★ ZEIT ★ [COMMUNITY & KNIGHTS] [ULTRA LOW INFLATION] [MICRO-PAYMENTS]

[KikloV]

Hello, just wondering whether there is a Zeit Signature available that I can add to my profile?

Hmm ,

Zeitcoin uses the following signature:

Code:

[center][b][font=Arial][color=#B7BDBD]_______[/color][color=#B8AEAE]___________________________________________________________________[/color][color=#B7BDBD]________[/color]
[b]????????[/b][/font][font=CENTURY GOTHIC, Arial]   [color=#B82858]  J??? O?? M???????[/color] ?       [url=http://www.zeit-coin.net][color=#0000FF][b][i]www.ZEIT-COIN.???[/i][/b][/color][/url][color=#B82858]      ? B? P??? O? S???????? S??????[/color]     [b][font=Arial]????????[/font][/b]
[color=#B7BDBD]¯¯¯¯¯¯¯[/color][color=#B8AEAE]¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯[/color][color=#B7BDBD]¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯[/color][/font][/b][/center]

 

Ha ha, you sure about that or is this something you quickly made up?

Hmm,
Use the internet wayback machince to view the user Zeitcoin's signature on the OP on
March 1st, 2015
https://web.archive.org/web/20150301065358/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=487814.0

Then you tell me.  

Unless you think Time Travel is part of my skill set.  


 


FYI:  Try This instead, looks like the copy paste into code was off.  

▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
ⓏⒺⒾⓉⒸⓄⒾⓃ    Jᴏɪɴ Oᴜʀ Mᴏᴠᴇᴍᴇɴᴛ ᕗ       www.ZEIT-COIN.ɴᴇᴛ      ᕙ Bᴇ Pᴀʀᴛ Oғ Sᴏᴍᴇᴛʜɪɴɢ Sᴘᴇᴄɪᴀʟ     ⓏⒺⒾⓉⒸⓄⒾⓃ
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀

Code:

[center][b][font=Arial][color=#B7BDBD]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄[/color][color=#B8AEAE]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄[/color][color=#B7BDBD]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄[/color]
[b]ⓏⒺⒾⓉⒸⓄⒾⓃ[/b][/font][font=CENTURY GOTHIC, Arial]   [color=#B82858]  Jᴏɪɴ Oᴜʀ Mᴏᴠᴇᴍᴇɴᴛ[/color] ᕗ       [url=http://www.zeit-coin.net][color=#0000FF][b][i]www.ZEIT-COIN.ɴᴇᴛ[/i][/b][/color][/url][color=#B82858]      ᕙ Bᴇ Pᴀʀᴛ Oғ Sᴏᴍᴇᴛʜɪɴɢ Sᴘᴇᴄɪᴀʟ[/color]     [b][font=Arial]ⓏⒺⒾⓉⒸⓄⒾⓃ[/font][/b]
[color=#B7BDBD]▀▀▀▀▀▀▀[/color][color=#B8AEAE]▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀[/color][color=#B7BDBD]▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀[/color][/font][/b][/center]

Thanks out to Rent_a_Ray , I believe he originally designed the signatures.
The one below would require updating the links to be accurate, but it shows the code you can use to make your own.

--WWW.ZEiT-COiN.NET--

Exchanges: -southXchange- -Cryptsy- -Cryptopia- -YOBit-

Code:

