[POLL] Are You losing Interest ?

[Spoetnik]

I am struggling to keep up interest in Altcoins. It seems like a new wave of coins come through every year or so that are the coins to own and are heavily traded.  
There is profit to be made trading them, but they will be forgotten soon enough, much like Peercoin, Primecoin, Nxt etc before them.

None of them offer me anything except a trading opportunity. Bitcoin is of very limited value as so few people use it. It is also folding under it'd own weight with higher transaction costs and limited transactions numbers.

I can sort of see why this is happening but i am stumped on how to fix it.
I often preach morality but that is pointless.
1) Many don't care and never will. (many will step on your neck for cash with out thinking twice)
2) Those that DO care are split up into their own bags their flogging.

So what happens is the evil assholes rule because they have majority over a lot of split up groups.
More people are willing to jump to anything scam or not as long as it gives them profits..
..than users who try and support a coin project they believe in.
So the one can sway the entire scene and the other is powerless.

The key is WHAT project to "support" ?
Right away you see a fractured list of sub-groups all vying to be legit and BETTER.
I've always said if some project was a Bitcoin Killer etc it would be very obvious.
There would be a conses and little debate about it.

So far we have not seen the "Bitcoin Killer" contrary to people chanting it.
Worse is BTC has been folding under it's own weight like he said.. i agree (as does pretty much everyone)
And yet BTC has shattered a record high price which tells me the Altcoin scene is as shitty as ever LOL

I guess i have no choice but to tell you all..
Your individual projects you are supporting suck.. ALL OF THEM !
There is no Bitcoin Killer.
I said in December that we need to re-think what we have supported for ages.
That project you supported for years may not be going anywhere and you may need to stop.
What then ?
That is the thing.. i don't know.
Just don't fall into a trap of being a shill simply because you NEED to invest in something NOW for profits ASAP.

A coin that has a potential to dethrone BTC will be obvious and the market price will be an indicator.
And who knows what is coming around the corner right ?

Maybe it would be better to support Bitcoin itself instead of Altcoins until we see a solid Bitcoin Killer ?
The benefit of that is we could bring in new users to crypto.. FOR BITCOIN.
And if a Bitcoin Killer is unleashed they can they jump over to it.

But this whole trying to profit off of what ever is laying around routine is a giant toilet.
And ALL the traders will be sucked in eventually.. you really can't win guys.
You stay at the table gambling you WILL guaranteed go broke.
Altcoins and their services can be rigged any way they want when ever they want.
So you are all playing a corrupt rigged game hoping to outsmart the Monopoly banker.
Problem is anytime he wants he can just grab the cash and give you the finger and you all can't do anything about it.

You want to support XYZ coin ? Or do you want to move forward ?
Bitcoin is fast approaching it's 10th birthday people.

[dinofelis]

All incorrect. In essence you are transposing cause and effect, as well transposing large scale changes from "smaller things grow faster" changes. And the agriculture age required roads for economies-of-scale in commerce thus it was not decentralized. You have numerous errors like that throughout.

Well, this is an interesting subject.  Two-wheeled chariots were invented by a "distributed" people, the Andronovo culture in Siberia, about 2000 BC.  One of the oldest roads on earth was build in England at about 3800 BC (the Sweet Track) where it is hard to imagine that it was an empire-induced road building operation.

I agree that city pavements occurred first in Ur, which was already a "state" in Mesopotamia.  But the idea that you need a *violence monopolist* and a *king* in order to build roads and be able to do agriculture, is the misguided kind of social lie that we have been fed with since we were children.  I'm not claiming that you can build a road on your own as an individual.  But you can build roads as a community without the need of a king who needs violence to make people obey his orders.

