How to Make Money With Bitcoin: Complete Guide for 2020

Ideas and suggestions to make Tarkov better from a “new” Players perspective

I’m a new player and I started playing EFT about 2 weeks after this wipe.It was one of the worst and best experiences I had in this game. I played the game solo and it took me about 4 months to get lvl 40 and my Kappa container. It was an amazing experience and very very fun! (Sorry Nikita) At the moment I have 900 hours in the game with about a 45% survivor rate and 40 million Rubles in the bank.
BUT…… the moment I got my Kappa case, I was instantly bored.
This is my 2 cents about how to extend the game and have less giga chads running around 2 week after wipe.
I’m very good at solving problems and making systems more efficient. I do this as a job. So what I respect the most is the developers time, energy and money. Every idea is very easy to implement and requires minimum development time. The amounts and levels can vary and it’s not set in stone. BTW English is not my first language, so sorry in advance for the ganky grammar.
I do not think the Flea Market should be removed. There went too much time in development that if you remove it, it would be seen as a loss of resources and money. I don’t think the problem is that you can buy anything on the flea market. I think the problem lays with higher tier amor & bullets being available on the flea from level 10.
Tarkov Ideas: - Change anything that requires euros to dollars. - Gate every single bullet that has 35+ penetration and class 5+ helmets & armor behind the traders and they can only be bought with euro's. - Found in raid 35+ penetration rounds and class 5+ cannot be sold on the flea market. - You can't trade euro's anymore for rubbles. - You can only acquire euros in dailies & Weekly quests (coming soon). - You can also find euros in safes and savs as you do right now. - Reserve map locked until lvl 15 or Bunker Part 1 quest. - Labs map locked until you are lvl 35 or Huntsman Path Eraser - Part 2 quest. - Crafting time for 35+ penetration bullets should be days not hours and you get half the amount they are now.
Make the game early game last longer: - Remove Gamma from EOD Users I’m a EOD User myself. I updated 1 month after starting to play the game because I enjoyed it so much! But getting the Gamma early wipe is too OP IMO. You already get a stash size worth 30 Million Rubles and an arsenal to beat standard account players into the ground.
Fun ideas (Sorry Nikita): - Make Prestige 1 dog tags gold. - Make Prestige 2 dog tags black. - The same way you can see melee weapons on players, you can also see the pouch they are using and what’s in it. - Remove The stylish one quest from the task and add it to the service tab of Ragman. - Make Killa 3x deadlier. Killa is the only boss that is solo yet he is one of the easier bosses to kill. Give Killa a lot more health than Gluhar and make him 3x more deadlie crazier.
This is what I envisioned. Can you also see it? Everyone running around with trash armor & bullets and beating each other with garbage and sticks? Altyns and Slicks are very rare to see and when you see them you are scared and excited at the same time? The kill time is up-ed a bit which makes for more exciting fights.
You don’t have to like or agree with everything, but if you like at least some ideas like the post so more people can see it and have more suggestions and discussion. I hope a developer or Nikita sees this post. I really like the prestige idea and would like to know what they think about it.
submitted by JissickO to EscapefromTarkov [link] [comments]

Why UMI Will Not Fall Victim to Inflation: Dispelling Myths of “Deadly Issue”

Why UMI Will Not Fall Victim to Inflation: Dispelling Myths of “Deadly Issue”
https://preview.redd.it/lr1w0ukh2ik51.jpg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b413e6e6b2e94d2e9522571040151826b7874e77
With UMI staking, anyone anywhere in the world can generate new coins at the rate of up to 40 % a month, or up to 5,669 % a year, with no risk of falling victim to fraudsters. It means new opportunities for humanity which never existed before. However, many people who are used to miserable interests on bank deposits and financial pyramids that last a few months at most cannot understand what makes this possible. How can you safely earn up to 40 % a month with no risk of losing it all?
Sceptics cannot wrap their minds around this which makes them suspect there’s a catch to it. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that you can find various myths about UMI's “deadly issue” on forums and social networks. The most popular among them say that you simply cannot ensure long-term operation with this kind of “super-high income” and no one has any idea what will happen to this cryptocurrency in 10 or more years. Here's a forecast from sceptics, briefly: “deposits” with this percentage are simply impossible, it will inevitably cause hyperinflation, UMI cryptocurrency will devalue, and will share the fate of currencies in some of the less fortunate countries, such as Zimbabwe or Venezuela.
To counter these allegations, we've prepared a detailed article with arguments dispelling all these myths, nullifying all “forecasts” and putting the lid on this issue. Here we go!
What's the value behind the forecasts?
First of all, 10 or more years is too much of a long term, and forecasting so far in advance is simply impossible. Don't take us wrong here: it's not just about cryptocurrencies; it's about anything in the world. There was a time when people thought pagers, faxes, and landline phones had cheerful prospects, but look at what happened to them. They have been replaced by smartphones and the Internet accessible to all which no one believed was possible in the first place. New technologies emerge out of the blue and transform the world beyond recognition. The old — something everyone is used to — is replaced with something new and more
convenient. Something better.
10 years ago people believed in developing bank technologies, but then, all of a sudden, Bitcoin was created and transformed people's understanding of financial payments. It turned out anyone in the world can make payments with no intermediaries and generate new digital money. It's true that Bitcoin is not perfect, but millions use it all over the world. This number is also growing fast with each passing day.
Do you remember forecasts made for Bitcoin when it first appeared? Both ordinary people and respected world-class experts predicted it would soon die. No one believed it could last for even 10 years.

https://preview.redd.it/q1kzcxfw2ik51.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=17a12d73b9046a357cf6ecd77253472215c8bb24
Typical article predicting the end of Bitcoin from respected mass media. Source.

Here're some graphic examples from the leading world-class mass media:
“That's the End of Bitcoin.” Forbes, 2011, BTC price — $15.
“Bitcoin is headed to the ash heap.” USA Today, 2015, BTC price — $208.
“R.I.P., Bitcoin. It’s time to move on.” The Washington Post, 2016, BTC price — $382.
“Stay away from bitcoin and ethereum — they are complete garbage.” This is garbage." MarketWatch, 2017, BTC price — $2,345.
“Is Bitcoin Going To Zero?” Forbes, 2018, BTC price — $3,432.
In 2020, the BTC price is almost $12,000. The respected mass media have “declared Bitcoin dead” over 400 times (!!!) referring to its lack of backing, high issue rate, super-high price growth, and the like — just like the skeptics “declaring UMI dead” right now. However, despite all the discouraging forecasts, Bitcoin continues to successfully grow and rapidly gain in popularity.

https://preview.redd.it/6z60xwd13ik51.png?width=791&format=png&auto=webp&s=25a6799fe551c6e7f91aa016907e95ce032d7e5e
Over 12 years, Bitcoin has been declared dead 381 times, but it only grows stronger with each passing year. Source.

All of the above is proof that you shouldn't put blind trust in various forecasts, even coming from respected sources. Forecasts are mere opinions and arguments, but no one can know for
sure what will happen in 10, 100, or 1,000 years. No expert can know that. Similarly, no one knows what will happen to UMI many years from now.
UMI can solve any issues on the fly
We cannot know the future, but we did all we could to make our coin last forever. Most existing cryptocurrencies have a very important problem — they cannot support high-quality growth and rapidly become obsolete.
To explain this, we'd like to quote our Whitepaper:
"Despite the apparition of new technology solutions, the Bitcoin blockchain still holds only about 2,000 transactions, and it takes about 10 minutes to create a block. In 11 years, developers still did not manage to come to an agreement and implement a solution that would allow scaling the system and upgrade performance.
Most other cryptocurrencies face a similar problem. They are launched and keep operating in an almost initial state even after numerous innovative solutions become available. For example, the Ethereum network has been attempting to switch to the PoS algorithm for over two years now, but due to code complexity, security threats, and issues of reaching consensus, this causes great inconvenience."
https://preview.redd.it/ezxzrpx43ik51.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=207f8a27a59fac760fc541dae6abd30d148296f5
Screenshot of a page in the UMI Whitepaper. Have you read it? It answers a lot of questions. Link.

Bitcoin itself is technically obsolete. This is besides the fact that it has a load of other problems. For instance, BTC is supposed to completely stop coin mining in 2140, meaning miners will lose motivation to support the network. What happens then? The hope is that the main source of income for miners will be transfer fees, but will they want to maintain powerful equipment for a reward in the form of small fees? If fees are big, will people want to pay those? Will they find a different solution? Will users just leave the Bitcoin ecosystem and join more high-tech cryptocurrencies like UMI?
When we designed UMI, we accounted for all these issues and launched a promising project with a conveniently scalable ecosystem. Even if UMI faces some challenges in the future, we will make amendments as the network grows. We will act as appropriate judging from the project's current status. They will be based on the situation and the current state of the project.
It's true that upgrade decisions have been and are being made by all leading crypto projects, including Bitcoin and Ethereum, but UMI supports really safe and rapid innovation. The network can be easily modified and scaled with cutting edge technology solutions. While other cryptocurrencies simply become obsolete, we can handle all kinds of challenges on the fly. The UMI network will grow and improve to be always up to date, keep up with the times, and prevent problems in 10, 100, or 1,000 years.
At this point, the UMI network is in excellent shape, and the smart contract offers you relevant and actionable staking opportunities. We've thought out every detail, and the brisk growth of our community proves it best of all.
There is no "deadly inflation"
And, lastly, let's bring an issue with supposedly too-high emission to a close. UMI is typically accused of paying a too high reward for staking — as much as 40% a month, or 5,669% a year — which no one and nothing else in this world can pay. Eventually, it might end up with inflation as it happened in Zimbabwe and Venezuela, etc.,
Let us look at real facts. Those who consider a 40% monthly growth impossible should look at bitcoin again as the most outstanding example which has proven that nothing is impossible. Imagine how many times your deposit would have grown if 10 years ago you had bought bitcoins or inexpensive mining equipment producing a reward of 50 BTC several times a day.
Please consider the following:
In March 2010, BitcoinMarket.com started operating as the first bitcoin exchange, and 1 BTC cost a lot less than a cent — $0.003.
At the time of writing this article, the price for 1BTC was about $12,000.
It means those who bought bitcoins 10 years ago have increased their "deposit" by nearly 400,000,000% (!!!). Four hundred million percent in ten years! This is a real fact.
Those who bought bitcoins when the price was a few cents or dollars also achieved the perfect result by increasing their "deposit" by thousand or million times.
Well, now the percentage in UMI staking doesn't seem so crazy, does it? The only difference
is that BTC "deposit" grows in line with the BTC price while UMI deposit growth is ensured the growth of the number of UMI coins, which in turn doesn't prevent the price from surging. In fact, both cases demonstrate a multiple growth of the "deposit".
All of the above is proof that the reason for inflation in Zimbabwe, Venezuela, etc is a bad economy, not a high emission. In late March. roughly speaking, in one day, the FED (U.S. Federal Reserve System) released 2.2 trillion dollars to support the economy during the coronavirus pandemic. Similar financial injections are regular in the USA, the country which is the most advanced world's economy.
These facts indicate that UMI has no "deadly issue" at all and, unlike the USA, it doesn't "print" anything.
Here is bare statistics form the UMI blockchain:
The UMI cryptocurrency was launched on June 1. Since the launch, it's been 3 months.
18,000,000 UMI coins were initially issued.
In total, there are now about 18,800,000 UMI coins.
In other words, in three months, the total number of UMI coins increased by only 4.4%. Does it look like "deadly inflation"?

https://preview.redd.it/gsdjbwp83ik51.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=8d4591a24b3ddc63f8501f1b7fe7a4c02b7da89c
In 3 months, the number of UMI coins has shown a few percent increase. Source.

