how long will it take for people to realize byteball is better than a lot of top10 coin?
It will take some time. The project lacks some marketing that other completely disfunctional coins do have. Anyways, it is doing well atm. Let's see when some bigger exchanges (polo?) do add it, but it's better they don't do it yet. October would be a good month for that. One of the strong points of Byteball is that the technology behind is so much different to other top 10 coins that it can act as a good hedge vs software/crypto bugs of the main ones (if such thing would happen). Ie: Litecoin is not a good hedge for Bitcoin in case of technical failure as they share almost the same codebase, same as ETC isn't vs Ethereum. |
|
|
|
Hi Guys as many of you here are holding or hodling bitcoin just a reminder stellar will taking a snapshot of the bitcoin blockchain on the 26 of June, Bitcoin community members can claim their fair share of lumens until August 27, 2017, after which any unclaimed lumens will be allocated to the Stellar operational fund and the Build Challenge, it's nothing like the fair distribution of Byteball ,i am sure a lot of guys will miss the 1 month period to claim their lumens so make sure to get yours convert them to bitcoin or Byteball or do whatever you like with them
every 1 bitcoin will give you 986.683 lumens which is equal to about $40 as of the lumens today exchange
( quote from from stellar website:
June 26, 2017: We’ll take a snapshot of the blockchain at the first block mined with a timestamp on June 26th (UTC/GMT). This snapshot will record the coin balances of all bitcoin accounts at that time.
June 27, 2017: We’ll publish a claim page, allowing bitcoin holders to verify that they control a given bitcoin address. We will then send that address’s share of lumens to the provided Stellar account.
To get a sense of the giveaway math, take Rachel as an example:
At time of snapshot
16,215,950 bitcoins in existence
Rachel owns 10 bitcoins
Rachel can claim
16,000,000,000 * (10/16,215,950) = 9,866.83 lumens
Calculation
Rachel owns .00006167% of the bitcoins in existence at the time of the snapshot.
Her 9,866.83 lumens therefore equals .00006167% of lumens given away.
August 27th, 2017: The bitcoin lumen program will conclude. If there are unclaimed lumens, they’ll go to Stellar.org’s operational fund and to the Build Challenge.
Due to regulatory restrictions, this program is closed to residents of the U.S. states of New York, Georgia, New Hampshire, and Connecticut as well as the nations of Iran, Cuba, North Korea, and other countries subject to sanctions by the United States. These restrictions are subject to change to account for changes in regulatory posture.
Members and board members of Stellar.org will not participate in the bitcoin-lumen program or claim any lumens from it.)
Thx for the reminder. But I do have one question that is not solved on the FAQ. What happens when someone has multiple addresses with BTC? Ie: What if I have my BTC on 20 different address? Will I be able to claim them all? I think you need to verify by facebook, but can you claim multiple addresses with just one facebook? |
|
|
|
That's right. But what makes you think that Core is no longer in the pockets of great economic players?
Thats my point. Different development groups are better than one.
Because Core is an extremely loose entity, unlike what would be put together by the New York group or Bitmain. Sure, there's an inner circle and then there's everyone else, but it still gives far more room for dissent or alternative points of view. New York City + bitdevs + bitcoin core = * ... u do the maths  Enuff with the cryptic posts!!!  If you really have something to say, just say it damn it! |
|
|
|
Let's put it this way. If any future Bitcoin developers end up on Bitmain's payroll (either directly or covertly), then you might as well kiss Bitcoin goodbye because it'll be fully compromised by that point. On another note: we are finally seeing some upward movement.  Aren't most principal Bitcoin developers already rich enough so that it would not be that easy to bribe/derail them from their own interest/investment? And yes, I am expecting a new ATH when all the clouds around this scaling issue are gone (which would probably happen in less than a week from now). |
|
|
|
That's right. But what makes you think that Core is no longer in the pockets of great economic players?