I agree that the "kings' violence" is a solution to the consensus problem which each community needs to solve before doing something, but I don't think that the price of giving all power to an aristocratic elite is necessary to achieve this, which is the basic tenet of statists.  I also think that if you are dreaming of a "new economy" (the dematerialized economy you're talking about) before hoping that a distributed society like it was before agriculture, is possible again, you will have to wait for eternity.  If you are convinced that one needs a king in order to make food, then we will always need a king (in more modern forms of presidents, parliaments, or whatever aristocratic structure).   Because we will never be free of material needs and always be prone to physical violence.

[dinofelis]

The key is WHAT project to "support" ?

No, the first question is: why would you support any project in the first place ?
What is your drive ?  What do you gain from it (not necessarily monetary-wise) ?
Is there a project that "brings the world closer to your ideal", and do you think it is going to happen ?

Why support crypto in the first place and not deal with centrally authorized/controlled/governed/regulated tokens ?

[francisthecrusher]

But the idea that you need a *violence monopolist* and a *king* in order to build roads and be able to do agriculture, is the misguided kind of social lie that we have been fed with since we were children.

Exactly. And even when a central violent monopolist does do things well (e.g. the height of rome), they don't actually need all that much power. For example look at the tax rate in the Roman empire before sh*t hit the fan. It was 2% but they had a huge empire connected with the best roads, agricultural systems and water distribution systems that weren't reached again till the modern era (and with like 30% tax rates). The problem is that central control brings in corruption and waste, somehow the Romans were able to avoid that (for a while).

[dinofelis]

Exactly. And even when a central violent monopolist does do things well (e.g. the height of rome), they don't actually need all that much power.

This is indeed the problem: that even with the best of intentions, a centralized power structure always diverges into a self-destructive system.  I'm actually horrified by the systematics of that dynamics, and I already said that the US constitution was built by people who god damn knew this, and tried to build all possible safeguards against this divergence into it, but the US government has become one of the most destructive power houses on earth.

That said, there IS the consensus problem in every collectivity, and Sun Tsu already realized the power and efficiency of hierarchy.  This is why very often, hierarchical systems out-compete distributed systems AT FIRST ; but later on, they diverge into self-destructive empires, almost inevitably. 

[iamnotback]

Sorry we can't move (within the next decade or two) to Monero's absolute anonymity. Sorry. We need a more pragmatic approach for Stage #5 of the global economic collapse because the State will still be strong in Asia and destructive in the West. I propose anonymity that is compatible with taxation, because Asia will have strong States not total collapse.

I don't see the use of anonymity if you allow for taxation.  And in fact, you can never prove that you declared everything.

Apparently you did not understand technically what I proposed upthread. We can in theory anonymously (in zero knowledge proofs) prove the tax reporting period totals on our inputs and outputs from transactions we've participated in (but apparently not with Monero's current technology).

You can prove that everything related to these addresses you own, is declared.  But you can never prove that you DON'T own the keys to other addresses.  What if you owned them, and lost them ?  How can you prove you have forgotten something ?

The point of proving what you declare is that if the law does a dragnet and finds you were lying (or uses the NSA to unmask the anonymity), then you have a problem.

But if you declared everything, you have no risk of a legal problem (assuming the law is unequivocal and adhered to).

This is not much different than cash businesses situation we had.

The alternative (as we discussed in detail upthread) is complete submission to absolute top-down totalitarianism or warlord chaos with no blockchain privacy, or alternatively illegality with Monero.

[iamnotback]

All incorrect. In essence you are transposing cause and effect, as well transposing large scale changes fromwith "smaller things grow faster" changes. And the agriculture age required roads for economies-of-scale in commerce thus it was not decentralized. You have numerous errors like that throughout.

Well, this is an interesting subject.  Two-wheeled chariots were invented by a "distributed" people, the Andronovo culture in Siberia, about 2000 BC.  One of the oldest roads on earth was build in England at about 3800 BC (the Sweet Track) where it is hard to imagine that it was an empire-induced road building operation.

Again I repeat, you are conflating large scale change with "smaller things grow faster" changes.