Let's move on:
We'd like to reiterate that the total number of UMI coins is almost 18,800,000.
There are about 14,500,000 coins on the genesis address today.
Almost 4,000,000 coins are involved in staking.
Thus, only 300,000 UMI (!)are freely circulated on the market. The remaining 18,500,000 coins are either used in staking or have not yet been released to the market.
https://preview.redd.it/f7b28jid3ik51.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=5ff8338121ebfe398cfb498a0cfcc00446ea6225
The number of coins stored on the genesis address at the time of writing the article. Source.

In real fact, UMI has no super-high emission. This fact has been proven. For a three-month period, which is a quarter of a year, the number of UMI has hardly changed and equals about 1.5% of the total number of coins on the market.
The truth is that UMI economy depends on a lot of factors. For example, burning 50,000 coins to create a structure. However, from a more general point of view, the UMI economic model itself is designed to encourage people to "save" rather than sell UMI coins. This is a crucial point that allows us to make progress, even with a high emission.
Moreover, it will take a billion-dollar staking structure that will be able to provide the highest possible emission on the UMI network a lot of years to appear. While it doesn't happen, all these forecasts can be regarded as irrelevant for today. Keep in mind that a 40% monthly profit will be available to the most successful structures and only after many years of development. To have your coins increased by 40% per month, your structure must have over 50 (!) times more coins than the number of coins initially generated by the network. And since this structure will do everything possible for the benefit of the UMI cryptocurrency, even 40% per month will not pose a risk to UMI's sustainable development.
Conclusions are as follows:
UMI offers no kind of "killing sky-high returns". Please don't take this myth seriously. UMI is growing. The current smart contract offers reasonable and up-to-date opportunities for UMI staking and poses no problem. If, however, a problem arises — we have all the tools to find an immediate solution. All these negative forecasts are not worth a brass farthing. They always have been and always will be. At all times and in all places. But they are highly unlikely to come true. Bitcoin outsmarted the most reputable and shrewd financial analysts. Why don't UMI, which is a lot more advanced than bitcoin, try to do the same?
UMI is a decentralized, strong, and high-tech network. It can exist the way it is now forever. But as it grows, it will improve to be always up to date, keep up with the times and prevent any problems. We are contributing to a great thing — we're creating a free economic system that will profitable for the entire human family. This is an opportunity to overcome social inequality and make regular people financially independent. So let's make every effort to make things go well. Ignore all evil-wishers and their predictions. Just join other users and go towards your dream. Then we will certainly succeed in it all.
Sincerely yours, UMI team
submitted by UMITop to u/UMITop [link] [comments]

How London Real and David Icke fooled the world. And everyone fell for it (long read) TL/DR included

[TL/DR at the bottom if you don't wanna read the whole thing]
HOW LONDON REAL AND DAVID ICKE FOOLED THE WORLD.
... AND EVERYONE FELL FOR IT
It's May, summer is coming in the Northern Hemisphere, but most of the people cannot enjoy the sun because they are trapped inside (unless they can chill in their gardens). Most social interactions happen between screens, and people go crazy on social media platforms about what is "really going on". An uprising began among ordinary folk regarding the origins of the so-called Covid 19 (and no, it's not the 19th Covid).
Few weeks back a very controversial Interview (some people call it a documentary; I tend to disagree, documentaries try to bring at least some proof to the table) surfaced on YouTube as a broadcast (meaning you could watch it as if it was Live) by London Real (basically a Joe Rogan style podcast channel) with the infamous conspiracy theorist David Icke. In the video, Mr. Icke makes extarordinary claims regarding Covid 19, 5G, Population control etc. The problem I had when the original video aired was that, although Mr. Icke mentioned sources, he did not cite almost anyone (and I researched his website, there's no actual studies cited anywhere to back up his claims), and most of the information seemed from someone who just read a few headlines here and there. (if you pm me I can give you examples, will stick to the story for the moment)
The video gathered millions of views and millions of shares across social media, and hyped a lot of people up against the "tyrant hand of the ones that want to control you", pretty soon people started attacking 5G towers (and if I recall correctly normal cellphone towers as well).
And YouTube did its job. Coronavirus was influencing people and who knew what desperate and angry people would have been capable of. So they deleted the video, to stop its spread. and so did all other platforms (Vimeo, facebook, etc). Rightfully so. What if there was no conspiracy? You hosted videos that encited people to commit crimes, you will be sued for billions and billions and billions (in Trump's voice).
People were outraged. The truth was being silenced. The government did not want to let the people know what's actually going on. Well... not really.. and you'll see why in a second.
[but now from our sponsor RAID Shadow Le... nah I'm kidding]
You see... it all goes back to the guy making the interview. His name is Brian Rose. He is the CEO and Founder of London Real, Dollar Store Joe Rogan (personal opinion based on intreviewing skill), and not many people know this, but he is what's called a "financial guru", basically a guy that, if you pay him a lot of money, will tell you how he made a lot of money by telling people how to make a lot of money (he's in the same boat as Dan Peña, Dan Lok, Tai Lopez etc (you get me). He has a course called the Business Accelerator which costs $2500 and upon researching former students and reviews, it seems all the positive ones are from websites where anyone can submit articles. Then there's the army of people (a lot of them right here on Reddit) who got scammed out of their money, were promised a LIVE Session which was actually a pre-recorded session, requested refunds which they never got and described the contents of the course as "below mediocre". (classic financial guru... the only one making money is the teacher). Also the courses were advertised as 96% completion but had a completion in the mid 40s (from one of the former students). Also, he was involved in some bitcoin scams and is basically banned from almost everwhere on the internet. While trying to find his net worth I found that he might be making about 200-300k a month with his courses (not too hard to imagine that basically the course has 60-70 people and it costs 2.5k).
Now, back to Coronavirus. When the videos got deleted Mr. Rose went on the social media platforms where he wasn't banned yet and yelled: THEY ARE TAKING YOUR FREEDOM. I CAN GIVE YOU FREEDOM: the DIGITAL FREEDOM PLATFORM.
AND EVERYONE FELL FOR IT.
Basically, what he's selling now is a video platform where the videos won't be deleted, and he's asking for donations (of course he is). What astonished me is that he managed to raise about 1 MILLION DOLLARS, which is "to get he platform up and running, get banned guests back on air, and TAKE YOUTUBE TO EU COURT" (you have to be an idiot to fall for that one - sorry - he basically violated the ToS, YouTube has its a$$ covered). Now the problem is the money he says he needs is astronomical. But he technically has lots of money, why does he need YOUR MONEY? (he is a financial guru after all).
I searched the cost of running a Netflix-like website (between 10k and 50k a month) - and he claims his platform has 600 long format videos (nowhere near comparing it to a streaming platform such as Netflix). You, you the one angry that the government was manipulating you just got manipulated into making this 1 million dollars. (there's no way in hell he would win a court of law against YouTube's Terms of Service that he agreed on when making the account). Not only that, Reddit is FULL with people complaining that they tried donating small amounts and then got charged hudreds of dollars, and nobody seemingly operating a refund policy (unless they did chargebacks but that's the long way around it).
You basically paid for a streaming platform where people can say what they want without any quality control. Some might be good interviews, others complete garbage, Unless you RESEARCH for yourself, you will never know. You want freedom of speech? Get ready for a lot of truckload of garbage.
.
.
AND WE ALL FELL FOR IT.

Epilogue: TL/DR:
Brian Rose (fake financial guru and dollar store Joe Rogan) gets the wackiest coronavirus guest he can (david icke) and gets banned off youtube (he knew it would happen) and other platforms, makes himself the victim and offers the solution: for people to help him build a free-thinking video platform (while seriously inflating the costs) even though he can more than afford it so he raises (at the time of me making this article) 1 MILLION DOLLARS.
If this isn't a story worth $997 in a limited seat (everyone gets in don't worry) online LIVE webinar, I don't know what is.
*EDIT: the whole "platform" is a weekly newsletter where you get a new video every week.
*EDIT: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If you claim something the burden of proof is on you to prove it.
Regards,
Ovi.
submitted by ovivalentino to conspiracy [link] [comments]

Shoreline SNORELINE. The impossible task of 3 PMC headshots from 100m.