[table][tr]
[td][url=http://www.zeit-coin.net][b][size=20pt][glow=#64A0D4,2,300][color=#64A0D4]--[/color][color=white]WWW.ZEiT-COiN.NET[/color][color=#64A0D4]--[/color][/glow][/size][/b][/url][/td]
[td]Exchanges: [url=https://www.southxchange.com/][glow=#3C3C3C,2,300][color=#3C3C3C]-[/color][color=white][b]south[color=#418BCA]X[/color]change[/b][/color][/glow][glow=#3C3C3C,2,300][color=#3C3C3C]-[/color][/url] [url=https://www.cryptsy.com/markets/view/ZEIT_LTC][glow=#408EC6,2,300][color=#408EC6]-[/color][color=white][b][s]Cryptsy[/s][/b][/color][/glow][glow=#408EC6,2,300][color=#408EC6]-[/color][/url] [url=http://cryptopia.co.nz/][glow=#FFE200,2,300][color=#FFE200]-[/color][color=#5E5E5E][b]Cryptopia[/b][/color][/glow][glow=#FFE200,2,300][color=#FFE200]-[/color][/url] [url=https://www.yobit.net/en/history/bids/ZEIT/BTC][glow=#465A73,2,300][color=#465A73]-[/color][color=white][b]YO[/b][/color][color=#0AADEF]Bit[/color][/glow][glow=#465A73,2,300][color=#465A73]-[/color][/url][/td][/tr][/table]

[1715194697]

1715194697

[KikloV]

Current Exchange status Updates

Exchanges working normally are :
Alcurex
Cryptopia
SouthXchange
Trade Satoshi


Exchanges with issues
CoinXchange zeitcoin wallet is offline ,
Trading there to get zeitcoins is currently useless as No Zeitcoins can be withdrawn or deposited there, be aware.
(No reply back yet on when it will be fixed or even if it will be fixed.)

NovaExchange zeitcoin trading is still blocked, but the wallets were allowing withdrawals
(No reply back yet on when it will be fixed.)
recommend moving all of your zeitcoins to one of the above exchanges that are working normally until they fix their trading bug.


Yobit  (Do Not Use Yobit) : Wallets do not accept deposits or withdrawals for over a year


 


FYI:
Question for the community, at what time frame should we place them on the Do not Trade List like yobit , if they are not allowing deposits or withdrawals to their zeit wallet.
Time frame choices.
1 month  of  being offline
3 months of being offline
6 months of being offline

Wanted to see the community's feedback on the above question.



FYI2:
ZEIT Blockchain Snapshot updated to Oct 2nd, 2017.
https://www.cryptopia.co.nz/Forum/Thread/1336?postId=7831

[four3200]

Never trade on YoShit.
effective 2015.

DASH's #1 volume exchange (historically)
is a SCAM >>> 1000%

[rhadamanthes]

FYI:
Question for the community, at what time frame should we place them on the Do not Trade List like yobit , if they are not allowing deposits or withdrawals to their zeit wallet.
Time frame choices.
1 month  of  being offline
3 months of being offline
6 months of being offline

Wanted to see the community's feedback on the above question.

1 month for me is probably too short if there was a real problem on one exchange, like Cryptorush back in the early history of ZETCOIN for the elder ones, it took more than 1 month to spot the real issue, neverending discussion before acting

6 months far too long, would be nefast for the coin, sending a weak signal to the crypto-community.

So , IMHO , 3 months seems to be a good compromise to add exchange in the "Do not Trade List", after several warnings of course !

[Alec40Gr]

i agree to 3 months

[_tompin_]

NovaExchange withdrawal worked ok, but I couldn't place any new buy order. I've asked on their support email about it and no response so far ...

[complexring]

I found this http://barterdex.supernet.org/
would be great if dev would talk to them!
They want to add more coins and help with everything almost at the end of the page!
Well i contacted them allready lets see what they say!

While direct barter between individuals is a goal.

Time Locking / aka segwit code allows counterfeiting and will never be implemented in ZEIT.
Barterdex requires time locking / segwit style code to allow the cross chain atomic swaps for their system to work.


 

Can you prove the statement regarding counterfeiting? How does one do that?

[_tompin_]

NovaExchange withdrawal worked ok, but I couldn't place any new buy order. I've asked on their support email about it and no response so far ...

I got some info from NovaeExchange, I hope they will fix it soon:
"We had to freeze some markets, and one of the markets was this. IT should all be alright by now, but if not please wait until the developers fix it. "

[Bitcoin!]

