GAW / Josh Garza discussion Paycoin XPY xpy.io ION ionomy. ALWAYS MAKE MONEY :)

[Chris_Sabian]

Really??  My post was deleted for being off topic?  Whatever....

[not.you]

Bitcoin will fade for the same reasons that first-generation technologies always fade. The sooner the better.

Completely wrong.

First of all, old technologies don't always fade.

Second, Bitcoin is constantly evolving. As soon as someone creates a coin that is not total shit, bitcoin will add it's features via sidechains.

LOL yeah, sidechains are the new hope.

First-gen technologies don't go away completely. I rode on a real steam train not that long ago, and I have a friend who still has a VCR.

Don't forget incandescent bulbs!  Way better than CFL's.

Bitcoin suffers from block times that are too long to ever make it completely practical in a face to face situation (like in a brick and mortar store).  Not impossible mind you, just not practical.  And I see no way that there could ever be a consensus to change block times.  It would require fundamental changes to the difficulty calculations and conceivably the total coin supply.  In my opinion a digital currency with faster block times will eventually succeed where bitcoin never can due to that limitation alone. 

[msarro]

Bitcoin will fade for the same reasons that first-generation technologies always fade. The sooner the better.

Completely wrong.

First of all, old technologies don't always fade.

Second, Bitcoin is constantly evolving. As soon as someone creates a coin that is not total shit, bitcoin will add it's features via sidechains.

LOL yeah, sidechains are the new hope.

First-gen technologies don't go away completely. I rode on a real steam train not that long ago, and I have a friend who still has a VCR.

Don't forget incandescent bulbs!  Way better than CFL's.

Bitcoin suffers from block times that are too long to ever make it completely practical in a face to face situation (like in a brick and mortar store).  Not impossible mind you, just not practical.  And I see no way that there could ever be a consensus to change block times.  It would require fundamental changes to the difficulty calculations and conceivably the total coin supply.  In my opinion a digital currency with faster block times will eventually succeed where bitcoin never can due to that limitation alone. 

I'd have to disagree. For most face to face transactions you simply would need the transaction to be broadcast, which takes seconds. Place an order on egifter using mycelium. The payment is nearly instantaneous.

[jimmothy]

Bitcoin suffers from block times that are too long to ever make it completely practical in a face to face situation (like in a brick and mortar store).  Not impossible mind you, just not practical.  And I see no way that there could ever be a consensus to change block times.  It would require fundamental changes to the difficulty calculations and conceivably the total coin supply.  In my opinion a digital currency with faster block times will eventually succeed where bitcoin never can due to that limitation alone. 

Bitcoin can and will have instant transactions via sidechains. It's only a matter of time.

[not.you]

Bitcoin will fade for the same reasons that first-generation technologies always fade. The sooner the better.

Completely wrong.

First of all, old technologies don't always fade.

Second, Bitcoin is constantly evolving. As soon as someone creates a coin that is not total shit, bitcoin will add it's features via sidechains.

LOL yeah, sidechains are the new hope.

First-gen technologies don't go away completely. I rode on a real steam train not that long ago, and I have a friend who still has a VCR.

Don't forget incandescent bulbs!  Way better than CFL's.

Bitcoin suffers from block times that are too long to ever make it completely practical in a face to face situation (like in a brick and mortar store).  Not impossible mind you, just not practical.  And I see no way that there could ever be a consensus to change block times.  It would require fundamental changes to the difficulty calculations and conceivably the total coin supply.  In my opinion a digital currency with faster block times will eventually succeed where bitcoin never can due to that limitation alone. 

I'd have to disagree. For most face to face transactions you simply would need the transaction to be broadcast, which takes seconds. Place an order on egifter using mycelium. The payment is nearly instantaneous.

If our face to face transaction was for a diamond ring or a Rolex there is no way in the world you would let me walk away with just a broadcast transaction.  If you did you would be asking to get ripped off.

[gawneedstobestopped]

It seems that the CEO is not only on "vacation", but is also still receiving an exorbitant salary while he is out of the country.

https://anonfiles.com/file/8e20443bb3a3f5e9fe929f9f03ebc870

$13,461.54 every two weeks???  That's an impressive salary.

Want to know something even more interesting?

Adam Matlack (the preacher from Texas) has a much more significant role than we all thought. I've uncovered significant evidence that Josh is using Adam as a front man for concealing the true source of revenue for the Prime Controllers being sold.

Feel free to ask him of his involvement -> adam@clearpoint.org

I've discovered that the true buyers are foreign and specifically sought to avoid KYC/AML requirements and paid for this privilege to Josh directly. Josh then turned to his last remaining trusted confidant, Adam Matlack, and manipulated him to become the shill to front these transactions by "purchasing Primes" himself.