It is getting ridiculous. I spent multiple raids on interchange a few days ago and got no luck on having people to kill from the required distance. I went to every spot people recommended and gave up after looking around, running around and also sitting for hours.
Now I have done 8 or so raids on SNORELINE, and nobody goes to ANY place but resort anymore, and quite frankly its impossible to get a 100m kill in the joint. I see nobody go to cottages, pier, or anywhere else. Gunshots at the start of the game at resort then the rest of the game its quiet. Nobody extracts on this map apparently, I have watched paths that people would have to cross to get to the extracts and nobody comes. I leave AI alive so I can hear if they get aggro'd from someone. 20 minutes into the game I now realize everyone is probably dead to one guy who went rock passage after killing 5 hatchlings and got himself a nice Grach sidearm from another guy.
The whole ledx shit needs to be spread to the other places on the map. Cottages, pier (add a door that needs a key for that building). Why is it so EASY to get millions worth of loot with nothing on the line?
May as well rename Shoreline to Resort because the rest of the map is not utilized at all simply due to the 1.5m and 30m roubles chance in the rooms. Every other landmark on the map has garbage loot. Yea you might get a bitcoin or graphics card in the cottage or radar, but apart from that's its all trash you might need for a quest at level 5. This is why nobody desires to go to these places.
It cannot be difficult to add more scavs to the Resort for now until the boss and raiders are brought in. Please do that.
One thing you notice about Reserve and Customs is that the bosses/raiders make the game feel alive because the players definitely don't in almost every case. It gives more stuff to do and a random "hotspot" every game for guaranteed PVP.
submitted by Ranoutofcharact7878 to EscapefromTarkov [link] [comments]

Transcript of Bitcoin ABC’s Amaury Sechet presenting at the Bitcoin Cash City conference on September 5th, 2019