Big volume today in zeitcoin we need a bit of marketing, im doying my part at twitter @blbtheman anyone care to join?

[warbird023]

Current Exchange status Updates

Exchanges working normally are :
Alcurex
Cryptopia
SouthXchange
Trade Satoshi


Exchanges with issues
CoinXchange zeitcoin wallet is offline ,
Trading there to get zeitcoins is currently useless as No Zeitcoins can be withdrawn or deposited there, be aware.
(No reply back yet on when it will be fixed or even if it will be fixed.)

NovaExchange zeitcoin trading is still blocked, but the wallets were allowing withdrawals
(No reply back yet on when it will be fixed.)
recommend moving all of your zeitcoins to one of the above exchanges that are working normally until they fix their trading bug.


Yobit  (Do Not Use Yobit) : Wallets do not accept deposits or withdrawals for over a year


 


FYI:
Question for the community, at what time frame should we place them on the Do not Trade List like yobit , if they are not allowing deposits or withdrawals to their zeit wallet.
Time frame choices.
1 month  of  being offline
3 months of being offline
6 months of being offline

Wanted to see the community's feedback on the above question.



FYI2:
ZEIT Blockchain Snapshot updated to Oct 2nd, 2017.
https://www.cryptopia.co.nz/Forum/Thread/1336?postId=7831

Generally i think that 3 Months is a good Time Frame.

But Im not sure,
Yobit case seems extreme for me.
For Comparison with yobit i think 6 Months.

[KikloV]

I found this http://barterdex.supernet.org/
would be great if dev would talk to them!
They want to add more coins and help with everything almost at the end of the page!
Well i contacted them allready lets see what they say!

While direct barter between individuals is a goal.

Time Locking / aka segwit code allows counterfeiting and will never be implemented in ZEIT.
Barterdex requires time locking / segwit style code to allow the cross chain atomic swaps for their system to work.


 

Can you prove the statement regarding counterfeiting? How does one do that?

 

We all know that LN is a Proposed Offchain solution to BTC backlog of Unconfirmed Transactions.

(Which could easily be fixed just with a blocksize increase or a faster BlockSpeed.)

But instead BTC core devs want to shove Segwit & LN down everyone throats.

Facts
LN Notes are a Offchain Representation of the value of a BTC (with the actual BTC locked in place on the actual BTC Onchain Blockchain)
LN Devs have continuously implied that BTC will be placed on LN and very rarely if ever be returned / unlocked on the real BTC Blockchain.
Combined the Chinese Mining Pools have over 51% necessary for an attack, (~68% at last count).
(With a 51% attack they can perform a history rewrite attacks, rewriting the blockchain.)
(A few years ago at the prompting of the BTC devs, a group (with over 51%) REWROTE the Last 12 Hours of the Blockchain to fix a fork, cause by a programming error.)
(So that was 76 Blocks that were rewritten.)
(We also know the Miners can choose which transactions are included in their blocks.)

So now back to the Title of this OP, Exactly how do you Counterfeit BTC on LN.

Option 1 :
Form a group of collusion between the Miners that control 51%,
Send 50 BTC to an address. Now follow the steps on LN to Lock up that 50 BTC on the Blockchain.
Whether LN requires 1 or 3 confirmations , as soon as LN confirms the representation of LN notes match your amount.
You and your colluding friends, rewrite the blockchain and include a transaction moving that 50 BTC to another address before the lock took place.
You now still have your 50 BTC Free & Clear Onchain, and a representation value of 50 BTC Offchain on LN .(Which you can use for LN transactions forever.)

BTC Onchain Transactions ended Counterfeiting , LN Offchain Transactions will bring Counterfeiting into Crypto.   

