Skycoin transactions offer increased privacy. Skycoin is designed for advanced CoinJoin support.
....
CoinJoin RFC:
- Skycoin naively supports a simplified CoinJoin protocol
- CoinJoin mixes transactions from multiple wallets to increase transaction privacy
- Skycoin is designed so that it is impossible to determine which transactions are CoinJoin transactions
Skycoin Coin Join Protocol:
- three people send their inputs and outputs to a remote server
- server creates a transaction containing the inputs/outputs from all three people
- the server sends each person the transaction.
- Each person verifies the transactions and sends the signatures for their inputs
- The server publishes the transactions.
This protocol is much simpler than zero coin while dramatically improving transaction privacy.
My advice: drop the coinjoin turd and implement ring signatures right into the core code, and if that isn't possible make some way to connect to Monero to achieve anonymity. |
|
|
|
It's built into the fundamentals of Bitcoin that once it attains a value, that value can only go up.
You'll need to define what you mean by "value" here, because Bitcoin has attained a value in the past that is much higher than its current value. The fundamentals regard the technical aspects of the coin, not the human element, which is responsible for the price action. Of course there are and always will be external elements. Market manipulation, hysteria and mania, technical glitches, trading bots etc. But the law of mathematics backing Bitcoin is that, when something has a value and is deflationary, that value cannot but go up. So as long as Bitcoin is used, it will have a value and that value, fundamentally speaking, can only increase in time. As like the value of fiat money that is inflationary, fundamentally speaking, can only decrease in time Unless another technology came along and made Bitcoin obsolete, then it doesn't matter how deflationary it is if everyone using it goes elsewhere. The possibility that something better comes to market is certainly real, and it could drive Bitcoin to sub $1 even if only one Bitcoin existed in the entire world. |
|
|
|
If there is a nuclear war and all human die off, then bitcoin will certainly be worthless.
What caused every single human to die off? Most of the research and analysis I have read about nuclear war shows that a large portion of humanity would die and civilisation as we know it would be over, but I've never heard of a scenario where every human would die from a nuclear war. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin IS the concept of cryptocurrency in itself, so if Bitcoin dies, so will all other altcoins and the whole idea of cryptocurrency.
This is only true if the reason Bitcoin dies being because of a reason that is applicable to all of the CryptoCoins. The main force here would be Government opposition. However, it's not inconceivable to imagine a scenario where Bitcoin fails due to another coin winning over the market due to some feature that Bitcoin just does not have. There is nothing that other coins can have that can't be implemented unto Bitcoin if the developers see it fit enough to do so. I disagree, the Bitcoin core development team are careful, their product is responsible for billions of dollars in wealth. They are not going to implement features to compete with other coins in a timely manner. To show an analogy, see Silicon valley and its startup culture. Quite often smaller, more nimble companies are able to fight and sometimes even ruin much larger, much better resourced companies. Actually, come to think of it, developers aren't really relevant at all. What made Bitcoin the only one there is is because of its first mover advantage. That's just how deflationary products work, the earlier you are, the more valuable you become. I urge caution here, Bitcoin is the first example of a real world deflationary product and it could/will face competition. Remember that Bitcoin is two things, a store of wealth and a decentralised digital cash transfer network, if a much better system emerges that makes that storage safer, more private and also makes the transaction network more usable, you might find the first mover advantage is not enough. Also the developers do matter, if the entire core team and Satoshi tomorrow said they are releasing Applecoin and dropping Bitcoin for various explained reasons, the market may react and follow. |
|
|
|
Noob here!
What value do you guys estimate that DRK will go to?
Thanks!
Its current value if you're lucky! |
|
|
|
I believe both coins will survive and coexist. sure btc has more infrastructure and will always be the original, but if I had to bet on which coin will double in value first I put my money on LTC. I believe many investors / speculators are counting on the same. using LTC as a hedge against Bitcoin is a nice option to have and smart day traders take advantage of that. now NMC and PPC aren't looking too good.
I actually see Litecoin dying, Bitcoin is a first mover and thus will not die and 2nd, 3rd place are up for grabs for anyone with real innovation. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin IS the concept of cryptocurrency in itself, so if Bitcoin dies, so will all other altcoins and the whole idea of cryptocurrency.
This is only true if the reason Bitcoin dies being because of a reason that is applicable to all of the CryptoCoins. The main force here would be Government opposition. However, it's not inconceivable to imagine a scenario where Bitcoin fails due to another coin winning over the market due to some feature that Bitcoin just does not have. There is nothing that other coins can have that can't be implemented unto Bitcoin if the developers see it fit enough to do so. I disagree, the Bitcoin core development team are careful, their product is responsible for billions of dollars in wealth. They are not going to implement features to compete with other coins in a timely manner. To show an analogy, see Silicon valley and its startup culture. Quite often smaller, more nimble companies are able to fight and sometimes even ruin much larger, much better resourced companies. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin every single time, the idea of owning Gold has never interested me.
|
|
|
|
It's built into the fundamentals of Bitcoin that once it attains a value, that value can only go up.
You'll need to define what you mean by "value" here, because Bitcoin has attained a value in the past that is much higher than its current value. The fundamentals regard the technical aspects of the coin, not the human element, which is responsible for the price action. |
|
|
|
In order to evaluate the risks of bitcoin, I would like to know what possible events could cause bitcoin to go to $0. I want to know things that would be truly devastating to bitcoin, or possibly all cryptos. I am not saying anything like this is likely, but for me it is important to understand the potential risks associated with it. I also want to know what events might cause a price decline that bitcoin would never be able to recover from.
