Buying an ICO coin, it does get sold back into market.
maybe i misunderstood, by middleman i thought we were referring to as for goods and services, not anything to do w/ ICOs
I think it was pumped up to avoid a flippening. The only evidence I have is price action and history of miners moving back and forth but it's pretty intriguing if you look closely.
Looking back, EDA should have been removed as soon as the difficulty stabilized, its implementation had game-changing economic consequences
I think it was pumped up to avoid a flippening. The only evidence I have is price action and history of miners moving back and forth but it's pretty intriguing if you look closely.
I have been thinking the same thing, though no proof as you allude to. tether printing ramped up at the same time as well. also i think EDA was an economics disaster
Only temporarily. If they stop upgrading and staying on the cutting edge they'll soon be unprofitable.
yup this - they must constantly work to keep up or they become irrelevant. you also must think of creative methods like optimizing your own client software or attacking other chains...
Depends on the transaction. BTC has a lot of ICO's which boosts it's transaction count. But using BTC as a middle man doesn't boost BTC price.
since the fees on BTC remain high and throughput capped, this is how BTC will collapse on its own. the tx count must increase to sustain the miners operations or the chain dies
Depends on the transaction. BTC has a lot of ICO's which boosts it's transaction count. But using BTC as a middle man doesn't boost BTC price.
using as a middleman definitely can and will. the BCH stress test was a great example. the tx count was around 600k and the price rose 20%. not a coincidence.
How is POS a scam though?
The term “scam” in crypto is just an unjustified buzzword that everyone just throws around in an attempt at the end all argument without facts.
No incentive to better further the network, to actually work to maintain your investment as once you have a high amount, keep it and maintain the current status quo. seem familiar?
How is POS a scam though?
The term “scam” in crypto is just an unjustified buzzword that everyone just throws around in an attempt at the end all argument without facts.
Similarly, EOS. Pretty sure the developers own a significant amount therefore can just vote for whoever block producers they want at any time.
How is POS a scam though?
The term “scam” in crypto is just an unjustified buzzword that everyone just throws around in an attempt at the end all argument without facts.
In POS, you can just chill out if you have a bunch of coins and make money in the future. Dash is the worst offender here with their instamine, giving control to the founder(s)
What's stopping a pool owner from splitting into two? That's trivial.
I do not follow?
I thought CTOR was also supposed to optimize efficiency of big blocks. Even if this wealth-distribution-therefore-bad narrative is true (I cannot tell) how to compare with supposed advantages?
CTOR is alleged to do so. i think everyone must evaluate and make their own conclusion. personally i oppose any form of socialism and believe competition can create the best solutions
Shit is crazy ATM. Bch price rising, discussion around fork day ramping up, tether imploding - very exciting!!
I think you are making a strong assertion on weak evidence. I have not seen any well-argued economic consequences - I assume you are talking about the ABC-spec?
Yes, my first post is a link to a comment where am abc dev states large miners suffer from improved block propagation, which in their own words CTOR is a "game-changer" for
That makes no sense. How can you put a cap on "large miners"?
Sorry, cap was not the best word choice. Putting in a mod that lowers rewards for large miners so that small ones have a more 'fair' chance is limiting large miners ability to compete
Devs can understand the economics of the system as well as anyone else. But as long as you are asserting that they cannot, please explain who is qualified to understand it.
I don't mean to say they cannot, but today it's clear to me that they do not. Economic consequences must be considered, not just technical - positive or negative.
Which of course we cannot expect super-technical developers to understand the economics of this system, bitcoin is not a software project for a client! it is an economic, global payment system
Essentially - wealth distribution via socializing the block reward. CTOR seems great until the economic consequences are considered.
What's up with the BCH price today? Everything else is only up 1% compared to our 10%. Someone making moves?
People probably think a split will happen and some free money. no such thing as a free lunch - also, I dont see a sustained split happening
Why and how will it be fine?
These type of situations will strengthen the chain. regardless of the outcome, the hashrate will increase, meaning the price will increase. all the innovation on BCH continues in spite
He seems to try hard to make CSW look good. Could you please tl;dr this?
nChain is signaling to other miners/businesses that they are the only miners in the space that are truly advocating for p2p global money. lay down foundation, let the free market build
&t=345s this is so good, puts the upcoming events into perspective big time
@jdh7190 as long as total hash of Coingeek, BMG and SVPool is not increasing substantially i see no reason to be impressed by SVPool hash. Most likely Coingeek is moving some of its hash to SV
I disagree, Coingeek has consistently had 20-30% of the hash rate for a long time. i also do not see any reason for them to do this cause no profit is made. SV is CSW personal pool