Option 2:
Secondary Way Segwit allows Counterfeiting is thru creation of a Fractional Reserve System
At any point they deem fit, the LN programmers can modify their code so that multiple LN Notes represent more than 1 onchain BTC.  It is the history of the goldsmiths all over again.

LN freezes the amount of BTC on the BTC onchain network,
what is transferred on LN is a representation of that value.
(No Different than when Banks allowed people to trade cash for gold.
The Gold is held somewhere else and the Cash is a representation of that amount of Gold.
Only redeemable upon request.)
IE: Banking (there is no difference between it & LN)

And here is the kicker, if LN is only a representation of a BTC, it is only a matter of time before a fractional BTC onchain is represented by more offchain on LN.
This becomes possible once LN can calculate how many people never remove their Locks on the BTC frozen on the BTC onchain network.
Study the history of Banking , this is exactly how they started. 
 
http://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/6970/when-was-fractional-reserve-banking-introduced

In the past, savers looking to keep their coins and valuables in safekeeping depositories deposited gold and silver at goldsmiths, receiving in exchange a note for their deposit (see Bank of Amsterdam). These notes gained acceptance as a medium of exchange for commercial transactions and thus became an early form of circulating paper money. As the notes were used directly in trade, the goldsmiths observed that people would not usually redeem all their notes at the same time, and they saw the opportunity to invest their coin reserves in interest-bearing loans and bills. This generated income for the goldsmiths but left them with more notes on issue than reserves with which to pay them. A process was started that altered the role of the goldsmiths from passive guardians of bullion, charging fees for safe storage, to interest-paying and interest-earning banks. Thus fractional-reserve banking was born.

LN          = Goldsmiths, (which became Banks)
LN Coins =  Notes
BTC        =  Gold

Option 3 for Hackers
Is exploiting the Time lock , so that the other party is blocked from the internet or collusion with a Bitcoin Miner to include your transaction stealing your coins back before the other user can retrieve it onchain.

https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf
Page 49 thru 51 

Improper Timelocks
Participants must choose timelocks with sucient amounts of time.  If insuf-
 cient time is given, it is possible that timelocked transactions believed to
be invalid will become valid, enabling coin theft by the counterparty.  There
is a trade-o  between longer timelocks and the time-value of money.  When
writing wallet and Lightning Network application software, it is necessary
to ensure that sucient time is given and users are able to have their trans-
actions enter into the blockchain when interacting with non-cooperative or
malicious channel counterparties

9.2    Forced Expiration Spam
Forced expiration of many transactions may be the greatest systemic risk
when using the Lightning Network.  If a malicious participant creates many
channels and forces them all to expire at once, these may overwhelm block
data capacity, forcing expiration and broadcast to the blockchain.  The re-
sult  would  be  mass  spam  on  the  bitcoin  network.   The  spam  may  delay
transactions to the point where other locktimed transactions become valid

9.3    Coin Theft via Cracking
As parties must be online and using private keys to sign, there is a possibility
that, if the computer where the private keys are stored is compromised, coins
will  be  stolen  by  the  attacker.   While  there  may  be  methods  to  mitigate
the threat for the sender and the receiver, the intermediary nodes must be
online and will likely be processing the transaction automatically. For this
reason,  the  intermediary  nodes  will  be  at  risk  and  should  not  be  holding
a  substantial  amount  of  money  in  this  \hot  wallet."   Intermediary  nodes
which have better security will likely be able to out-compete others in the
long run  and  be able to  conduct greater transaction volume due to  lower
fees.  Historically, one of the largest component of fees and interest in the
 nancial system are from various forms of counterparty risk { in Bitcoin it
is possible that the largest component in fees will be derived from security
risk premiums.
A Funding Transaction may have multiple outputs with multiple Com-
mitment Transactions, with the Funding Transaction key and some Commit-
ment Transactions keys stored oine.  It is possible to create an equivalent
of a \Checking Account" and \Savings Account" by moving funds between
outputs  from  a  Funding  Transaction,  with  the  \Savings  Account"  stored
online and requiring additional signatures from security services.