I honestly feel terrible for Adam, because I don't think he knows this yet.

I also have it from a trusted source, that "interim" CEO Jonah Dorman has zero actual control over the company in the absence of Homero. He was strategically placed as a fall man while Josh flees the scene. I see that as bittersweet as I feel all of them should be punished, it just pisses me off that Josh might escape the grasp of the law.

Also, why aren't we asking more questions about Stuart Fraser's involvement in Josh Garza's money laundering scheme and subsequent evacuation of the country? Seems like a likely story that Stuart would assist Josh's escape as his downfall would hit too close to home for Stuart and his connection to the financial world.



Oh and by the way, here is his current location. Don't believe me? Go knock on the door.

Josh Garza
2A, rue Bosquet
3rd floor, right door
Bruxelles, 1060
Belgium

[not.you]

Bitcoin suffers from block times that are too long to ever make it completely practical in a face to face situation (like in a brick and mortar store).  Not impossible mind you, just not practical.  And I see no way that there could ever be a consensus to change block times.  It would require fundamental changes to the difficulty calculations and conceivably the total coin supply.  In my opinion a digital currency with faster block times will eventually succeed where bitcoin never can due to that limitation alone. 

Bitcoin can and will have instant transactions via sidechains. It's only a matter of time.

I had to go and read about side chains since I am unfamiliar with the concept but what immediately stands out is that if you are using an alternate block chain to accomplish for bitcoin what bitcoin cannot accomplish on its own, then why use bitcoin at all?  Why not just use the side chain as the only block chain?

[Paul Revere]

[jimmothy]

Bitcoin suffers from block times that are too long to ever make it completely practical in a face to face situation (like in a brick and mortar store).  Not impossible mind you, just not practical.  And I see no way that there could ever be a consensus to change block times.  It would require fundamental changes to the difficulty calculations and conceivably the total coin supply.  In my opinion a digital currency with faster block times will eventually succeed where bitcoin never can due to that limitation alone. 

Bitcoin can and will have instant transactions via sidechains. It's only a matter of time.

I had to go and read about side chains since I am unfamiliar with the concept but what immediately stands out is that if you are using an alternate block chain to accomplish for bitcoin what bitcoin cannot accomplish on its own, then why use bitcoin at all?  Why not just use the side chain as the only block chain?

The whole point is so we don't need to create a new altcoin or bitcoin hard fork for every new idea/function/feature.

[inBitweTrust]

I had to go and read about side chains since I am unfamiliar with the concept but what immediately stands out is that if you are using an alternate block chain to accomplish for bitcoin what bitcoin cannot accomplish on its own, then why use bitcoin at all?  Why not just use the side chain as the only block chain?

Different sidechains will have different use cases and it is likely they will specialize in different areas and have different security models. In the unlikely scenario that one sidechain becomes popular enough where bitcoin or other sidechains are never or rarely used bitcoin will remain secure as long as block reward can pay for security. There may have to be changes under this unlikely scenario in the future once we become more dependent upon transaction fees covering the cost of security of the main chain. There are solutions to fund this in such unusual scenario.

Bitcoin suffers from block times that are too long to ever make it completely practical in a face to face situation (like in a brick and mortar store).  Not impossible mind you, just not practical.  And I see no way that there could ever be a consensus to change block times.  It would require fundamental changes to the difficulty calculations and conceivably the total coin supply.  In my opinion a digital currency with faster block times will eventually succeed where bitcoin never can due to that limitation alone.  

In realty the only thing that matters is 1-2 second approvals at the slowest for in person purchases. People aren't going to wait 30 seconds, 1 min , or 2.5 minutes.

Bitcoin already has solved this problem like credit cards have with off the chain confirmations based upon risk assessment tools and looking for signs of double spending on the blockchain before the first confirmation appears with coinbase and bitpay. Anytime I buy something in person with BTC it is instant. Did you know that many cc actually take up to 60 days to confirm vs Bitcoins 10 min(People just assume that a approval is a confirmation when it isn't and can be reversed)?

In the very near future interpayment channels will speed up approval times to make them instant in a more trustless manner http://impulse.is ... and sidechains as have already been mentioned.

[dwdoc]

Paycoin is a pointless clone wrapped in a blanket of scam, but there are alt coins that are innovative. Bitcoin will fade for the same reasons that first-generation technologies always fade. The sooner the better.

Bitcoin will fade just like email, the Internet, broadcast radio, internal combustion powered automobiles, railroads, batteries, QWERTY keyboards and cellular telephony. Boy I miss those things...

