Analysis

[masterluc]

I'm too )

[1713998538]

1713998538

[1713998538]

1713998538

[RyNinDaCleM]

Me too! Silver is my PM of choice. I believe it has more upside potential

[bitcodo]

Haha, EW guys agree on this, just waveaddict missing.

Like to read your comments guys.

And serious question, what is silver target, 16-18? And do you think gold, silver and BTC will have similar date of theirs low, maybe end of year?

Best regards!

[GangkisKhan]

Me too! Silver is my PM of choice. I believe it has more upside potential

Silver dropped more than gold in the last 2 years.

Interestingly enough, LTC dropped more than BTC also.

[RyNinDaCleM]

Me too! Silver is my PM of choice. I believe it has more upside potential

Silver dropped more than gold in the last 2 years.

Interestingly enough, LTC dropped more than BTC also.

Silver will go to 100 before gold goes to 10,000!

My buy target for silver has been $15 for about a year now

[blade87]

Me too! Silver is my PM of choice. I believe it has more upside potential

Silver dropped more than gold in the last 2 years.

Interestingly enough, LTC dropped more than BTC also.

Well yeah, because LTC is "crypto silver" to BTC "crypto gold".

[masterluc]

Silver dropped more than gold in the last 2 years.

Interestingly enough, LTC dropped more than BTC also.

LTC "is like a sivler" is nothing more than advertisement.

There is a competetion between two (three, four, etc) chains, even with different hash algo. Competetion with consumed power. Today when typical miner spends many kW/h, he hasa choice whether to run bitcoin or other algo miner. And his power source is limited.

So one chain begin to entice miners from another one along with other chain security. So one chain "eats" others power and security.

This is not like gold and silver live in nature. Gold doesn't destroy silver with just self-existence.

So I may say, Only one chain price has a market value. Other's value is ZERO.

[lebing]

So I may say, Only one chain price has a market value. Other's value is ZERO.

I used to agree with you on this point, but no more. A pure anonymous coin does provide value and therefore will serve to fill quite a large niche. Everyone from argentinians, tax evaders, money launderers etc will want something untraceable and this will eventually be an enormous market share.

[masterluc]

It should use not a PoW then or use bitcoin chain as ethalon of timestamp server.

Any independent PoW alt chains are poised to die.

[Void_80]

There is a competetion between two (three, four, etc) chains, even with different hash algo. Competetion with consumed power. Today when typical miner spends many kW/h, he hasa choice whether to run bitcoin or other algo miner. And his power source is limited.

How PoS forks can have zero value
they will outcompete BTC itself... 

[zby]

It should use not a PoW then or use bitcoin chain as ethalon of timestamp server.

Any independent PoW alt chains are poised to die.

What about alts that do improve over bitcoin - for example have better anonymity?

[hdbuck]

It should use not a PoW then or use bitcoin chain as ethalon of timestamp server.

Any independent PoW alt chains are poised to die.

What about alts that do improve over bitcoin - for example have better anonymity?

I dont see any alts that actually improve anything over bitcoin. Its all about the network and its security i guess but maybe you can enlighten me as to which one you may have in mind?
Anonymity is a non issue or simply a myth.

[zby]

It should use not a PoW then or use bitcoin chain as ethalon of timestamp server.

Any independent PoW alt chains are poised to die.

What about alts that do improve over bitcoin - for example have better anonymity?

I dont see any alts that actually improve anything over bitcoin. Its all about the network and its security i guess but maybe you can enlighten me as to which one you may have in mind?
Anonymity is a non issue or simply a myth.

What I had on mind is this: https://cryptonote.org/inside/ - that does improve anonymity, but I believe that there are possible also other improvements (maybe quick transactions, maybe something that does not burn so much electricity for nothing, maybe something closing a security problem that we don't know yet about, maybe other things that we cannot even imagine now).

[HeliKopterBen]

Chains that provide a viable decentralized online marketplace and derivatives trading will likely be valuable.  Btsx and nxt are the frontrunners right now.  One of those will likely take 2nd place in market cap at some point.  Ripple is centralized.  I believe 3-5 chains will emerge as dominant with bitcoin being the primary POW coin (digital gold).  A decentralized internet such as maidsafe may have potential.  All others will slowly drift into obscurity.  I could also be wrong about this.

[oda.krell]

It should use not a PoW then or use bitcoin chain as ethalon of timestamp server.

Any independent PoW alt chains are poised to die.

I understand your point, and it's a good one: PoW "splitting" is problematic in the sense that the security of one chain cannibalizes the security of another chain.

Where I disagree with you is that this means there can only be one valuable chain. There can only be one chain with security as the main feature, that I agree with.

If however you value some other feature higher for some reason, like privacy, because you're trying to run a black market for example, then you will probably be willing to compromise: less network security, more anonymity.

This probably puts a pretty strict upper limit on the max valuation of the "2nd most valuable chain", but I believe it's higher than zero in the long term.

[masterluc]

It should use not a PoW then or use bitcoin chain as ethalon of timestamp server.

Any independent PoW alt chains are poised to die.

What about alts that do improve over bitcoin - for example have better anonymity?

I say (and satoshi said something similar), that "long fork problem" (like CJDNS founder calls it) - is a problem where only one PoW fork survives. Not necessary, but probably Bitcoin. Others either:

- never become mature and die in infancy merging into Main fork their innovations [EVOLUTION], or
- due to some accident (immature fork may become "better" than very mature fork only due to some very big and dramatic event) one of them becomes Main fork, making former Main fork unsecured [REVOLUTION]

I didn't investigated proof of capacity, this looks interesting. But I have no opinion so far. Other proofs I know (proof of stake, etc) - don't impress.

Satoshi had a public thoughts about this using term "CPU power". After 4 yrs of evolution, I think term "cpu power" may be replaced by "electrical power". Also his merged mining idea doesn't solve long fork threat (hovewer in its namecoin realization).

Taking all together I summarize that others POW forks are probably only needed to improve Bitcoin and then become abandoned. No gold or silver or copper. Bitcoin is a complex device and others are spare parts - this is more correct analogy.

These are just my thoughts. And oh... this run out of topic )

[sumantso]

These are just my thoughts. And oh... this run out of topic )

So for on topic, what looks likelier - $360 or $580? Wish I had kept some fiat handy, used all in the last dip to buy up, and didn't sell them.

[masterluc]

Shorting xauusd hard  Yeah baby, go, go, go! (xbtusd probably too)

[sumantso]

Shorting xauusd hard  Yeah baby, go, go, go! (xbtusd probably too)

Can you clarify for simpletons like me. Is it buy or sell?

[thefiniteidea]

Sell