 

[Badassname]

Has anyone looked into making a Zeit presence on Investfeed?  It's a brand new site dealing mostly on crypto information.

[dollux]

I found this http://barterdex.supernet.org/
would be great if dev would talk to them!
They want to add more coins and help with everything almost at the end of the page!
Well i contacted them allready lets see what they say!

While direct barter between individuals is a goal.

Time Locking / aka segwit code allows counterfeiting and will never be implemented in ZEIT.
Barterdex requires time locking / segwit style code to allow the cross chain atomic swaps for their system to work.


 

Can you prove the statement regarding counterfeiting? How does one do that?

 

We all know that LN is a Proposed Offchain solution to BTC backlog of Unconfirmed Transactions.

(Which could easily be fixed just with a blocksize increase or a faster BlockSpeed.)

But instead BTC core devs want to shove Segwit & LN down everyone throats.

Facts
LN Notes are a Offchain Representation of the value of a BTC (with the actual BTC locked in place on the actual BTC Onchain Blockchain)
LN Devs have continuously implied that BTC will be placed on LN and very rarely if ever be returned / unlocked on the real BTC Blockchain.
Combined the Chinese Mining Pools have over 51% necessary for an attack, (~68% at last count).
(With a 51% attack they can perform a history rewrite attacks, rewriting the blockchain.)
(A few years ago at the prompting of the BTC devs, a group (with over 51%) REWROTE the Last 12 Hours of the Blockchain to fix a fork, cause by a programming error.)
(So that was 76 Blocks that were rewritten.)
(We also know the Miners can choose which transactions are included in their blocks.)

So now back to the Title of this OP, Exactly how do you Counterfeit BTC on LN.

Option 1 :
Form a group of collusion between the Miners that control 51%,
Send 50 BTC to an address. Now follow the steps on LN to Lock up that 50 BTC on the Blockchain.
Whether LN requires 1 or 3 confirmations , as soon as LN confirms the representation of LN notes match your amount.
You and your colluding friends, rewrite the blockchain and include a transaction moving that 50 BTC to another address before the lock took place.
You now still have your 50 BTC Free & Clear Onchain, and a representation value of 50 BTC Offchain on LN .(Which you can use for LN transactions forever.)

BTC Onchain Transactions ended Counterfeiting , LN Offchain Transactions will bring Counterfeiting into Crypto.   

Option 2:
Secondary Way Segwit allows Counterfeiting is thru creation of a Fractional Reserve System
At any point they deem fit, the LN programmers can modify their code so that multiple LN Notes represent more than 1 onchain BTC.  It is the history of the goldsmiths all over again.

LN freezes the amount of BTC on the BTC onchain network,
what is transferred on LN is a representation of that value.
(No Different than when Banks allowed people to trade cash for gold.
The Gold is held somewhere else and the Cash is a representation of that amount of Gold.
Only redeemable upon request.)
IE: Banking (there is no difference between it & LN)

And here is the kicker, if LN is only a representation of a BTC, it is only a matter of time before a fractional BTC onchain is represented by more offchain on LN.
This becomes possible once LN can calculate how many people never remove their Locks on the BTC frozen on the BTC onchain network.
Study the history of Banking , this is exactly how they started. 
 
http://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/6970/when-was-fractional-reserve-banking-introduced

In the past, savers looking to keep their coins and valuables in safekeeping depositories deposited gold and silver at goldsmiths, receiving in exchange a note for their deposit (see Bank of Amsterdam). These notes gained acceptance as a medium of exchange for commercial transactions and thus became an early form of circulating paper money. As the notes were used directly in trade, the goldsmiths observed that people would not usually redeem all their notes at the same time, and they saw the opportunity to invest their coin reserves in interest-bearing loans and bills. This generated income for the goldsmiths but left them with more notes on issue than reserves with which to pay them. A process was started that altered the role of the goldsmiths from passive guardians of bullion, charging fees for safe storage, to interest-paying and interest-earning banks. Thus fractional-reserve banking was born.