Transcript of Bitcoin ABC’s Amaury Sechet presenting at the Bitcoin Cash City conference on September 5th, 2019
I tried my best to be as accurate as possible, but if there are any errors, please let me know so I can fix. I believe this talk is important for all Bitcoin Cash supporters, and I wanted to provide it in written form so people can read it as well as watch the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOv0nmOe1_o For me, this was the first time I felt like I understood the issues Amaury's been trying to communicate, and I hope that reading this presentation might help others understand as well.
Bitcoin Cash’s Culture
“Okay. Hello? Can you hear me? The microphone is good, yeah?
Ok, so after that introduction, I’m going to do the only thing that I can do now, which is disappoint you, because well, that was quite something.
So usually I make technical talks and this time it’s going to be a bit different. I’m going to talk about culture in the Bitcoin Cash ecosystem. So first let’s talk about culture, like what is it? It’s ‘the social behaviors and norms found in human society.’
So we as the Bitcoin Cash community, we are a human society, or at least we look like it. You’re all humans as far as I know, and we have social behaviors and norms, and those social behaviors and norms have a huge impact on the project.
And the reason why I want to focus on that point very specifically is because we have better fundamentals and we have a better product and we are more useful than most other cryptos out there. And I think that’s a true statement, and I think this is a testimony of the success of BCH. But also, we are only just 3% of BTC’s value. So clearly there is something that we are not doing right, and clearly it’s not fundamental, it’s not product, it’s not usefulness. It’s something else, and I think this can be found somewhat in our culture.
So I have this quote here, from Naval Ravikant. I don’t know if you guys know him but he’s a fairly well known speaker and thinker, and he said, “Never trust anyone who does not annoy you from time to time, because it means that they are only telling you what you want to hear.”
And so today I am going to annoy you a bit, in addition to disappointing you, so yeah, it’s going to be very bad, but I feel like we kind of need to do it.
So there are two points, mainly, that I think our culture is not doing the right thing. And those are gonna be infrastructure and game theory. And so I’m going to talk a little bit about infrastructure and game theory.
Right, so, I think there are a few misconceptions by people that are not used to working in software infrastructure in general, but basically, it works like any other kind of infrastructure. So basically all kinds of infrastructure decay, and we are under the assumption that technology always gets better and better and better and never decays. But in terms of that, it actually decays all the time, and we have just a bunch of engineers working at many many companies that keep working at making it better and fighting that decay.
I’m going to take a few examples, alright. Right now if you want to buy a cathode ray tube television or monitor for your computer (I’m not sure why you want to do that because we have better stuff now), but if you want to buy that, it’s actually very difficult now. There are very little manufacturers that even know how to build them. We almost forgot as a human society how to build those stuff. Because, well, there was not as high of a demand for them as there was before, and therefore nobody really worked on maintaining the knowledge or the know how, and the factories, none of that which are required to build those stuff, and therefore we don’t build them. And this is the same for vinyl discs, right? You can buy vinyl disk today if you want, but it’s actually more expensive than it used to be twenty years ago.
We used to have space shuttles. Both Russia and US used to have space shuttles. And now only the US have space shuttles, and now nobody has space shuttles anymore.
And there is an even better counter example to that. It’s that the US, right now, is refining Uranium for nuclear weapons. Like on a regular basis there are people working on that problem. Except that the US doesn’t need any new uranium to make nuclear weapons because they are decommissioning the weapons that are too old and can reuse that uranium to build the new weapon that they are building. The demand for that is actually zero, and still there are people making it and they are just basically making it and storing it forever, and it’s never used. So why is the US spending money on that? Well you would say governments are usually pretty good at spending money on stuff that are not very useful, but in that case there is a very good reason. And the good reason is that they don’t want to forget how it’s done. Because maybe one day it’s going to be useful. And acquiring the whole knowledge of working with uranium and making enriched uranium, refining uranium, it’s not obvious. It’s a very complicated process. It involves very advanced engineering and physics, a lot of that, and keeping people working on that problem ensures that knowledge is kept through time. If you don’t do that, those people are going to retire and nobody will know how to do it. Right.
So in addition to decaying infrastructure from time to time, we can have zero days in software, meaning problems in the software that are not now exploited live on the network. We can have denial of service attack, we can have various failures on the network, or whatever else, so just like any other infrastructure we need people that essentially take care of the problem and fight the decay constantly doing maintenance and also be ready to intervene whenever there is some issue. And that means that even if there is no new work to be done, you want to have a large enough group of people that are working on that everyday just making it all nice and shiny so that when something bad happens, you have people that understand how the system works. So even if for nothing else, you want a large enough set of people working on infrastructure for that to be possible.
So we’re not quite there yet, and we’re very reliant on BTC. Because the software that we’re relying on to run the network is actually a fork to the BTC codebase. And this is not specific to Bitcoin Cash. This is also true for Litecoin, and Dash, and Zcash and whatever. There are many many crypotos that are just a fork of the Bitcoin codebase. And all those crypos they actually are reliant on BTC to do some maintenance work because they have smaller teams working on the infrastructure. And as a result any rational market cannot price those other currencies higher than BTC. It would just not make sense anymore. If BTC were to disappear, or were to fail on the market, and this problem is not addressed, then all those other currencies are going to fail with it. Right? And you know that may not be what we want, but that’s kind of like where we are right now.
So if we want to go to the next level, maybe become number one in that market, we need to fix that problem because it’s not going to happen without it.
So I was mentioning the 3% number before, and it’s always very difficult to know what all the parameters are that goes into that number, but one of them is that. Just that alone, I’m sure that we are going to have a lower value than BTC always as long as we don’t fix that problem.
Okay, how do we fix that problem? What are the elements we have that prevent us from fixing that problem? Well, first we need people with very specific skill sets. And the people that have experience in those skill sets, there are not that many of them because there are not that many places where you can work on systems involving hundreds of millions, if not billions of users, that do like millions of transactions per second, that have systems that have hundreds of gigabytes per second of throughput, this kind of stuff. There are just not that many companies in the world that operate on that scale. And as a result, the number of people that have the experience of working on that scale is also pretty much limited to the people coming out of those companies. So we need to make sure that we are able to attract those people.
And we have another problem that I talked about with Justin Bons a bit yesterday, that we don’t want to leave all that to be fixed by a third party.
It may seem nice, you know, so okay, I have a big company making good money, I’m gonna pay people working on the infrastructure for everybody. I’m gonna hire some old-time cypherpunk that became famous because he made a t-shirt about ERISA and i’m going to use that to promote my company and hire a bunch of developers and take care of the infrastructure for everybody. It’s all good people, we are very competent. And indeed they are very competent, but they don’t have your best interest in mind, they have their best interest in mind. And so they should, right? It’s not evil to have your own interest in mind, but you’ve got to remember that if you delegate that to others, they have their best interest in mind, they don’t have yours. So it’s very important that you have different actors that have different interests that get involved into that game of maintaining the infrastructure. So they can keep each other in check.
And if you don’t quite understand the value proposition for you as a business who builds on top of BCH, the best way to explain that to whoever is doing the financials of your company is as an insurance policy. The point of the insurance on the building where your company is, or on the servers, is so that if everything burns down, you can get money to get your business started and don’t go under. Well this is the same thing. Your business relies on some infrastructure, and if this infrastructure ends up going down, disappearing, or being taken in a direction that doesn’t fit your business, your business is toast. And so you want to have an insurance policy there that insures that the pieces that you’re relying on are going to be there for you when you need them.
Alright let’s take an example. In this example, I purposefully did not put any name because I don’t want to blame people. I want to use this as an example of a mistake that were made. I want you to understand that many other people have done many similar mistakes in that space, and so if all you take from what I’m saying here is like those people are bad and you should blame them, this is like completely the wrong stuff. But I also think it’s useful to have a real life example.
So on September 1st, at the beginning of the week, we had a wave of spam that was broadcasted on the network. Someone made like a bunch of transactions, and those were very visibly transactions that were not there to actually do transactions, they were there just to create a bunch of load on the network and try to disturb its good behavior.
And it turned out that most miners were producing blocks from 2 to 8 megabytes, while typical market demand is below half a megabyte, typically, and everything else above that was just spam, essentially. And if you ask any people that have experience in capacity planning, they are going to tell you that those limits are appropriate. The reason why, and the alternative to raising those limits that you can use to mitigate those side effects are a bit complicated and they would require a talk in and of itself to go into, so I’m going to just use an argument from authority here, but trust me, I know what I’m talking about here, and this is just like raising those limits is just not the solution. But some pool decided to increase that soft cap to 32 megs. And this has two main consequences that I want to dig in to explain what is not the right solution.
And the first one is that we have businesses that are building on BCH today. And those businesses are the ones that are providing value, they are the ones making our network valuable. Right? So we need to treat those people as first class citizens. We need to attract and value them as much as we can. And those people, they find themselves in the position where they can either dedicate their resources and their attention and their time to make their service better and more valuable for users, or maybe expand their service to more countries, to more markets, to whatever, they can do a lot of stuff, or they can spend their time and resources to make sure the system works not when you have like 10x the usual load, but also 100x the usual load. And this is something that is not providing value to them, this is something that is not providing value to us, and I would even argue that this is something that is providing negative value.
Because if those people don’t improve their service, or build new services, or expand their service to new markets, what’s going to happen is that we’re not going to do 100x. 100x happens because people provide useful services and people start using it. And if we distract those people so that they need to do random stuff that has nothing to do with their business, then we’re never going to do 100x. And so having a soft cap that is way way way above what is the usual market demand (32 megs is almost a hundred times what is the market demand for it), it’s actually a denial of service attack that you open for anyone that is building on the chain.
We were talking before, like yesterday we were asking about how do we attract developers, and one of the important stuff is that we need to value that over valuing something else. And when we take this kind of move, the signal that we send to the community, to the people working on that, is that people yelling very loudly on social media, their opinion is more valued than your work to make a useful service building on BCH. This is an extremely bad signal to send. So we don’t want to send those kind of signals anymore.
That’s the first order effect, but there’s a second order effect, and the second order effect is to scale we need people with experience in capacity planning. And as it turns out big companies like Google, and Facebook, and Amazon pay good money, they pay several 100k a year to people to do that work of capacity planning. And they wouldn’t be doing that if they just had to listen to people yelling on social media to find the answer. Right? It’s much cheaper to do the simple option, except the simple option is not very good because this is a very complex engineering problem. And not everybody is like a very competent engineer in that domain specifically. So put yourself in the shoes of some engineers who have skills in that particular area. They see that happening, and what do they see? The first thing that they see is that if they join that space, they’re going to have some level of competence, some level of skill, and it’s going to be ignored by the leaders in that space, and ignoring their skills is not the best way to value it as it turns out. And so because of that, they are less likely to join it. But there is a certain thing that they’re going to see. And that is that because they are ignored, some shit is going to happen, some stuff are going to break, some attacks are going to be made, and who is going to be called to deal with that? Well, it’s them. Right? So not only are they going to be not valued for their stuff, the fact that they are not valued for their stuff is going to put them in a situation where they have to put out a bunch of fires that they would have known to avoid in the first place. So that’s an extremely bad value proposition for them to go work for us. And if we’re going to be a world scale currency, then we need to attract those kinds of people. And so we need to have a better value proposition and a better signaling that we send to them.
Alright, so that’s the end of the first infrastructure stuff. Now I want to talk about game theory a bit, and specifically, Schelling points.
So what is a Schelling point? A Schelling point is something that we can agree on without especially talking together. And there are a bunch of Schelling points that exist already in the Bitcoin space. For instance we all follow the longest chain that have certain rules, right? And we don’t need to talk to each other. If I’m getting my wallet and I have some amount of money and I go to any one of you here and you check your wallet and you have that amount of money and those two amounts agree. We never talk to each other to come to any kind of agreement about how much each of us have in terms of money. We just know. Why? Because we have a Schelling point. We have a way to decide that without really communicating. So that’s the longest chain, but also all the consensus rules we have are Schelling points. So for instance, we accept blocks up to a certain size, and we reject blocks that are bigger than that. We don’t constantly talk to each other like, ‘Oh by the way do you accept 2 mb blocks?’ ‘Yeah I do.’ ‘Do you accept like 3 mb blocks? And tomorrow will you do that?’
We’re not doing this as different actors in the space, constantly worrying each other. We just know there is a block size that is a consensus rule that is agreed upon by almost everybody, and that’s a consensus rule. And all the other consensus rules are effectively changing Schelling points. And our role as a community is to create valuable Schelling points. Right? You want to have a set of rules that provide as much value as possible for different actors in the ecosystem. Because this is how we win. And there are two parts to that. Even though sometimes we look and it’s just one thing, but there are actually two things.
The first one is that we need to decide what is a valuable Schelling point. And I think we are pretty good at this. And this is why we have a lot of utility and we have a very strong fundamental development. We are very good at choosing what is a good Schelling point. We are very bad at actually creating it and making it strong.
So I’m going to talk about that.
How do you create a new Schelling point. For instance, there was a block size, and we wanted a new block size. So we need to create a new Schelling point. How do you create a new Schelling point that is very strong? You need a commitment strategy. That’s what it boils down to. And the typical example that is used when discussing Schelling points is nuclear warfare. So think about that a bit. You have two countries that both have nuclear weapons. And one country sends a nuke on the other country. Destroys some city, whatever, it’s bad. When you look at it from a purely rational perspective, you will assume that people are very angry, and that they want to retaliate, right? But if you put that aside, there is actually no benefit to retaliating. It’s not going to rebuild the city, it’s not going to make them money, it’s not going to give them resources to rebuild it, it’s not going to make new friends. Usually not. It’s just going to destroy some stuff in the other guy that would otherwise not change anything because the other guys already did the damage to us. So if you want nuclear warfare to actually prevent war like we’ve seen mostly happening in the past few decades with the mutually assured destruction theory, you need each of those countries to have a very credible commitment strategy, which is if you nuke me, I will nuke you, and I’m committing to that decision no matter what. I don’t care if it’s good or bad for me, if you nuke me, I will nuke you. And if you can commit to that strongly enough so that it’s credible for other people, it’s most likely that they are not going to nuke you in the first place because they don’t want to be nuked. And it’s capital to understand that this commitment strategy, it’s actually the most important part of it. It’s not the nuke, it’s not any of it, it’s the commitment strategy. You have the right commitment strategy, you can have all the nuke that you want, it’s completely useless, because you are not deterring anyone from attacking you.
There are many other examples, like private property. It’s something usually you’re going to be willing to put a little bit of effort to defend, and the effort is usually way higher than the value of the property itself. Because this is your house, this is your car, this is your whatever, and you’re pretty committed to it, and therefore you create a Schelling point over the fact that this is your house, this is your car, this is your whatever. People are willing to use violence and whatever to defend their property. This is effectively, even if you don’t do it yourself, this is what happens when you call the cops, right? The cops are like you stop violating that property or we’re going to use violence against you. So people are willing to use a very disproportionate response even in comparison to the value of the property. And this is what is creating the Schelling point that allows private property to exist.
This is the commitment strategy. And so the longest chain is a very simple example. You have miners and what miners do when they create a new block, essentially they move from one Schelling point when a bunch of people have some amount of money, to a new Schelling point where some money has moved, and we need to agree to the new Schelling point. And what they do is that they commit a certain amount of resources to it via proof of work. And this is how they get us to pay attention to the new Schelling point. And so UASF is also a very good example of that where people were like we activate segwit no matter what, like, if it doesn’t pan out, we just like busted our whole chain and we are dead.
Right? This is like the ultimate commitment strategy, as far as computer stuff is involved. It’s not like they actually died or anything, but as far as you can go in the computer space, this is very strong commitment strategy.
So let me take an example that is fairly inconsequential in its consequences, but I think explains very well. The initial BCH ticker was BCC. I don’t know if people remember that. Personally I remember reading about it. It was probably when we created it with Jonald and a few other people. And so I personally was for XBC, but I went with BCC, and most people wanted BCC right? It doesn’t matter. But it turned out that Bitfinex had some Ponzi scheme already listed as BCC. It was Bitconnect, if you remember. Carlos Matos, you know, great guy, but Bitconnect was not exactly the best stuff ever, it was a Ponzi scheme. And so as a result Bitifnex decided to list Bitcoin Cash as BCH instead of BCC, and then the ball started rolling and now everybody uses BCH instead of BCC.
So it’s not all that bad. The consequences are not that very bad. And I know that many of you are thinking that right now. Why is this guy bugging us about this? We don’t care if it’s BCC or BCH. And if you’re doing that, you are exactly proving my point.
Because … there are people working for Bitcoin.com here right? Yeah, so Bitcoin.com is launching an exchange, or just has launched, it’s either out right now or it’s going to be out very soon. Well think about that. Make this thought experiment for yourself. Imagine that Bitcoin.com lists some Ponzi scheme as BTC, and then they decide to list Bitcoin as BTN. What do you think would be the reaction of the Bitcoin Core supporter? Would they be like, you know what? we don’t want to be confused with some Ponzi scheme so we’re going to change everything for BTN. No, they would torch down Roger Ver even more than they do now, they would torch down Bitcoin.com. They would insult anyone that would suggest that this was a good idea to go there. They would say that everyone that uses the stuff that is BTC that it’s a ponzi scheme, and that it’s garbage, and that if you even talk about it you are the scum of the earth. Right? They would be extremely committed to whatever they have.
And I think this is a lesson that we need to learn from them. Because even though it’s a ticker, it’s not that important, it’s that attitude that you need to be committed to that stuff if you want to create a strong Schelling point, that allows them to have a strong Schelling point, and that does not allow us to have that strong of a Schelling point.
Okay, so yesterday we had the talk by Justin Bons from Cyber Capital, and one of the first things he said in his talk, is that his company has a very strong position in BCH. And so that changed the whole tone of the talk. You gotta take him seriously because his money is where his mouth is. You know that he is not coming on the stage and telling you random stuff that comes from his mind or tries to get you to do something that he doesn’t try himself. That doesn’t mean he’s right. Maybe he’s wrong, but if he’s wrong, he’s going bankrupt. And you know just for that reason, maybe it’s worth it to listen to it a bit more than some random person saying random stuff when they have no skin in the game.
And it makes him more of a leader in the space. Okay we have some perception in this space that we have a bunch of leaders, but many of them don’t have skin in the game. And it is very important that they do. So when there is some perceived weakness from BCH, if you act as an investor, you are going to diversify. If you act as a leader, you are going to fix that weakness. Right? And so, leaders, it’s not like you can come here and decide well, I’m a leader now. Leaders are leaders because people follow them. It seems fairly obvious, but … and you are the people following the leaders, and I am as well. We decide to follow the opinion of some people more than the opinion of others. And those are the defacto leaders of our community. And we need to make sure that those leaders that we have like Justin Bons, and make sure that they have a strong commitment to whatever they are leading you to, because otherwise you end up in this situation:

https://preview.redd.it/r23dptfobcl31.jpg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=750fbd0f1dc0122d2791accc59f45a235a522444
Where you got a leader, he’s getting you to go somewhere, he has some goal, he has some whatever. In this case he is not that happy with the British people. But he’s like give me freedom or give me death, and he’s going to fight the British, but at the same time he’s like you know what? Maybe this shit isn’t gonna pan out, you gotta make sure you have your backup plan together, you have your stash of British pound here. You know, many of us are going to die, but that’s a sacrifice I’m willing to make.
That’s not the leader that you want.
I’m going to go to two more examples and then we’re going to be done with it. So one of them is Segwit 2x. Segwit 2x came with a time where some people wanted to do UASF. And UASF was essentially people that set up a modified version of their Bitcoin node that would activate segwit on August 1, no matter what. Right? No matter what miners do, no matter what other people do, it’s going to activate segwit. And either I’m going to be on the other fork, or I’m going to be alone and bust. Well, the alternative proposal was segwit 2x. Where people would activate segwit and then increase the size of the block. And what happened was that one of the sides had a very strong commitment strategy, and the other side, instead of choosing a proportional commitment strategy, what they did was that they modified the activation of segwit 2x to be compatible with UASF. And in doing so they both validate the commitment strategy done by the opposite side, and they weaken their own commitment strategy. So if you look at that, and you understand game theory a bit, you know what’s going to happen. Like the fight hasn’t even started and UASF has already won. And when I saw that happening, it was a very important development to me, because I have some experience in game theory, a lot of that, so I understood what was happening, and this is what led me to commit to BCH, which was BCC at the time, 100%. Because I knew segwit 2x was toast, even though it had not even started, because even though they had very strong cards, they are not playing their cards right, and if you don’t play your cards right, it doesn’t matter how strong your cards are.
Okay, the second one is emergent consensus. And the reason I wanted to put those two examples here is because I think those are the two main examples that lead to the fact that BTC have small blocks and we have big blocks and we’re a minority chain. Those are like the two biggest opportunities we had to have big blocks on BTC and we blew both of them for the exact same reason.
So emergent consensus is like an interesting technology that allows you to trade your bigger block without splitting the network. Essentially, if someone starts producing blocks that are bigger than … (video skips) ,,, The network seems to be following the chain that has larger blocks, eventually they’re going to fall back on that chain, and that’s a very clevery mechanism that allows you to make the consensus rules softer in a way, right? When everybody has the same consensus rules, it still remains enforced, but if a majority of people want to move to a new point, they can do so by bringing others with them without creating a fork. That is a very good activation mechanism for changing the block size, for instance, or it can be used to activate other stuff.
There is a problem, though. This mechanism isn’t able to set a new point. It’s a way to activate a new Schelling point when you have one, but it provides no way to decide when and where or to what value or to anything to where we are going. So this whole strategy lacks the commitment aspect of it. And because it lacks the commitment aspect of it, it was unable to activate properly. It was good, but it was not sufficient in itself. It needs to be combined with a commitment strategy. And especially on that one there are some researchers that wrote a whole paper (https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/686.pdf) unpacking the whole game theory that essentially come to that conclusion that it’s not going to set a new size limit because it lacked the commitment aspect of it. But they go on like they model all the mathematics of it, they give you all the numbers, the probability, and the different scenarios that are possible. It’s a very interesting paper. If you want to see, like, because I’m kind of explaining the game theory from a hundred mile perspective, but actually you can deep dive into it and if you want to know the details, they are in there. People are doing that. This is an actual branch of mathematics.
Alright, okay so conclusion. We must avoid to weaken our commitment strategy. And that means that we need to work in a way where first there is decentralization happening. Everybody has ideas, and we fight over them, we decide where we want to go, we put them on the roadmap, and once it’s on the roadmap, we need to commit to it. Because when people want to go like, ‘Oh this is decentralized’ and we do random stuff after that, we actually end up with decentralization, not decentralization in a cooperative manner, but like in an atomization manner. You get like all the atoms everywhere, we explode, we destroy ourself.
And we must require a leader to have skin in the game, so that we make sure we have good leaders. I have a little schema to explain that. We need to have negotiations between different parties, and because there are no bugs, the negotiation can last for a long time and be tumultuous and everything, and that’s fine, that’s what decentralization is looking like at that stage, and that’s great and that makes the system strong. But then once we made a decision, we got to commit to it to create a new Schelling point. Because if we don’t, the new Schelling point is very weak, and we get decentralization in the form of disintegration. And I think we have not been very good to balance the two. Essentially what I would like for us to do going forward is encouraging as much as possible decentralization in the first form. But consider people who participate in the second form, as hostile to BCH, because their behavior is damaging to whatever we are doing. And they are often gonna tell you why we can’t do that because it’s permissionless and decentralized, and they are right, this is permissionless and decentralized, and they can do that. We don’t have to take it seriously. We can show them the door. And not a single person can do that by themself, but as a group, we can develop a culture where it’s the norm to do that. And we have to do that.”
submitted by BCHcain to btc [link] [comments]

Antminer T19 May Not Affect Bitcoin Hash Rate but Keeps Bitmain Ahead

The Antminer T19 by Bitmain may not have a big impact on the Bitcoin network, and it comes out amid the firm’s internal and post-halving uncertainty.
Earlier this week, Chinese mining-hardware juggernaut Bitmain unveiled its new product, an application-specific integrated circuit called Antminer T19. The Bitcoin (BTC) mining unit is the latest to join the new generation of ASICs — state-of-the-art devices designed to mitigate increased mining difficulty by maximizing the terahashes-per-second output.
The Antminer T19 announcement comes amid the post-halving uncertainty and follows the company’s recent problems with its S17 units. So, can this new machine help Bitmain to reinforce its somewhat hobbled position in the mining sector?
T19: The cheaper S19
According to the official announcement, the Antminer T19 features a mining speed of 84 TH/s and a power efficiency of 37.5 joules per TH. The chips used in the new device are the same as those equipped in the Antminer S19 and S19 Pro, though it uses the new APW12 version of the power supply system that allows the device to start up faster.
Bitmain usually markets its Antminer T devices as the most cost-effective ones, while the S-series models are presented as the top of the line in terms of productivity for their respective generation, Johnson Xu — the head of research and analytics at Tokensight — explained to Cointelegraph. According to data from F2Pool, one of the largest Bitcoin mining pools, Antminer T19s can generate $3.97 of profit each day, while Antminer S19s and Antminer S19 Pros can earn $4.86 and $6.24, respectively, based on an average electricity cost of $0.05 per kilowatt-hour.
Antminer T19s, which consume 3,150 watts, are being sold for $1,749 per unit. Antminer S19 machines, on the other hand, cost $1,785 and consume 3,250 watts. Antminer S19 Pro devices, the most efficient of three, are considerably more expensive and go for $2,407. The reason Bitmain is producing another model for the 19 series is due to what is known as "binning" chips, Marc Fresa — the founder of mining firmware company Asic.to — explained to Cointelegraph:
“When chips are designed they are meant to achieve specific performance levels. Chips that fail to hit their target numbers, such as not achieving the power standards or their thermal output, are often ‘Binned.’ Instead of throwing these chips in the garbage bin, these chips are resold into another unit with a lower performance level. In the case of Bitmain S19 chips that don’t make the cutoff are then sold in the T19 for cheaper since they do not perform as well as the counterpart.” The rollout of a new model “has nothing to do with the fact that machines are not selling well,” Fresa went on to argue, citing the post-halving uncertainty: “The biggest reason machines probably are not selling as well as manufacturers would like is because we are on a bit of a tipping point; The halving just happened, the price can go anyway and the difficulty is continuing to drop.” Product diversification is a common strategy for mining hardware producers, given that customers tend to aim for different specifications, Kristy-Leigh Minehan, a consultant and the former chief technology officer of Genesis Mining, told Cointelegraph:
“ASICs don’t really allow for one model as consumers expect a certain performance level from a machine, and unfortunately silicon is not a perfect process — many times you’ll get a batch that performs better or worse than projected due to the nature of the materials. Thus, you end up with 5–10 different model numbers.” It is not yet clear how efficient the 19-series devices are because they have not shipped at scale, as Leo Zhang, the founder of Anicca Research, summed up in a conversation with Cointelegraph. The first batch of S19 units reportedly shipped out around May 12, while the T19 shipments will start between June 21 and June 30. It is also worth noting that, at this time, Bitmain only sells up to two T19 miners per user “to prevent hoarding.”
Hardware problems and competitors
The latest generation of Bitmain ASICs follows the release of the S17 units, which have received mostly mixed-to-negative reviews in the community. In early May, Arseniy Grusha, the co-founder of crypto consulting and mining firm Wattum, created a Telegram group for consumers unsatisfied with the S17 units they purchased from Bitmain. As Grusha explained to Cointelegraph at the time, out of the 420 Antminer S17+ devices his company bought, roughly 30%, or around 130 machines, turned out to be bad units.
Similarly, Samson Mow, the chief strategy officer of blockchain infrastructure firm Blockstream, tweeted earlier in April that Bitmain customers have a 20%–30% failure rate with Antminer S17 and T17 units. “The Antminer 17 series is generally considered not great,” added Zhang. He additionally noted that Chinese hardware company and competitor Micro BT has been stepping on Bitmain’s toes lately with the release of its highly productive M30 series, which prompted Bitmain to step up its efforts:
“Whatsminer gained significant market share in the past two years. According to their COO, in 2019 MicroBT sold ~35% of the network hashrate. Needless to say Bitmain is under a lot of pressure both from competitors and internal politics. They have been working on the 19 series for a while. The specs and price look very attractive.” Minehan confirmed that MicroBT has been gaining traction on the market, but refrained from saying that Bitmain is losing market share as a result: “I think MicroBT is offering option and bringing in new participants, and giving farms a choice. Most farms will have both Bitmain and MicroBT side by side, rather than exclusively host one manufacturer.”
“I would say that MicroBT has taken up the existing market share that Canaan has left,” she added, referring to another China-based mining player that recently reported a net loss of $5.6 million in the first quarter of 2020 and cut the price of its mining hardware by up to 50%.
Indeed, some large-scale operations seem to be diversifying their equipment with MicroBT units. Earlier this week, United States mining firm Marathon Patent Group announced that it had installed 700 Whatsminer M30S+ ASICs produced by MicroBT. However, it is also reportedly waiting for a delivery of 1,160 Antminer S19 Pro units produced by Bitmain, meaning that it also remains loyal to the current market leader.
Will the hash rate be affected?
Bitcoin’s hash rate plummeted 30% soon after the halving occurred as much of the older generation equipment became unprofitable due to the increased mining difficulty. That spurred miners to reshuffle, upgrading their current rigs and selling older machines to places where electricity is cheaper — meaning that some of them had to temporarily unplug.
The situation has stabilized since, with the hash rate fluctuating around 100 TH/s for the past few days. Some experts attribute that to the start of the wet season in Sichuan, a southwest Chinese province where miners take advantage of low hydroelectricity prices between May and October.
The arrival of the new generation of ASICs is expected to drive the hash rate even higher, at least once upgraded units become widely available. So, will the newly revealed T19 model make any impact on the state of the network?
Experts agree that it won’t affect the hash rate to a major degree, as it’s a lower output model compared with the S19 series and MicroBT’s M30 series. Minehan said she doesn’t expect the T19 model “to have a huge impact that’s an immediate cause of concern,” as “most likely this is a run of <3500 units of a particular bin quality.” Similarly, Mark D’Aria, the CEO of crypto consulting firm Bitpro, told Cointelegraph:
“There isn’t a strong reason to expect the new model to significantly affect the hashrate. It might be a slightly more compelling option to a miner with extraordinarily inexpensive electricity, but otherwise they likely would have just purchased an S19 instead.” Bitmain continues to hold leadership despite internal struggle
At the end of the day, manufacturers are always in an arms race, and mining machines are simply commodity products, Zhang argued in a conversation with Cointelegraph:
“Besides price, performance, and failure rate, there are not many factors that can help a manufacturer differentiate from the others. The relentless competition led to where we are today.” According to Zhang, as the iteration rate naturally slows down in the future, there will be more facilities using “creative thermal design such as immersion cooling,” hoping to maximize the mining efficiency beyond just using most powerful machines.
As for now, Bitmain remains the leader of the mining race, despite having to deal with the largely defunct 17 series and an intensifying power struggle between its two co-founders, Jihan Wu and Micree Zhan, which recently resulted in reports of a street brawl.
“Due to its recent internal issues, Bitmain is facing challenges to keep its strong position in the future thus they started to look at other things to expand its industry influences,” Xu told Cointelegraph. He added that Bitmain “will still dominate the industry position in the near future due to its network effect,” although its current problems might allow competitors such as MicroBT to catch up.
Earlier this week, the power struggle inside Bitmain intensified even further as Micree Zhan, an ousted executive of the mining titan, reportedly led a group of private guards to overtake the company’s office in Beijing.
Meanwhile, Bitmain continues to expand its operations. Last week, the mining company revealed it was extending its “Ant Training Academy” certification program to North America, with the first courses set to launch in the fall. As such, Bitmain seems to be doubling down on the U.S.-based mining sector, which has been growing recently. The Beijing-based company already operates what it classifies as “the world’s largest” mining facility in Rockdale, Texas, which has a planned capacity of 50 megawatts that can later be expanded to 300 megawatts.
submitted by melissaBrian0 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Want to start fresh after the crypto crash? Here is a comprehensive guide on how to invest and prosper over the long term.