Thats my point. Different development groups are better than one.
Because Core is an extremely loose entity, unlike what would be put together by the New York group or Bitmain. Sure, there's an inner circle and then there's everyone else, but it still gives far more room for dissent or alternative points of view. My bet is on a few selfish opportunist miners getting compromised (i.e., bought) WAY before a large, loose group of idealistic volunteer developers would. It's pretty easy to spot the people who sell out (and/or get bought). They are the ones promoting changes that fly in the face of decentralization, enhancing their control and benefiting themselves the most. But what would be the problem of that? I mean, BITMAIN already has control (direct+indirect) over 50% of Bitcoin. They can play all games they want, but if Bitcoin crashes for their stupidity (51% attack) they will be worthless. Of course, I would be much more relaxed when the mining markets becomes more decentralised with more big players. It will also be a sign of a more mature market. |
|
|
|
Thx. It looks like it's not only in alpha but I would have to compile it myself... I think I will wait until BETA or something. It's interesting that it makes the ledger act as a HID (Keyboard)... Maybe someone should do a ledger APP that mimics a "Rubber Ducky" for extra value It seems that both Trezor and Ledger wallets are sold out atm and on preorder. It's no wonder, and since I tried my first hardware wallet I knew everyone needs to have one. It is probably the best development that have hapened for cryptocurrencies for the past years. The only one that really gives you full control over your assets whilst being secure and convenient. And if things like this password managers keep evolving they will be a must-have for EVERYONE. |
|
|
|
Core represents a centralized point in our ecosystem
Core team is the only real counterweight to centralization in ASIC production. I do agree. But I don't see any reasonable technical or political reason for core to not be on board Segwit2x. If it is only because of the blocksize increase that's nonsense, we will need that increase too even if Segwit will mean way better scaling. |
|
|
|
LOL
I am perfectly aware of his obsesion with PM's, but maybe this time he has a point about the scaling issue.
I don't see it, but if I am "totally wrong" I would be interested in knowing how I am misreading current situation.
Until then, I am totally bullish medium/long term on this.
Well, I'm fairly stumped as it's so hard to get straightforward information from anyone. You've got your big block crew, your Core crew, the UASF kamikazes, the secretive NY crew. They're all tainted with their own viewpoint somehow. I don't think it's as clear cut as Segwit arriving as originally intended by Core. There's still other crap out on the horizon. I'll sit back and the let the numbers do the talking. I don't see anyone from any faction actively choosing a chain split if it can possibly be avoided. The only people that would desire a chain split are the ones that are not really long on BTC. What people doesn't realise is that if Bitcoin fails as a store of value (and a big chain split could do it) all other cryptocurrencies do. It's basically the same as if some day gold could be artificially produced for a much lower cost... what would you think would happen to silver and all the rest? (assuming they were "vulnerable" to the same or even other techniques soon to be discovered). I am always trying to take the pulse of fundamentals of Bitcoin for the long term, and I am not seeing as much resistance for this Segwit2x agreement. It is all about perception, and it if is perceived as a good thing, it will. As I said, I am as happy today as I can be thinking about Bitcoin/cryptocurrencies future. In next 24/48 hours we will probably see enough signaling for Segwit2x to pass (80%) and if all goes well it will be near 100% before activating day. |
|
|
|
Disclaimer:
Disclaimer: he wants to invite you into his sex van to sell you shiny bits of metal that sit there and do nothing. LOL I am perfectly aware of his obsesion with PM's, but maybe this time he has a point about the scaling issue. I don't see it, but if I am "totally wrong" I would be interested in knowing how I am misreading current situation. Until then, I am totally bullish medium/long term on this. |
|
|
|
Today is a happy day. We are finally very close to a non-contentious solution for the scaling drama of this past years.
