
|
Avalon is taking the BFL route of coerced refunds, great.  "Accept our flexible definition of 'two weeks = Soon' or take back the money you lent us with no interest." "Ya, that's what we thought. Thanks for the free loan, suckers. Now we're rich and famous but you get jack." I vote to cancel and buy an early KnC Jupiter pre-order. We have enough Avalons now and they are shady.that is a terrible idea. ! although trying to get in on KnC early would be nice. Just not by hastily cancelling anything. |
|
|
|
Paypal will never help Bitcoin gain more widespread acceptance. Bitcoin is their competition and even if they publicly say they are considering using it in their system (which many gullible people believed and took at face value), it just won't happen.
Paypal has a near monopoly in their market and has monopolistic pricing and they are going to protect that however they need to. They sure aren't going to help Bitcoin, which could hurt them in the long run.
Offering zero risk of chargeback fraud to services and people who previously were not eligible to use paypal, thus massively increasing their userbase, is hardly damaging their business model. This action would only go to improve their market share and hedge against further (and inevitable) use of digital currencies. Paypal have one and only one chance to win from the bitcoin competition, and that is to adapt and intertwine it alongside their current system before it is too late and one of their competitors does it first. End of story |
|
|
|
|
Hi Trillian
I can't speak for others, but from my perspective bASIC-MINING creates value due to its small share issue (50,000 now after the 10x split) not like the 100mil or more of AMC or 400,000 of ASCIMINER. Currently your 0.35 per share gets approx 12% return, but any growth due to the small share issue is magnified in the share price.
This is where the valuation comes from, 30% reinvested into future growth.
Imagine that in the non virtual world? A company able to give 12% dividend and reinvest 30% of profits into advancement.
Thats not to say there has not been some luck on the way, backing Avalon has been a stroke of genius. Plus creativex has an uncanny ability to find new ones ( I bet he was good as where's Waldo ! )
Personally I think it comes down to the business model, for the time being it fits very well into this space. Part of this model is that Eric's only incentive comes from the 1 in 5 founders steak, You can be sure every effort is being made to keep growth high.
DYOR as always.
|
|
|
|
After much planning and preparation, I'm proud to announce that Havelock & TAT Investments will be providing a new venue for you to trade full shares of ASICMINER. This asset works much like ASICMINER-PT on BTCT.co, with total support for importing & exporting of direct shares as well as ASICMINER-PT & G.ASICMINERThis passthrough also pays 100% of dividends!Launch Date/Time to be announced soon! Imports are being accepted immediately!As part of this launch the other fractional passthrough, named ASICM, will be renamed to AM100, to make the names more informative: AM1 = Full Shares AM100 = Fractional Shares NOTE: None of the fractional shares are currently eligible for importing into this new asset (TAT.ASICMINER, nor AM100).Full details here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=253673.0Are you planning on having an option to import the fractional shares into this new listing? (that would be nice  ) |
|
|
|
With only 4 or 5 main companies producing ASCI chips The future of mining seems very centralised and in my opinion is the biggest danger bitcoin currently faces. 1 CPU 1 Vote that was the initial idea but the reality is far from that now. can anyone point me to threads with decent discussion on how to prevent this nearly fatal flaw in the bitcoin protocol. Dan Kaminsky predicts that the current proof-of-work function isn’t going to be used by the end of the year — he assigns 0% probability it’s going to be used if this is indeed the serious problem many believe it is what is the solution.? how do we restore the power to the individual 'average computer user' now that the network is already in the hands of the few big asci producers, and their army of pre orders and hence already deeply invested followers who have essentially bought their dominating vote of the bitcoin network? |
|
|
|
Hi Lunarboy, At the moment no - there is some discussion about it in https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=143274.msg2585913#msg2585913 and for the next few post on that thread. They are currently set at pretty much the lowest the Bitcoin network will accept - I am hoping this will be sufficient but again have a look at that thread. Cheers Thanks, missed that one. |
|
|
|
|
Now fees are calculated automatically in 5.12 is there a way around the auto settings to force a different fee value?
|
|
|
|
Top up your oyster card with Bitcoins  |
|
|
|
Awesome find! The GPU that are offline, time to sell? Hi miTgiB. Yeah, I'm working on a sale thread...just have my hands full ATM. I was Travelling all weekend, but was fortunately able to make a stop and pick up this beautiful batch 1. So am I right in thinking we STILL have another batch 3 on order? IF so you are rapidly becoming my favourite person on these forums. GREAT WORK |
|
|
|
If I was a smart operator with a ton of money I might be thinking of priming a litecoin bubble by smashing the Gox Bitcoin price low, then when gox takes on ltc, fire up a rally and sell into the fever of litecoin being better than bitcoin. Litecoin will be very attractive to people late to the game. As long as they perceive litecoin to be as robust as bitcoin, 100 litecoins sounds better than 3.5 bitcoins.
Basically the aim of the LTC IPO project. Wow.... this is exactly what seems to be happening http://www.efinancialnews.com/story/2013-07-05/forget-bitcoins-litecoins-are-the-next-new-thingSupporters of Litecoins say this alternative crypto currency is more secure than Bitcoins because they are less vulnerable to cyber attacks. yeah real quality journalism  |
|
|
|
any chance of a copy |
|
|
|
I can't seem to find it written down anywhere. Can someone clarify how the other 50% is divided up?
See here: https://www.havelockinvestments.com/fund.php?symbol=HIM#ui-tabs-6The management fees seem to have a wide variance month to month, and there have been a few months where the fund has operated as a loss, but pushed out a dividend anyway (May's income was -BTC236! due to blade purchases). Truthfully, given all the screaming people have been doing about AM blades and ROI, I'm very curious to see what this fund is going to look like in a few months. I did see that and the other monthly statements, I was just wondering if it was a set fee each month for management expenses? |
|
|
|
I want to invest a nice chunk into RSM, but can you give me one solid reason why I should?
RSM is not fundraising any more we finished the IPO over a year ago. The only reason we still remain publicly listed is to enable early investors to cash out. For those unsure on how we plan to grow RSM. As stated in the contract we'll be reinvesting over 90% of profits into buying more ASIC's. That is how we plan to grow RSM organically. Rather than through issuing new shares for fundraising. I'm guessing that's what he was actually referring too.  either way thanks for the good work mathewh3 long may it stay that way. |
|
|
|
Jaroslaw
This user is currently ignored. Wish there was a way to ignore threads  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