Yeah those technological innovations and example prototypes occur due to spontaneous diversity in the decentralized (high entropy) wild, but to scale those innovations out to every human on earth at that time required the monopolist state to conquer all the warlords, and to keep order over interstate commerce. Otherwise it diverged into bandits waiting along the side of the road to effective force you into the business of trading contraband, which destroys commerce.

But the idea that you need a *violence monopolist* and a *king* in order to build roads and be able to do agriculture, is the misguided kind of social lie that we have been fed with since we were children.

...but I don't think that the price of giving all power to an aristocratic elite is necessary to achieve this, which is the basic tenet of statists.

Exactly. And even when a central violent monopolist does do things well (e.g. the height of rome), they don't actually need all that much power. For example look at the tax rate in the Roman empire before sh*t hit the fan. It was 2% but they had a huge empire connected with the best roads, agricultural systems and water distribution systems that weren't reached again till the modern era (and with like 30% tax rates). The problem is that central control brings in corruption and waste, somehow the Romans were able to avoid that (for a while).

Missing from your analysis is the fact that thermodynamic processes are irreversible and you can't just replicate into the past. The state of the empire at the end is of course inefficient, but nature didn't build the empire for the end, but rather for all that it accomplished before the end. You can't get all those in the middle without also getting the end. You can't have it both ways and eat your cake too. Sorry.

As the physical economy becomes a smaller and smaller portion of the total economy, we can move away from physical violence as necessary for human progress.

I also think that if you are dreaming of a "new economy" (the dematerialized economy you're talking about) before hoping that a distributed society like it was before agriculture, is possible again,

Agriculture was never decentralized. Hunting was decentralized. Agriculture required protection from the bandits. You apparently don't know anything about farming. The Bible says don't mix your field with many kinds of plants and don't produce just enough for yourself. Produce an whole hectare of produce and then trade. This is economy-of-scale and maximum division-of-labor which has been absolutely necessary for the productivity of man to increase above subsistence level.

...you will have to wait for eternity.

Dude it is already underway. This is covered extensively in the Economics Devastation thread in the Economics forum.

If you are convinced that one needs a king in order to make food, then we will always need a king (in more modern forms of presidents, parliaments, or whatever aristocratic structure).   Because we will never be free of material needs and always be prone to physical violence.

Wow. What you smoking?

[Sundark]

With the rise of ICO popularity Altcoin scene became ridiculous.

At this point even if new altcoin project is really amazing, it's hard to notice. It will be overshadowed by 10 or 20 other less innovative projects with bigger marketing budget.

I lost my faith we will see any good altcoin, only bitcoin will survive (probably not as currency but more likely store value coin).

[ulhaq]

Apparently you did not understand technically what I proposed upthread. We can in theory anonymously (in zero knowledge proofs) prove the tax reporting period totals on our inputs and outputs from transactions we've participated in (but apparently not with Monero's current technology).

While taxes can be assessed and appropriate payment proven, payment of taxes cannot be forced in a decentralized currency that is not controlled by the government. The government can know that person 352 owes x dollars in taxes, but if he doesn't pay it and is anonymous, how can the government do anything about it?

The government cannot prevent anonymous currencies from being used, although it can sanction use of a cryptocurrency. This leaves the possibility of a large underground economy. One possibility is that taxation shifts from income-based to residency-based.

[lionheart78]

I miss the day when dev deliver first before funds flows in to the coin.  I also miss the day where dev were really working hard on the code rather than on the microphone.  It is really insane to see a coin being hyped then gather millions of dollars just by providing a white paper (which even their own dev is puzzled to create ) while a coins that delivers the project first were ignored.  With this I often stop reading an announcement thread whenever I see an ICO stated in their OP.

[dinofelis]

If you are convinced that one needs a king in order to make food, then we will always need a king (in more modern forms of presidents, parliaments, or whatever aristocratic structure).   Because we will never be free of material needs and always be prone to physical violence.