LN          = Goldsmiths, (which became Banks)
LN Coins =  Notes
BTC        =  Gold

Option 3 for Hackers
Is exploiting the Time lock , so that the other party is blocked from the internet or collusion with a Bitcoin Miner to include your transaction stealing your coins back before the other user can retrieve it onchain.

https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf
Page 49 thru 51 

Improper Timelocks
Participants must choose timelocks with sucient amounts of time.  If insuf-
 cient time is given, it is possible that timelocked transactions believed to
be invalid will become valid, enabling coin theft by the counterparty.  There
is a trade-o  between longer timelocks and the time-value of money.  When
writing wallet and Lightning Network application software, it is necessary
to ensure that sucient time is given and users are able to have their trans-
actions enter into the blockchain when interacting with non-cooperative or
malicious channel counterparties

9.2    Forced Expiration Spam
Forced expiration of many transactions may be the greatest systemic risk
when using the Lightning Network.  If a malicious participant creates many
channels and forces them all to expire at once, these may overwhelm block
data capacity, forcing expiration and broadcast to the blockchain.  The re-
sult  would  be  mass  spam  on  the  bitcoin  network.   The  spam  may  delay
transactions to the point where other locktimed transactions become valid

9.3    Coin Theft via Cracking
As parties must be online and using private keys to sign, there is a possibility
that, if the computer where the private keys are stored is compromised, coins
will  be  stolen  by  the  attacker.   While  there  may  be  methods  to  mitigate
the threat for the sender and the receiver, the intermediary nodes must be
online and will likely be processing the transaction automatically. For this
reason,  the  intermediary  nodes  will  be  at  risk  and  should  not  be  holding
a  substantial  amount  of  money  in  this  \hot  wallet."   Intermediary  nodes
which have better security will likely be able to out-compete others in the
long run  and  be able to  conduct greater transaction volume due to  lower
fees.  Historically, one of the largest component of fees and interest in the
 nancial system are from various forms of counterparty risk { in Bitcoin it
is possible that the largest component in fees will be derived from security
risk premiums.
A Funding Transaction may have multiple outputs with multiple Com-
mitment Transactions, with the Funding Transaction key and some Commit-
ment Transactions keys stored oine.  It is possible to create an equivalent
of a \Checking Account" and \Savings Account" by moving funds between
outputs  from  a  Funding  Transaction,  with  the  \Savings  Account"  stored
online and requiring additional signatures from security services.

 

Hi Kiklo, although the information you have presented above is detailed and probably comprehensive I have to admit that it does not mean anything to me hardly because I do not understand it I don't think. I take responsibility for not understanding it and in no way am I trying to undermine or discredit you in anyway. I accept that you probably do understand it clearly and that I am not able to make any of confirmation because I don't. I am hoping that you might help me to create a simpler explanation that I can understood more easily, please, if you do I thank you for your time and understanding.

My thinking on this subject is that the BTC block chain was a continual and unbroken ledger of transactions that could not be externally changed without that change also being recorded onto it. The introduction of Segwit allows changes to be made to the BTC block chain by locking coins onto it and then making the changes on an external block chain using the coins already locked on the BTC block chain as collateral . Transactions and changes are made on the external block chain but those actions are not recorded on the main BTC block chain because those coins never left the BTC block chain.

If what I am saying is correct then I can make as many changes off the BTC block chain as I like so long as I can confirm those original coins on the BTC block chain can be accounted for. 

If what I am saying here is correct then these external chains can use the same coins over and over again with no actual bitcoin being used at all in any of the transactions which also means that I can pretend to have a 100 coins but only really have 50 and so long as I can account for those 50 coins at the end of the day it does not matter because the main BTC block chain has not changed.