[siampumpkin]

Kind of sad, I offered to take over all of his companies and subsidiaries a few weeks ago (with conditions of course). I guess good luck to their new CEO!

With your history of shilling for LTCGear, you would have been perfect for the job!

You couldn't be more correct with that comment.   Chris from LTCgear recently did a Q&A in litecointalk and I am not joking but the mage was more protective of him than any of the people who have lost large amounts of money.   Pretty disappointing considering the Mage's position within the litecoin community.

Perhaps the Mage would like to comment on why he was so protective of Chris during that Q&A

https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=24666.0

I wondered about the Mage's and all the moderators of Litecointalks attitude toward Chris. To them he can do no wrong. I would not be surprised if all the mods over their have been paid all along.

[Searing]

Bitcoin will fade for the same reasons that first-generation technologies always fade. The sooner the better.

Completely wrong.

First of all, old technologies don't always fade.

Second, Bitcoin is constantly evolving. As soon as someone creates a coin that is not total shit, bitcoin will add it's features via sidechains.

whoo hoo.....thats telling them!

[bananafana]

Paycoin is a pointless clone wrapped in a blanket of scam, but there are alt coins that are innovative. Bitcoin will fade for the same reasons that first-generation technologies always fade. The sooner the better.

Bitcoin will fade just like email, the Internet, broadcast radio, internal combustion powered automobiles, railroads, batteries, QWERTY keyboards and cellular telephony. Boy I miss those things...

You're comparing a specific instance of technology (bitcoin) with broad categories (email, etc.).

Cryptocurrencies aren't going away. Neither is email.

But the first networked email wasn't the email you're using now. My first email address looked something like "utzoo!decvax!harpo!eagle!mhtsa!ihnss!ihuxp!grg" (called a "bang path"). The transport was UUCP, over dialup modems.

You're still using email, but you aren't using any of those technologies that got networked email off the ground. In the future you'll still be using cryptocurrency, but you won't be using bitcoin (and probably not anything that currently exists).

EDIT: the way bang paths evolved, with various things done to continue making use of the underlying technology and make it more convenient and add features, reminds me of all the side chain stuff. It's not a bad thing, it's a way of keeping an existing infrastructure useful. But eventually designing something from the ground up wins out over putting bandaids on top of an obsolescent foundation.

[dwdoc]

Paycoin is a pointless clone wrapped in a blanket of scam, but there are alt coins that are innovative. Bitcoin will fade for the same reasons that first-generation technologies always fade. The sooner the better.

Bitcoin will fade just like email, the Internet, broadcast radio, internal combustion powered automobiles, railroads, batteries, QWERTY keyboards and cellular telephony. Boy I miss those things...

You're comparing a specific instance of technology (bitcoin) with broad categories (email, etc.).

Cryptocurrencies aren't going away. Neither is email.

But the first networked email wasn't the email you're using now. My first email address looked something like "utzoo!decvax!harpo!eagle!mhtsa!ihnss!ihuxp!grg" (called a "bang path"). The transport was UUCP, over dialup modems.

You're still using email, but you aren't using any of those technologies that got networked email off the ground. In the future you'll still be using cryptocurrency, but you won't be using bitcoin (and probably not anything that currently exists).

EDIT: the way bang paths evolved, with various things done to continue making use of the underlying technology and make it more convenient and add features, reminds me of all the side chain stuff. It's not a bad thing, it's a way of keeping an existing infrastructure useful. But eventually designing something from the ground up wins out over putting bandaids on top of an obsolescent foundation.

You are not considering the inertia associated with network effects.  The reason the internet has never upgraded from IPV4 to IPV6 is because too much hardware and software is dependent on IPV4.  Bitcoin is like IPV4. It's just a base level protocol on which innovation can be layered. 

[bananafana]

You are not considering the inertia associated with network effects.  The reason the internet has never upgraded from IPV4 to IPV6 is because too much hardware and software is dependent on IPV4.  Bitcoin is like IPV4. It's just a base level protocol on which innovation can be layered. 

The internet is in the process of upgrading from IPV4 to IPV6, and will continue. There's not much choice, given the limit on the IPV4 address space.

Bitcoin isn't like IPV4, because IPV4 wasn't the first. Bitcoin is like NCP (if my quick dip into wikipedia came up with the right acronym). NCP lasted about twelve years, it looks like. It was mostly used by geeks. Mainstream acceptance wasn't achieved until NCP was phased out in favor of TCP/IP.

[Josef_Stylin]

argh, the shill account leaking fake info is back i see... sigh

[jimmothy]

You are not considering the inertia associated with network effects.  The reason the internet has never upgraded from IPV4 to IPV6 is because too much hardware and software is dependent on IPV4.  Bitcoin is like IPV4. It's just a base level protocol on which innovation can be layered. 