Totally wrong. Nothing has changed at all and it's still the same old parties having the same old positions. A contentious Chinese/Jihan Wu fork (only with Barry Silbert added to the mix) vs the other Bitcoin core people: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCTgqEBXYAQBgNI.jpg:largeIf you're trying to trade this, it's leaning far more towards a fork disaster than non-contentious fork. *disclaimer: I am neither attempting to long or short it myself. Can you elaborate more on your point? I have already read that and many other twitter/reddit comments that have been posted for the past months. Let's focus on current status: - It looks like Segwit2x will pass, maybe even with almost 100% miner support. - Segwit2x includes Segwit: Good. - Segwit2x includes a 2MB block size increase soon after: Good. I hate HF's but an almost unanimous HF for a fixed reasonable 2x increase is also ok to me. More so if it is executed with almost 100% miner support. - I see it as a reasonable compromise. Also, and most importantly, it is PERCEIVED as a reasonable compromise for most of the parties in this "battle". - It avoids BU, which is an ABOMINATION. - It avoids UASF, which could be a fucking disaster. Well, I could go on... But... can you tell me whats the wrong thing about this move? I don't see why it is "the same old parties having the same old positions". Why do you consider so? Disclaimer: I am not exactly trying to trade this... But it will for sure influence my trades which, anyway, are almost all the time long for the majority of my trading funds. I only do actively trade a little portion around 25-30% to keep increasing my long term stash. |
|
|
|
Pools not signaling for segwit2x:
Canoe
Kano CKPool
Slush Pool
BTCC
GBMiners
You want I should "take care of them"? So guys, why won't these signal for segwit2x? What's the reason for this? Are they outnumbered? Just trying to understand all this. I get the bit no one wants a hard fork, we don't need messy. They probably will. They are just lagging in signaling their position. Did you closely observe how the Litecoin signaling evolved until the 100% miners signaling SW? It's perfectly normal. Yesterday night, only Bitfury was signaling Segwit2x, now look... give em some time. |
|
|
|
|
Today is a happy day. We are finally very close to a non-contentious solution for the scaling drama of this past years.
Let's see how everything evolves from this point on, but the prospects have never been this good before.
|
|
|
|
This point needs to be emphasised, there is a world of difference between most of these ICOs and using blockchain tech to tokenise conventional securities like debt or equity. Most ICOs are selling imaginary vapourware, with no direct ownership of the company or idea the ICO proposes, tokenising the equity of a company moves ownership of that equity onto a ledger (distributed or decentralised) which enables T0 transactions and reduces counterparty risk.
That's something I would really like to know the details. Let's see if I got it right: - SOme guys fund a corporate, so they are the only partners and probably they just invest a very little amount of money. - Then, that company issues some tokens. Those tokens are basically free for them to issue, except for salaries, marketing, etc etc... - NOw let's supposse they obtain 10 million dollas for those tokens. - At the end of fiscal year, those 10 million dollars are almost pure profit (minus expenses) and they need to pay taxes on it. - I mean, even if they do "invest" those millions onto any other asset (ie: real state), at the end of the year all that is seen as profit as it is a HUGE LOT OF MONEY that wasn't invested by the partners in their initial capital. So, again, its profit and needs to pay taxes on it. Am I correct on this? |
|
|
|
Litecoin breakout in 3, 2, 1....
Bitcoin to follow.
Dat walls though.... I am not sure LTC price has a significant influence in Bitcoin Price... besides as a reference of what will happen when BTC approves SW. |
|
|
|
Do I need an argument? The guy has no credibility.