Wow. What you smoking?

If you believe that one day we will be free of material needs and will not be prone to violence, then I think the guy smoking heavily is on the other side of the line

I still need a house, I still need food, I still need a lot of material stuff, and I can still be beaten up, tortured, and killed.  I don't think that this kind of thing will disappear in any near future, on the contrary.

[Spoetnik]

TIME is why many of us lose interest.. we hear "one day" this and that for years.

Should be OneDayTalk.org
All the ICO's are about "one day" ..you pay me a million and maybe one day i make you the Bitcoin Killer.
Long con baggies pushing the my coinz gonna defeat the gubberments !111111ONE
..one day

Meanwhile reality keeps on keepin' on ...oblivious to crypto kiddy rabble.

[ether19]

I am not losing interest because of profits.
I have for a long time because crypto stuff Altcoins etc have no meaning to my real life.
When i leave my computer it has no effect on my life at all.
I see and hear nothing about it until i deliberately come back here.
So i can read a million topics on what coin we all should jump to now for.. profits.

Maybe i could believe in the whole "one day" thing if there was real progress made.
But when i leave my PC there is no sign of Altcoins anywhere.
Best i can tell the prospects of that ever happening keeps getting worse.
What ? Should i cling to the hope some ANON coin gets heavy Dark Market usage ?
Why should i care ? It's like i plan on buying guns & crack on silk road.
And since the whole little profiteer bullshit bores me what the fuck am i left with ?

I'd say the Poll results should tell me how many people there are here like me.
People who seem genuinely concerned about adoption etc.

If all this has amounted to nothing but a massive pyramid scheme of coin hopping for ROI's.
Then i just can't be bothered.. sorry and good luck (you are going to need it with looming legal issues)

what you talking about is only for bitcoin, i'm also here for adoption like you but only for bitcoin not for scamcoin, this place serve as a bitoin profit for me, and until there are money i can't get tired of it, the only cryptocurrency that can change the world is bitcoin but it need more features and fixes

I am in all this bitcoin and altcoin thing just to make enough gains so that I can retire early and lead a peaceful life without thinking of money. Cryptos are bringing in some profits for me and maybe it might not be the same in future, things can go south at any moment. But I am here now and I want to enjoy the feeling of chasing profit, the thrill you get from making profits and disappointment when making loss. This is part of my life and I just love it.

[kryptqnick]

With the rise of ICO popularity Altcoin scene became ridiculous.

At this point even if new altcoin project is really amazing, it's hard to notice. It will be overshadowed by 10 or 20 other less innovative projects with bigger marketing budget.

I lost my faith we will see any good altcoin, only bitcoin will survive (probably not as currency but more likely store value coin).

I disagree. I realize my argument is not very srtong but I'll say it anyway. 'One of the kind' is not something we have in our world. There are male, female, transgender people, young and old ones, plants and animals (plus people) etc. And in terms of currencies there are some strong ones like USD, EURO, GBP. I think that's why it doesn't make sense to suppose bitcoin will be the only one. Other strong cryptocurrencies have to appear on the market and they will.

[iamnotback]

If you are convinced that one needs a king in order to make food, then we will always need a king (in more modern forms of presidents, parliaments, or whatever aristocratic structure).   Because we will never be free of material needs and always be prone to physical violence.

Wow. What you smoking?

If you believe that one day we will be free of material needs and will not be prone to violence, then I think the guy smoking heavily is on the other side of the line

I still need a house, I still need food, I still need a lot of material stuff, and I can still be beaten up, tortured, and killed.  I don't think that this kind of thing will disappear in any near future, on the contrary.

Again you continue to conflate large scale with small scale. The key concepts you elided from your thought process were:

As the physical economy becomes a smaller and smaller portion of the total economy, we can move away from physical violence as necessary for human progress.