The internet is in the process of upgrading from IPV4 to IPV6, and will continue. There's not much choice, given the limit on the IPV4 address space.

Bitcoin isn't like IPV4, because IPV4 wasn't the first. Bitcoin is like NCP (if my quick dip into wikipedia came up with the right acronym). NCP lasted about twelve years, it looks like. It was mostly used by geeks. Mainstream acceptance wasn't achieved until NCP was phased out in favor of TCP/IP.

You're missing the point entirely.

The internet did not go away when it upgraded to IPV4 nor when upgrading to IPV6.

[Subtuppel]

You are not considering the inertia associated with network effects.  The reason the internet has never upgraded from IPV4 to IPV6 is because too much hardware and software is dependent on IPV4.  Bitcoin is like IPV4. It's just a base level protocol on which innovation can be layered.  

The internet is in the process of upgrading from IPV4 to IPV6, and will continue. There's not much choice, given the limit on the IPV4 address space.

Bitcoin isn't like IPV4, because IPV4 wasn't the first. Bitcoin is like NCP (if my quick dip into wikipedia came up with the right acronym). NCP lasted about twelve years, it looks like. It was mostly used by geeks. Mainstream acceptance wasn't achieved until NCP was phased out in favor of TCP/IP.

You're missing the point entirely.

The internet did not go away when it upgraded to IPV4 nor when upgrading to IPV6.

Sorry, but you are the one who does not understand it.

In his analogy it is not "Bitcoin == Internet" but "Cryptocurrencies == Internet" and Bitcoin would just be one of the groundbreaking, early but eventually replaced layers. And the internet did propbably not "go away", but it has become something different and it works without any of the "original" hard- and software.

To believe that nothing will ever be good enough to replace BTC is outright stupid. You cannot just merge all new and/or useful tech into an existing "product" forever and "block" all competition by doing so.

Back on topic:
The cult is selling "Immortals" for USD 6.00 : https://hashtalk.org/topic/32055/selling-imortals-i-have-some-15-slots-10-slots-and-5-slots/3.
Honestly, how can someone buy something with such a stupid name, is immortal better than "never obsolete"? What's the next step, "almighty" or "divine" maybe?

[TheMage]

Kind of sad, I offered to take over all of his companies and subsidiaries a few weeks ago (with conditions of course). I guess good luck to their new CEO!

With your history of shilling for LTCGear, you would have been perfect for the job!

You couldn't be more correct with that comment.   Chris from LTCgear recently did a Q&A in litecointalk and I am not joking but the mage was more protective of him than any of the people who have lost large amounts of money.   Pretty disappointing considering the Mage's position within the litecoin community.

Perhaps the Mage would like to comment on why he was so protective of Chris during that Q&A

https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=24666.0

I wondered about the Mage's and all the moderators of Litecointalks attitude toward Chris. To them he can do no wrong. I would not be surprised if all the mods over their have been paid all along.

Oye, way off topic but since a number of people asked I have to respond  (BTW if you are going to talk about LTCGear, as a mod I ask that you go to the proper thread and talk about it).


1. I'm not shilling, thanks Mr sockpuppet and feel free to post on your main account along with everyone else asking questions.

2. The position of a moderator is to ensure that there is organization on forums and proper information flowed. I was not protective of Chris at all and there were a ton of questions posted.

3. On a personal note, I am not convinced that LTCGear is A. a scam B. a failed company or C. a company that had some bad luck due to hacking's, but for now for a few days im leaning towards C (again my personal feelings).

4. No, I havent been paid to shill at all. Unlike some people (GAW), I have ethical standards and boundaries that I wont cross.


The 6 pages of stuff I deleted was ether A repeat info (the majority) or B blatant trolling (i.e. WHEN THE FUCK ARE WE GETTING PAID). Yes thats whats on everyones mind, when we are getting paid, its fairly obvious. So I ensured that people who invested with a company didnt have to sift though pages of literal shit to get information.


You're welcome for performing an unpaid/unwelcomed job of moderating and helping trying to quell a situation where a company that owes a large sum of money to people not pay out in several weeks, that I clean up a thread to ensure that the proper information is flowed to everyone accordingly! If I didnt I would get complaints that its at bad as bitcointalk (and yes ive already got those)!



You all should be seriously ashamed of yourselves for even implying that either I or the moderators on Litecointalk have any personal involvement in LTCGear beyond moderation or personal investments. On a personal note, my actions have never been outside the boundaries of ethical. I always approach situations in good faith and do what I can for cryptos to make it better for everyone.