It also means that the so called decentralized Bitcoin and attending block chain are now a centralizing feature and the solution has become the problem.

Thank you again.

[CoinQuest]

If what I am saying here is correct then these external chains can use the same coins over and over again with no actual bitcoin being used at all in any of the transactions which also means that I can pretend to have a 100 coins but only really have 50 and so long as I can account for those 50 coins at the end of the day it does not matter because the main BTC block chain has not changed.

It also means that the so called decentralized Bitcoin and attending block chain are now a centralizing feature and the solution has become the problem.

Thank you again.

You are correct.

https://hooktube.com/watch?v=4AC6RSau7r8

[dollux]

If what I am saying here is correct then these external chains can use the same coins over and over again with no actual bitcoin being used at all in any of the transactions which also means that I can pretend to have a 100 coins but only really have 50 and so long as I can account for those 50 coins at the end of the day it does not matter because the main BTC block chain has not changed.

It also means that the so called decentralized Bitcoin and attending block chain are now a centralizing feature and the solution has become the problem.

Thank you again.

You are correct.

https://hooktube.com/watch?v=4AC6RSau7r8

Thanks CoinQuest, good to know that I have that correct because I have watched the video you posted a number of times, along with many others around the subject of money, it is a good presentation, well put together, easy to understand and I really like elements of the sound track.

A single block chain driven coin is far less vulnerable than all the coins where all the fiat seems to gather, are we really that stupid or am I missing something?

That's not really meant to be a question, just a loud thought.

Thanks again.

[KikloV]

Current Exchange status Updates

Exchanges working normally are :
Alcurex
Cryptopia
NovaExchange  :  Trading has been reactivated.    
SouthXchange
Trade Satoshi




Exchanges with issues
CoinXchange  : Wallet is offline , No deposits or withdrawals at the moment
Yobit            : Wallets do not accept deposits or withdrawals for over a year
(Do Not Use Yobit)

 

[oleksii777]

Thanks for the info. Is there any fresh news on the coin ?? I want good news!
------------

Current Exchange status Updates

Exchanges working normally are :
Alcurex
Cryptopia
NovaExchange  :  Trading has been reactivated.    
SouthXchange
Trade Satoshi




Exchanges with issues
CoinXchange  : Wallet is offline , No deposits or withdrawals at the moment
Yobit            : Wallets do not accept deposits or withdrawals for over a year
(Do Not Use Yobit)

 

[KikloV]

Thanks for the info. Is there any fresh news on the coin ?? I want good news!
------------

We have had this conversation before,
ZEIT requires patience and strength of will.

We don't do pump and dump and we don't spread useless hype.
If you want constant news updates , this is not the coin for you.

There are no planned code updates for at least a year or more.

The ULI is performing it's job and the price per coin is holding better verses Bitcoin than many of the other alts.
That is the only current news and expect it to be the only news for the foreseeable future.


 

[CoinQuest]

That is the only current news and expect it to be the only news for the foreseeable future.


 

No news is good news.
Carry on.

[KikloV]

Thanks for the info. Is there any fresh news on the coin ?? I want good news!
------------

We have had this conversation before,
ZEIT requires patience and strength of will.

We don't do pump and dump and we don't spread useless hype.
If you want constant news updates , this is not the coin for you.

There are no planned code updates for at least a year or more.

The ULI is performing it's job and the price per coin is holding better verses Bitcoin than many of the other alts.
That is the only current news and expect it to be the only news for the foreseeable future.


 

Interesting... So nothing to expect?

You can expect the price to go up and down but the code is solid and no hard forks/ updates planned.
Everyday that passes the ULI has a greater effect on the price, so that is occurring without anything else needing to be done.
As the price becomes more stable it's practical value for real world trading increases, it is nothing but a matter of time now. 
Current ZEIT Marketcap bouncing between 2 & 4 million on the high end.

As they say , if it ain't broke don't fix it.