Instead of harvesting high diversity of effort (i.e. true investment) with a viral distribution model, IMO Byteball is creating a low entropy speculation with too much top-down control at the nascent stage where it needs exponential distribution. Thus the probability of failure is much higher, i.e. the antifragility is very low.

And the various ways I have tried to explain to you that annealing by decentralized failure is more antifragile than top-down failure. So thus when violence is only at an individual decentralized level, then it can't fail everywhere all at once. It anneals (please search the thread for my use of the word 'anneal'), as in simulated annealing as a form of free market fitness (which is why ice doesn't crack if you freeze it slowly enough).

So the point is that once the intangible Knowledge Age economy is orders-of-magnitude more valuable to humanity than the tangible one, then top-down control over the tangible one won't be economic. The top-down controller wouldn't be able to extract enough value from it to maintain control over those who extract value from the intangible economic.

And that my friend is a "genius" level divergent analysis. We can't train a machine to think this way, because it is induced from creative thinking originating from my unique experiences and integration in the human living network.

I hope you clearly see your error now.

[iamnotback]

Spoetnik's recent posts are actually quite accurate in discussing the problem. As well the posts by others. I am reading intently.

We have a serious problem and if I can't think how we can get out of this dilemma, then I might also lose interest.

Here are my posts about the fraud problems in our crypto ecosystem:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1803849.msg18022330#msg18022330

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1804521.msg18022054#msg18022054

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1808859.0

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.msg18015763#msg18015763

[iamnotback]

Apparently you did not understand technically what I proposed upthread. We can in theory anonymously (in zero knowledge proofs) prove the tax reporting period totals on our inputs and outputs from transactions we've participated in (but apparently not with Monero's current technology).

While taxes can be assessed and appropriate payment proven, payment of taxes cannot be forced in a decentralized currency that is not controlled by the government. The government can know that person 352 owes x dollars in taxes, but if he doesn't pay it and is anonymous, how can the government do anything about it?

The government cannot prevent anonymous currencies from being used, although it can sanction use of a cryptocurrency. This leaves the possibility of a large underground economy. One possibility is that taxation shifts from income-based to residency-based.

You misunderstood the point I was making, which is that in order to not incriminate yourself (i.e. compliant with laws that require you to report) and not have a risk of being caught, then you'd want a way to declare/report, but still maintain your anonymity (privacy).

Of course those who don't care about being illegal, will not declare/report, and I wasn't speaking about them. I presume the governments will track them down, because anonymity isn't perfect (the NSA can deanonymize you if they really want to).

Of course it is possible the governments (especially in the West) might go totally bezerk and make everything illegal (even breathing), in which case we'd use anonymity and not report and be in MadMax type collapse scenario (where even gold is useless and only food, guns, and hacking ability are money). In that case, we'll have bigger problems than crypto can solve, such as keeping the electricity turned on.

[iamnotback]

I bet you all are as weary of seeing @iamnotback posts as I am, so I am trying to wrap up my contribution to this thread and this Altcoin Discussion subforum for the time being.

(So I can go work more productively on implementing a strategy and not just talking about it)

The purpose of this for me has been to clearly communicate my stance and to solidify my strategy.

So here we go for the conclusion as follows...

I am struggling to keep up interest in Altcoins. It seems like a new wave of coins come through every year or so that are the coins to own and are heavily traded.  
There is profit to be made trading them, but they will be forgotten soon enough, much like Peercoin, Primecoin, Nxt etc before them.

None of them offer me anything except a trading opportunity. Bitcoin is of very limited value as so few people use it. It is also folding under it'd own weight with higher transaction costs and limited transactions numbers.

I can sort of see why this is happening but i am stumped on how to fix it.
I often preach morality but that is pointless.
1) Many don't care and never will. (many will step on your neck for cash with out thinking twice)
2) Those that DO care are split up into their own bags their flogging.