Well its happened, the crypto market just experienced the worst crash since 2014, the bubble has burst. The idiocy of newbies FOMO-ing into anything with low nominal value lead to endless twitter timelines like this, and now nobody has any idea where the market settles. What do you do now?
In the following weeks it will be a good time to rethink your investment approach and how you arrive at your decisions. Just buying whatever is shilled on Twitter or Reddit and jumping from one crypto to another isn't going to work like it did these last two months.
The good news is that we're finally back closer and closer to our long term moving average which is much more healthy for entrants, the bad news is that the fear might continue compounding if outstanding issues are not dealt with. Tether is the big concern for me personally for reasons I've stated many times, but some relief in the short term may come if the SEC and CFTC meeting on February 6th goes well. Nobody really knows where the bottom is but I think we're now past the "irrational exhuberance" stage and we're entering a period of more serious inspection where cryptos will actually have to prove themselves as useful. I suspect hype artists like CryptoNick and John McAfee will fall out of favor.
But perhaps most importantly use this as a learning experience, don't try to point fingers now. The type of dumb behavior that people were engaging in that was rewarded in a bull market (chasing pumps, going all in on a shillcoin, following hype..etc) could only ever lead to what we are experiencing now. Just like so many people jumped on the crypto bandwagon during the bull run, they will just as quickly jump on whatever bandwagon is to be used to blame for the deflation of the bubble. Nobody who pumped money into garbage without any use case will accept that they themselves with their own investing behavior were the real reason for the gross overvaluation of most cryptocurrencies, and the inevitable crash.
So if you're looking for a fresh start after the massacre (or just want to get in now), here is a guide:

Part A: Making a Investment Strategy

This is your money, put some effort into investing it with an actual strategy. Some simple yet essential advice that should apply to everyone, regardless of individual strategy:
  1. Slow down and research each crypto that you're buying for at least a week.
  2. Don't buy something just because it has risen.
  3. Don't exit a position just because it has declined.
  4. Invest only as much as you can afford to lose.
  5. Prepare enter and exit strategies in advance.
First take some time to think about your ROI target, set your hold periods for each position and how much you are actually ready to risk losing.
ROI targets
A lot of young investors who are in crypto have unrealistic expectations about returns and risk. A lot of them have never invested in any other type of financial asset, and hence many seem to consider a 5-10% ROI in a month to be unexciting.
But its important to temper your hype and realize why we had this exponential growth in the last year and how unlikely it is that we see 10x returns in the next year. What we saw recently was Greater Fool Theory in action. Those unexciting returns of 5-10% a month are much more of the norm, and much more healthy for an alternative investment class.
You can think about setting a target in terms of the market ROI over a relevant holding period and then add or decrease based on your own risk profile.
Example: Calculating a 2 year ROI target
Lets say you want to hold for 2 years now, how could you set a realistic target to strive for? You could look at a historical 2 year return as a base, preferably during a period similar to what we're facing now. Now that we had a major correction, I think we can look at the two year period starting in 2015 after we had the 2014 crash. To calculate a 2 year CAGR starting in 2015:
Year Total Crypto Market Cap
Jan 1, 2015: $5.5 billion
Jan 1, 2017: $18 billion
Compounded annual growth return (CAGR): [(18/5.5)1/2]-1 = 81%
This annual return rate of 81% comes out to about 4.9% compounded monthly. This may not sound exciting to the lambo moon crowd, but it will keep you grounded in reality. You can aim for a higher return (say 2x of that 81% rate) if you choose to take on more risky propositions. I can't tell you what return target you should set for yourself, but just make sure its not depended on you needing to achieve continual near vertical parabolic price action in small cap shillcoins because that isn't sustainable.
Once you have a target you can construct your risk profile (low risk vs. high risk category coins) in your portfolio based on your target.
Risk Management
Everything you buy in crypto is risky, but it still helps to think of these 3 risk categories:
How much risk should you take on? That depends on your own life situation for one, but also it should be proportional to how much expertise you have in both financial analysis and technology.
The general starting point I would recommend is:
Some more core principles on risk management to consider:
You can think of each crypto having a risk factor that is the summation of the general crypto market risk (Rm), but also its own inherent risk specific to its own goals (Ri).
Rt = Rm +Ri
The market risk is something you cannot avoid, it is essentially the risk that is carried by the entire market over things like regulations. What you can minimize though the Ri, the specific risks with your crypto. That will depend on the team composition, geographic risks (for example Chinese coins like NEO carry regulatory risks specific to China), competition within the space and likelihood of adoption and other factors, which I'll describe in Part 2: Crypto Picking Methodology.
Portfolio Allocation
Along with thinking about your portfolio in terms of risk categories described above, I really find it helpful to think about the segments you are in. OnChainFX has some segment categorization but I generally like to bring it down to:
Think about your "Circle of Competence", your body of knowledge that allows you to evaluate an investment. Your ability to properly judge risk and potential is going to largely correlated to your understanding of the subject matter. If you don't know anything about how supply chains functions, how can you competently judge whether VeChain or WaltonChain will achieve adoption? If you don't understand anything about the tech when you read the Cardano paper, are you really able to determine how likely it is to be adopted?
Consider the historic correlations between your holdings. Generally when Bitcoin pumps, altcoins dump but at what rate depends on the coin. When Bitcoin goes sideways we tend to see pumping in altcoins, while when Bitcoin goes down, everything goes down.
You should diversify but really shouldn't be in much more than around 12 cryptos, because you simply don't have enough competency to accurately access the risk across every segment and for every type of crypto you come across. If you have over 20 different cryptos in your portfolio you should probably think about consolidating to a few sectors you understand well.