For instance, I have heard that if SHA256 (or maybe some other type of security) is cracked, then bitcoin will essentially become worthless. Also, another example of a doomsday scenario for bitcoin would be the emergence of a competing crypto that is superior in every way, causing btc price decline slowly to very little, as market share moves to the other currency. On the other hand, something like a U.S. ban on bitcoin, as unlikely as it is, would not cause the price to go to 0, it would just find a much lower equilibrium price very quickly, and then probably slowly rise from there.
As I own bitcoin, I am concerned that one day, I could wake up and bitcoin will have gone to 0 while I was sleeping due to some unforeseen risk.
$0 is utterly unrealistic and almost certainly would never happen, even if SHA256 was smashed and there was an apocalypse there would be some nutcase collector who wants to catch them all, he'll pay you some cents for the almost worthless Bitcoin. However, Bitcoin falling under $10 would be devastating and would signal the end of Bitcoin for sure, for there must have been a good reason to drop that low and effectively wiping out the hundreds of millions of USD invested into the Bitcoin ecosystem. There is only one real scenario where Bitcoin dropping below $10 and close to $0 being a semi-good thing, that is if a large holder were to unload onto the market (think:Satoshi) there are several people who could bring the price under $10, however this effect would be limited and the price would certainly recover if it became obvious to the world that a single manipulator was causing the mayhem. (If the world thinks it's the market at large and not the actions of a single person, then people might panic and mass sell offs could destroy the confidence in Bitcoin) It's a semi good thing because if the price recovers, then it was effectively a redistribution of wealth to the Bitcoin community, however if the market at large panic sold and everyone got out, then the price may not recover, and that would be bad. Possible situations where Bitcoin drops to $0-$10 and never returns mostly would deal with competition. The competition so far has been weak (think:Litecoin) but is growing stronger every day (think:Monero, Ethereum) and it's possible that some form of competition becomes attractive enough to start drawing money out of Bitcoin. However, I don't see Bitcoin being fussed by this competition anytime soon, at the moment the competition fights among itself. At the end of the day, diversifying a little is the best bet. My current recommendation is to keep 1% to a maximum of 5% of your CryptoCoin wealth in some of the alts that actually have utility and 99% to 95% in Bitcoin, as no serious competitor really exists yet. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin IS the concept of cryptocurrency in itself, so if Bitcoin dies, so will all other altcoins and the whole idea of cryptocurrency.
This is only true if the reason Bitcoin dies being because of a reason that is applicable to all of the CryptoCoins. The main force here would be Government opposition. However, it's not inconceivable to imagine a scenario where Bitcoin fails due to another coin winning over the market due to some feature that Bitcoin just does not have. |
|
|
|
I am very concerned about this.
But seriously, I refuse to discard a coin just because it's botnet mined.
Other stuff... I will keep an eye on it. Something isn't quite fitting.
What isn't fitting? Perhaps the insane FUD campaign against this coin isn't quite fitting, I actually see it as a metric of how valid this coin really is. The more people that fight us shows just how many people are going to be displaced by us. |
|
|
|
I am not going to waste time teaching you how to read a graph and analyze an overall trend. Maybe your grandmother or sister can help you with that.
Monero price goes down.
Yeah, I just found another coin with a long downwards trajectory, it certainly has nothing going for it.  |
|
|
|
|
Any chance you'll be accepting Monero anytime soon?
|
|
|
|
monero is doing even better than I thought.
You can't be serious... Monero has gone absolutely nowhere. The standard is not ninja miner cost in April or whatever... The standard is the first week listed on Polo when the Ave Price was 0.00530 That's the fucking standard for "doing better" or sucking shit. I've made over 2,000 XMR trades because it's nice to scalp it on 3 exchanges... And the volume is real, but I'm certain XMR is being heavily manipulated by a few whales... Probably on direct orders from the McRisto Pump Mothership. Even the crack hos on the street know a Big Pump is coming... Every day I hear, "I'll blow you for some Monero, baby". XMR is positively levitating like a shady snake charmer... While far superior coins with SANE communities have gotten crushed. Let's face it... This is a Gen 1.0 one trick anon pony... Up against a Gen 2.0 Crypto Asset platform shoot out... With major corporations about to start rolling out well financed Gen 3.0 crypto. There is a market for a digital currency that acts like cash, Monero is positioned to be that currency. The anonymous feature is all we need. These Crypto asset currencies pose many threats, but none to Monero, and if they start positioning themselves to take on dedicated currencies, the people investing will wake up one day with their dreams smashed to pieces because these asset currencies are not able to offer anonymous simple cash, and investing in them thinking that is what you're getting will become a rude awakening for you. Also when has a major corporation created something truly innovative in the crypto space? |
|
|
|
There have been already a lot of those proposals been made, most broken, like PoS. Please donīt use the world revolutionary without any proof. You already have a fully mined coin and a lot of imho unjustified hype, my question remains, why is BTCD needed if the "teleport" stuff works with Bitcoin?
My question about the PoW-to-PoS coins is what's the hurry. Even if you are convinced that PoS is the future and your coin should transition to PoS (I'm not, but let's assume that for now), why not make the PoW period longer, like a year or two (or five) and then transition to PoS? That would reduce concerns about the legitimacy of the launch or distribution while still resulting in the same long term "benefit" (if you want to believe) of PoS. So why not? You can't lag behind the competition. If PoS is the future you have to be the first to use it. That is a big if though. |
|
|
|
|
Funny how Bitshares just fly's past $100 million yet Monero seems to be stuck at being a small timer...
|
|
|
|
|
Also BitsharesX seem to be gaining ground, they are now number three on coinmarketcap, so someone is making money.
|
|
|
|
|
Desperate times calls for desperate measures, the Bytecoin folk are at their wit's end!
You see, Monero is the honeybadger, and Bytecoin is something else, probably a worm.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