So what happens is the evil assholes rule because they have majority over a lot of split up groups.
More people are willing to jump to anything scam or not as long as it gives them profits..
..than users who try and support a coin project they believe in.
So the one can sway the entire scene and the other is powerless.

The key is WHAT project to "support" ?
Right away you see a fractured list of sub-groups all vying to be legit and BETTER.
I've always said if some project was a Bitcoin Killer etc it would be very obvious.
There would be a conses and little debate about it.

So far we have not seen the "Bitcoin Killer" contrary to people chanting it.
Worse is BTC has been folding under it's own weight like he said.. i agree (as does pretty much everyone)

...

A coin that has a potential to dethrone BTC will be obvious and the market price will be an indicator.
And who knows what is coming around the corner right ?

Maybe it would be better to support Bitcoin itself instead of Altcoins until we see a solid Bitcoin Killer ?
The benefit of that is we could bring in new users to crypto.. FOR BITCOIN.
And if a Bitcoin Killer is unleashed they can they jump over to it.

But this whole trying to profit off of what ever is laying around routine is a giant toilet.
And ALL the traders will be sucked in eventually.. you really can't win guys.
You stay at the table gambling you WILL guaranteed go broke.
Altcoins and their services can be rigged any way they want when ever they want.
So you are all playing a corrupt rigged game hoping to outsmart the Monopoly banker.
Problem is anytime he wants he can just grab the cash and give you the finger and you all can't do anything about it.

You want to support XYZ coin ? Or do you want to move forward ?
Bitcoin is fast approaching it's 10th birthday people.

@Spoetnik that is a very astute post. I understand now what you (@Spoetnik) were trying to convey on the topic of "losing interest". You mean you want people to either work (invest, promote, etc) towards real adoption of something (decentralized or whatever is realistic) instead of just playing greater fool speculation (rob thy brother).

IMO, you have alluded broadly to the only way we can put an end to the current ICO (and Dash's "scam" model) Tragedy-of-the-Commons devolution.

Dash is a DAC - Deliberate Autocratic Obfuscation organization.

We require two developments in order to render the current devolution insignificant and irrelevant:

1. We need to develop a truly decentralized, scalable blockchain that makes is possible to actually do all the decentralized ideas that these ICOs are promoting, and monetize the ideas without a token (because token monetization is a big fat lie anyway). The sooner that the space of good ideas has been populated by real world solutions that are running and well supported by a business model that makes sense, then these ICOs will not make sense to anyone who isn't retarded. In other words, the FOMO (fear of missing out) effect will have disappeared. In other words, we need to create a real world actuation of Ethereum's bullshit vaporware (Casper, hack-proof smart contracts, etc), and render that consortium irrelevant in the real world.

2. We need massive adoption by this "Bitcoin Killer" blockchain by people who have no interest in speculating on altcoins. If this consumer-oriented ecosystem economically dwarfs our current speculation ecosystem, then what ever retards remain in tiny marketcaps such as Bitcoin and Dash ... well they can circle jerk themselves into oblivion.

It is time for someone capable to do the hard work to put an end to the nonsense.

If anyone disagrees or approves of this plan, I'd appreciate knowing that you do.

Price is stable, volume is stable.
Litecoin is a second most accepted coin in the Universe.
No other coin, especially centralised coins like ETH, can compete with litecoin real adoption.
Even wikileaks accepts litecoin (proof: https://shop.wikileaks.org/donate#dlitecoin)
Call me when ethereum premine will have some real adoption besides pockets of manipulators and crooks.

[mace15]

My answer is No. Im not losing interest in altcoins trading, its the matter of right choose of the coins you will trade. It is the right choose that you will be profitable also.

[ekoice]

No.I do accept that there are lots of scam coins nowadays, but still there are genuine coins.Altcoin trading is still profitable.Only at some times, when Bitcoin rally happens, altcoin prices suffer.Its also temporary and they recover quickly.Altcoin is a ever growing market.