Part B: Crypto Picking Methodology (Due Dilligence)

Do you struggle on how to fundamentally analyze cryptocurrencies? Here is a 3-step methodology to follow to perform your due dilligence:

Step 1: Filtering and Research

There is so much out there that you can get overwhelmed. The best way to start is to think back to your own portfolio allocation strategy and what you would like to get more off. For example in my view enterprise-focused blockchain solutions will be important in the next few years, and so I look to create a list of various cryptos that are in that segment.
Upfolio has brief descriptions of the top 100 cryptos and is filterable by categories, for example you can click the "Enterprise" category and you have a neat list of VEN, FCT, WTC...etc.
Once you have a list of potential candidates, its time to read about them:
  • Critically evaluate the website. If it's a cocktail of nonsensical buzzwords, if its unprofessional and poorly made, stay away. Always look for a roadmap, compare to what was actually delivered so far. Always check the team, try to find them on LinkedIn and what they did in the past.
  • Read the whitepaper or business development plan. You should fully understand how this crypto functions and how its trying to create value. If there is no use case or if the use case does not require or benefit from a blockchain, move on.
  • Check the blockchain explorer. How is the token distribution across accounts? Are the big accounts selling? Try to figure out who the whales are (not always easy!) and what the foundation/founder account is based on the initial allocation.
  • Look at the Github repos, does it look empty or is there plenty of activity?
  • Search out the subreddit and look at a few Medium or Steem blogs about the coin. How "shilly" is the community, and how much engagement is there between developer and the community?
  • I would also go through the BitcoinTalk thread and Twitter mentions, judge both the length and quality of the discussion.
You can actually filter out a lot of scams and bad investments by simply keeping your eye out on the following red flags:
  • allocations that give way too much to the founder
  • guaranteed promises of returns (Bitcooonnneeeect!)
  • vague whitepapers filled with buzzwords
  • vague timelines and no clear use case
  • Github with no useful code and sparse activity
  • a team that is difficult to find information on

Step 2: Passing a potential pick through a checklist

Once you feel fairly confident that a pick is worth analyzing further, run them through a standardized checklist of questions. This is one I use, you can add other questions yourself:
Crypto Analysis Checklist
What is the problem or transactional inefficiency the coin is trying to solve?
What is the Dev Team like? What is their track record? How are they funded, organized?
How big is the market they're targeting?
Who is their competition and what does it do better?
What is the roadmap they created and how well have they kept to it?
What current product exists?
How does the token/coin actually derive value for the holder? Is there a staking mechanism or is it transactional?
Is there any new tech, and is it informational or governance based?
Can it be easily copied?
What are the weaknesses or problems with this crypto?
The last question is the most important.
This is where the riskiness of your crypto is evaluated, the Ri I talked about above. Here you should be able to accurate place the crypto into one of the three risk categories. I also like to run through this checklist of blockchain benefits and consider which specific properties of the blockchain are being used by the specific crypto to provide some increased utility over the current transactional method:
Benefits of Cryptocurrency
Decentralization - no need for a third party to agree or validate transactions.
Transparency and trust - As blockchain are shared, everyone can see what transactions occur. Useful for something like an online casino.
Immutability - It is extremely difficult to change a transaction once its been put onto a blockchain
Distributed availability - The system is spread on thousands of nodes on a P2P network, so its difficult to take the system down.
Security - cryptographically secured transactions provide integrity
Simplification and consolidation - a blockchain can serve as a shared ledger in industries where multiple entities previously kept their own data sources
Quicker Settlement - In the financial industry when we're dealing with post-trade settlement, a blockchain can drastically increase the speed of verification
Cost - in some cases avoiding a third party verification would drastically reduce costs.

Step 3: Create a valuation model

You don't need to get into full modeling or have a financial background. Even a simple model that just tries to derive a valuation through relative terms will put you above most crypto investors. Some simple valuation methods that anyone can do:
Probablistic Scenario Valuation
This is all about thinking of scenarios and probability, a helpful exercise in itself. For example: Bill Miller, a prominent value investor, wrote a probabilistic valuation case for Bitcoin in 2015. He looked at two possible scenarios for probabalistic valuation:
  1. becoming a store-of-value equal to gold (a $6.4 trillion value), with a .25% probability of occurring
  2. replacing payment processors like VISA, MasterCard, etc. (a $350 million dollar value) with a 2.5% probability
Combining those scenarios would give you the total expected market cap: (0.25% x 6.4 trillion) + (2.5% x 350 million). Divide this by the outstanding supply and you have your valuation.
Metcalfe's Law
Metcalfe's Law which states that the value of a network is proportional to the square of the number of connected users of the system (n2). So you can compare various currencies based on their market cap and square of active users or traffic. We can alter this to crypto by thinking about it in terms of both users and transactions:
For example, compare the Coinbase pairs:
Metric Bitoin Ethereum Litecoin
Market Cap $152 Billion $93 Billion $7.3 Billion
Daily Transactions (last 24hrs) 249,851 1,051,427 70,397
Active Addresses (Peak 1Yr) 1,132,000 1,035,000 514,000
Metcalfe Ratio (Transactions Based) 2.43 0.08 1.47
Metcalfe Ratio (Address Based) 0.12 0.09 0.03
Generally the higher the ratio, the higher the valuation given for each address/transaction.
Market Cap to Industry comparisons
Another easy one is simply looking at the total market for the industry that the coin is supposedly targeting and comparing it to the market cap of the coin. Think of the market cap not only with circulating supply like its shown on CMC but including total supply. For example the total supply for Dentacoin is 1,841,395,638,392, and when multiplied by its price in early January we get a market cap that is actually higher than the entire industry it aims to disrupt: Dentistry.
More complex valuation models
If you would like to get into more fleshed out models with Excel, I highly recommend Chris Burniske's blog about using Quantity Theory of Money to build an equivalent of a DCF analysis for crypto.
Here is an Excel file example of OMG done by Nodar Janashia using Chris' model .
You should create multiple scenarios with multiple assumptions, both positive and negative. Have a base scenario and then moderately optimistic/pessimistic and highly optimistic/pessimistic scenario.
Personally I like to see at least a 50% upward potential before investing from my moderately pessimistic scenario, but you can set your own safety margin.
The real beneficial thing about modelling isn't even the price or valuation comparisons it spits out, but that it forces you to think about why the coin has value and what your own assumption about the future are. For example the discount rate you apply to the net present utility formula drastically affects the valuation, and it reflects your own assumptions of how risky the crypto is. What exactly would be a reasonable discount rate? What about the digital economy you are assuming for the coin, what levers affects its size and adoption and how likely are your assumptions to come true? You'll be a drastically more intelligent investor if you think about the fundamental variables that give your coin the market cap you think it should hold.

Summing it up

The time for lambo psychosis is over. But that's no reason to feel down, this is a new day and what many were waiting for. I've put together in one place here how to construct a portfolio allocation (taking into consideration risk and return targets), and how to go through a systematic crypto picking method. I'm won't tell you what to buy, you should always decide that for yourself and DYOR. But as long as you follow a rational and thorough methodology (feel free to modify anything I said above to suit your own needs) you will feel pretty good about your investments, even in times like these.
Edit: Also get a crypto prediction ferret. You won't regret it.
submitted by arsonbunny to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

All Of The Weedcoins, POT, THC, SMOKE, PRG, TKS, DOPE, CANN, MRJA, GRWI, KUSH, GRMD, CCN, STV, CNNC, BGR, MAR, BLAZR, BUBO, are Shitcoins

All Of The Weedcoins, POT, THC, SMOKE, PRG, TKS, DOPE, CANN, MRJA, GRWI, KUSH, GRMD, CCN, STV, CNNC, BGR, MAR, BLAZR, BUBO, are Shitcoins