Yes, you need an argument. Regardless of your opinion on CSW, his points stand on their own. And it's not like this is some new oddball claim he is discussing. It is an aspect of SegWit that we have known since inception, bot for some reason never gets discussed. Without SegWit, the most devastating thing a miner 51% attack could accomplish is to roll back some transactions. In all their expenditure, they are unable to claim others' coins for themselves. However, once SegWit activates, the attack surface of a 51% attack takes on a new aspect. If a miner (or a cartel thereof) accumulates 51% of the hashrate, they are able to steal the funds of others. All it requires is mining new non-Segwit blocks that contain transactions which spend the 'anyone can spend' transactions in previous SegWit blocks. Further, every additional block for all eternity contains additional incentive for the chain to be so attacked, as it will contain monotonically-increasing value locked in transactions that are SegWit under the new rules, but subject to theft via anyone-can-spend chain rollbacks. So CSW aside, how come nobody wants to talk about this aspect of SegWit? There have been plenty of arguments around that issue already so maybe thats why there's no need to talk anymore about it. Yes, a 51% attack could spend segwit transactions but: a) If they do that, Bitcoin (at least THAT majority chain) will be worthless anyways. b) They could just change the rules and increase the block size reward to whatever arbitrary value they would like instead. They could do that with or without Segwit in place. I would consider it a non-issue or at least not more critical than the risk that a 51% of miners could totally ruin Bitcoin value. That's why I would prefer miner control would be somewhat more limited and distributed than what it is at this time. There is a 1million prize in Litecoin for any miner that want to do it. https://www.reddit.com/r/litecoin/comments/6azeu1/1mm_segwit_bounty/I fact it may be 2 mill at current price. Noone has claimed it (F2POOL would be in a position to do it). |
|
|
|
I plan on opening a hotdog stand and creating a private blockchain for inventory management.
Blockchain is cool... BUt what about an ICO first? Think BIG. You could easily get a few ten millions for your little hotdog stand. No need to invest your own money on it. Heck, no need to even open the hotdog stand. Seems legit. HotDogStand ICO. Ticker symbol HDS. Long name: HotDogs. Algo: Proof of Steak. or Proof of Meat. or Proof of Hotdogs. Coin Supply: 1000 To be sold in ICO: 800, 200 will be kept by Elwar and Devs, locked in escrow for a period of 6 months Angel Day Bonus: 20% 1 week Bonus: 15% 2 week Bonus: 10% 3 week Bonus: 5% Last week: 0% Minimum Target: 100 BTC Maximum Target: 10000 BTC, if reached, will have 24 hours and then ICO will end. Coin Price: Price Discovery Escrow: Individual Addresses per Participant, Multi-signature consolidated public address forwarded daily. Roadmap: You get hotdogs. Each coin is backed by hotdogs. Normal hotdogs go stale in 24 hours. We will use a preservative that will keep it good for 3 years. Pre-Ann to be announced soon, and Pre-sale and Pre-ICO before the real one 2 months later. *edit* If I post an address, someone is going to send something to it. Crazy. The funny thing is that Elwar does in fact have a real project that would be a perfect candidate for an ICO. That seasteading thing. |
|
|
|
I plan on opening a hotdog stand and creating a private blockchain for inventory management.
Blockchain is cool... BUt what about an ICO first? Think BIG. You could easily get a few ten millions for your little hotdog stand. No need to invest your own money on it. Heck, no need to even open the hotdog stand. |
|
|
|
so quoting a dash website article that quotes that sirer guy who's been spouting junk for months? got a more convincing source? It's a shit source but this is an opinion piece rather than actual news. We should consider the arguments made instead of what source there is for the limited information they provide.
Bitcoin is heading for at least one split if you ask me. Will that cause a price drop? Yes, in the short term. Will it cause "The Flippening"? Maybe for a little while in terms of market cap, but it won't actually matter. I tend to regard google trends as the best indicator of "the flippening" anyway, and ETH isn't anywhere near bitcoin if you measure it that way instead. Bullish outcome, bearish event IMO. Have you taken into account that BITMAIN does NOT have ETH miners? Just saying. |
|
|
|
so quoting a dash website article that quotes that sirer guy who's been spouting junk for months? got a more convincing source? ^^^ This. I am just gonna say that my prediction on the outcome of the scaling issue is now moderately positive. But again, who fucking knows. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