https://preview.redd.it/r6nvz6g643521.png?width=594&format=png&auto=webp&s=35fc73c6393a7d3f884ed40aba5e5fc2193be304
https://cryptoiq.co/all-of-the-weedcoins-pot-thc-smoke-prg-tks-dope-cann-mrja-grwi-kush-grmd-ccn-stv-cnnc-bgr-mar-blazr-bubo-are-shitcoins/
The War On Shitcoins Episode 7: Weed-Themed Coins including Including PotCoin (POT), Paragon (PRG), SMOKE, Tokes (TKS), HempCoin (THC), Marijuana Coin (MAR), CannabisCoin (CANN), CannaCoin (CCN), DopeCoin (DOPE), BlazerCoin (BLAZR), GreenMed (GRMD), Growers International (GRWI), Cannation (CNNC), Bongger (BGR), Sativacoin (STV), KushCoin (KUSH), GangaCoin (MRJA), Budbo (BUBO). The war on shitcoins is a Crypto.IQ series that targets and shoots down cryptocurrencies that are not worth investing in either due to their being scams, having serious design flaws, being centralized, or in general just being worthless copies of other cryptocurrencies. There are thousands of shitcoins that are ruining the markets, and Crypto.IQ intends to expose all of them. The crypto space needs an exorcism, and we are happy to provide it.
There are numerous cryptocurrencies that are nothing more than copies of other cryptocurrencies with marijuana logos slapped on. Perhaps the developers of these cryptocurrencies were running dry and decided to do an ICO or premine in order to fill their war chest with marijuana. Whatever the motives may be, the human race has created 18 weed-themed cryptocurrencies. Each one will be reviewed and properly burned below.
Potcoin (POT) is one of the earliest marijuana-themed cryptocurrencies, having launched in 2014, and has a market cap of $2.7 million. Shockingly, the POT market cap approached $100 million during the 2017 crypto craze. POT is branded as a global solution for the $100 billion global marijuana industry, but obviously, the global marijuana industry has never embraced Potcoin based on the volume of less than $3,000 per day as of this writing. It is actually nonsensical that marijuana enthusiasts would want to be holding and transacting POT since having POT labeled on all of their transactions is much less anonymous than using Bitcoin. POT started as PoW and eventually switched to PoS and has no unique capabilities or characteristics. Since POT’s only unique trait is a weed logo, it is clearly a shitcoin. For each weed-themed cryptocurrency CryptoIQ will give it a classification stoners understand. Since POT is one of the earliest and most popular weed coins and has the second highest weed coin market cap, the classification is burning blunt.
HempCoin (THC) is not far behind POT, with a market cap of $2.3 million and similar minuscule volume of $12,000 per day. THC launched in 2014 and is meant to revolutionize the weed and hemp industry by providing a decentralized payment system. Like POT, there is no reason marijuana entrepreneurs would choose to transact with THC versus Bitcoin, especially since liquidity is so low they would lose money. Apparently, THC is PoW and PoS, but has no unique capabilities. The classification of THC is half-smoked blunt.
SMOKE has a market cap of $840,000 and is listed on some decentralized exchanges. It seems like SMOKE is meant to be the weed version of Steemit. It appears the website did launch and is functioning as a social network for stoners, who can smoke and earn SMOKE. Perhaps SMOKE has potential, so it gets the classification fresh pinner joint. However, the entire concept of people motivating each other to smoke drugs to earn cryptocurrency seems like something the world does not need.
Paragon (PRG) is a bit more advanced than the other weed coins since it integrates smart contract technology and can be used to build dApps for the marijuana industry. Perhaps PRG can be nicknamed Weedthereum. PRG has the highest weed coin market cap at $5.2 million although volume is only $21,000 per day. The SEC stomped on PRG’s blunt and issued severe penalties for the unregistered ICO. PRG must return investments to the investors, and since $12 million was raised and PRG has lost over half that value, it seems Paragon is at risk of going bankrupt. This yields the classification of blunt soaked with trash juice.
Tokes (TKS) is a weed coin launched via the WAVES blockchain that has a market cap of $775,000 but less than $400 per day of daily trading volume. Someone dumping the TKS they received from selling a QP of weed could crash the market. Apparently, TKS aims to be a supply chain tracking tool for the marijuana industry, in addition to being a compliant currency for dispensaries, but it is obviously not used much. For now, TKS is classified as hitting a roach.
DopeCoin (DOPE) launched way back in 2014 and today is practically dead with a market cap near $420,000 (seriously) and less than $1,000 of daily trading volume. DOPE transitioned from a PoW to PoS cryptocurrency, and the website is poorly made, unlike the weed coins listed above which have well-built websites. There are no redeeming qualities to DOPE, and its classification is accidentally inhaled the roach.
CannabisCoin (CANN) has a market cap less than $400,000 and volume less than $4,000 per day. CANN’s goal is to be used to purchase marijuana at dispensaries, and there used to be a product line of weed strains called CANNdy which were supposed to be traded at one gram per one CANN. Now one CANN is worth half of a penny, so that probably did not work out well. Shockingly, CANN’s market cap hit $30 million in early January 2018, so it has seen an epic collapse this year. This gives CANN the classification paid for fireweed but got schwag.
GanjaCoin (MRJA) is the first weed coin in the list that is nearly dead. Based on the Bitcointalk thread, it is listed on a couple of obscure exchanges. GanjaCoin had ambitious plans to open a dispensary in which each gram of weed was backed by one MRJA. GangaCoin is unique among the weed coins since it used masternodes, much like Dash. It is obvious that practically no one is using MRJA, giving it the classification old roach in a storm drain.
Growers International (GRWI) is designed for marijuana growers and has some increased capabilities versus other weed coins such as smart contracts, a blockchain repository for cannabis strains, and supply tracking from seed to sale. The idea is legitimate, but the market cap of $88,000 and less than $1,000 of daily trading volume indicates GRWI has failed to take root. This is perhaps due to a swap to an ERC-20 token being required to use any of the dApps, since apparently, the developers could not do it on their own chain. The swap does not appear to be going well, and therefore, GRWI is classified as burnt fingers on the roach.
KushCoin (KUSH) is a weed coin that had Weedthereum aspirations, but now the website is dead, the devs have disappeared behind a cloud of weed smoke, and KUSH has been completely delisted. The only appropriate classification is roach buried in a garbage dump.
GreenMed (GRMD) has a market history similar to the half-life of radioactive waste, and currently has a market cap of only $40,000 and daily trading volume less than $300. Apparently GreenMed is among the cryptocurrencies that aimed to have an attached debit card, and just like TenX and Monaco, this ended up being disastrous. The website has been converted to a simple marijuana e-commerce store with no mention of cryptocurrency, indicating the developers gave up on the crypto debit card idea. GRMD seems to be completely dead, and the classification is roach thrown out of a car on the highway.
CannaCoin (CCN) is a PoS cryptocurrency with probably no people staking. It may be listed on a random obscure exchange. It appears CCN did not have any unique characteristics yet still hit a market cap of $2 million in January 2018. This is more proof of how detached from reality the crypto rally was since now CCN is certainly dead. The classification is roach at the bottom of a trash can filled with garbage.
SativaCoin (STV) has no redeeming qualities, despite being named after a potent strain of marijuana. It was PoS, and that’s about it. During the crypto rally STV nearly hit a $1 million market cap, but the developer team is gone and presumably smoking the portion of the market cap they cashed out. STV is completely delisted and valueless, giving it the classification shredded roach on the side of the road soaked with trash juice.
Cannation (CNNC) raised less than a Bitcoin during their mid-2017 ICO, perhaps enough to smoke the dev team out for a month, and now the website is gone. CNNC was just a PoW/PoS hybrid that had no unique capabilities. Really, CNNC is an obvious ICO scam, giving it the classification bought a weed roach but got a spice roach.
Bongger (BGR) is named after someone taking a huge rip from a marijuana water pipe, and perhaps that is exactly what the dev team is doing since the devs are still around four years after launch and seem chill about the fact that BGR is worth nothing. The classification for this cryptocurrency is passed out on the couch and covered with doritos.
Marijuanacoin (MAR) hit a market cap of $900,000 in January 2018, perhaps for no other reason than it has the word marijuana in its name. The MAR dev briefly showed up in October 2017 and proposed to hard fork the blockchain, and apparently asked for donations, before disappearing forever. MAR continues to be listed on Cryptopia but has no volume, meaning it is worthless. This gives MAR the classification wind gust blows your joint into a lake.
BlazerCoin (BLAZR) has no website and no announcement thread but is listed on YoBit despite zero volume. This gives BLAZR the special classification prison joint made of toilet paper and the scrapings from a green apple.
Budbo (BUBO) is listed on Cryptopia and HitBTC, with a whopping $63 of volume, enough to buy an eighth. Budbo is branded as a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) for the weed industry. BUBO was sold in an ICO, and appears to have collected a whopping $37 million from investors. This is perhaps since the ICO occurred in late December 2017 and January 2018, when investors were overloaded with cash and enthusiasm. The developers still periodically show up and say they are “working on it,” but nothing has been developed, and the website is mediocre. Budbo is certainly the biggest scam in weed coin history and therefore earns the classification got mugged by drug dealer.
submitted by turtlecane to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Don't let the current price and marketcap 'rank' fool you...

Sadly, I see a lot of people who bought into Neblio near it's highs or people who are newly discovering Neblio and they're being discouraged by the following:
  1. Price Drop: While every project that was active prior to the start of the market crash in early 2018 saw it's price drop heavily, NEBL's overall price drop has fallen quite drastically. However, it's simply not fair to judge the project by it's price drop - the ENTIRE market dropped - from the king & first mover in Bitcoin, to literally every single altcoin.
  2. Extent of the Price Drop: People tend to resort to, "Yeah, Bitcoin dropped 6x it's value, but NEBL dropped XXX times it's value!" This isn't a fair unit of measure, actually, it's a bullshit unit of measure because the entire space is speculation driven. In the traditional stock market, it would be fair to be spooked by a company who's rank in market cap drastically fell because investors will abandon based off of the company's PERFORMANCE - tanking sales, scandals, a tainted product, massive lawsuits, etc. However, almost NONE of the ENTIRE crypto space has a project that is ACTUALLY GENERATING REVENUE! If Amazon was not generating a return for the company - Amazon would not be worth shit and Jeff Bezos would be broke. However, Amazon makes BILLIONS in sales revenue profits, advertisement revenue, ad-share, etc. All of this revenue = company earnings = company profits = investor dividends. The more profitable and successful a company is, the more investors are willing to pay to own shares in the company to benefit from those returns. There's not a SINGLE PROJECT in the top 500 that is actively generating revenue and profits by being used by the consumer, market, or anywhere else in the world. There's NO performance record, there's NO earnings revenue, there's NOTHING. What makes people buy? SPECULATION. Every. Single. Project. in this entire market is SPECULATION driven. You know why Neblio fell from top 100 to 395? Because when it was in the top 100, there were only 1,300 different crypto tokens - now there's 2,900. Is it Neblio's fault that 1,600 jackass projects have entered the space and the noobs in this market will flood into anything new and shiny in hopes of lambo's? No, we had numerous forks that put projects ahead of Neblio, we had DEX launches pumping new coins that went ahead of Neblio, we have two dozen stable coins created since Neblio's high that went ahead, and then we had another 1,500 projects who people simply buy because it's 'new' and they think it has to go up before it can go down.
  3. But other projects didn't fall as much... This is where we get into the one 'negative' of Neblio - brand awareness and brand marketing. Brand awareness & marketing costs MONEY. Advertisements cost money, influencers cost money, many write-ups today on prominent crypto outlets cost money. Even most partnerships. - cost money. New exchange listings to reach new buyers? You guessed it - costs money. The Neblio team, does not partake in this. Actually, they don't partake in ANY of this. While this absolutely SUCKS in the short time, they're brilliant for it in the long run. Eddy and the team aren't morons - they're fully aware that marketing and brand awareness is crucial. However, timing is more important. Since marketing costs money (a lot of money in this market), why would you waste resources and team money when the bear market has no definite end in sight? Imagine if they pulled out all the stops as soon as their rank started to fall - paid exchange after exchange, paid influencer after influencer to keep the project in front of the audience, paid for the expensive forum and crypto website ads/banners/write-ups. How long would that hold? People would have bought in, the rank would have held through February, March, April 2018...then what? As the articles get old, the ads expire, the presence drops as new projects do the same...what happens? People sell, the price drops, people panic sell, and the same end result happens. Maybe they start it when they fell to 150 in mid 2018? Do you think that would have held until now, the last quarter of 2019? Nope, because we're still in the bear market and Bitcoin has it's LARGEST market dominance since early 2017. Any marketing would have been an absolute WASTE up to this point and a waste of team money. While everyone is blowing their money to hold a nice rank and marketcap with garbage daily volume, they'll go broke while teams like Neblio have the bulk of their funding and capital saved for the future.
  4. What's the positive? Neblio is doing what counts - coding. The Neblio team codes and develops RELENTLESSLY - they pump out more quality code per developer more than every single project in crypto except for maybe a 10 to 15 projects. Neblio is BUILDING what matters - the code, the network. When the hype of the other projects that pushed Neblio's rank down fall and fail, and they will, the GENUINE projects will be what remain standing. Rank changes fast in this space, VERY fast. I'm a big supporter of Crypterium (full disclosure, I hold CRPT and am an ICO buyer) - a project that a few months ago was in the rank of 300's with it's earliest supporters screaming scam and failure, to now having largely sustained volume and broke into the top 100 today. This market changes fast and when the bull market is truly back, as the shit projects begin dropping off without any actual product, the REAL projects with REAL systems and blockchain solutions will THRIVE and explode upward. Crypterium was down 46 times from it's ATH, and in a matter of only a few months it's down 6 times from ATH. 46 times to 6 times and inside the bear market. So STOP worrying about price.
  5. Price changes quickly and is NOT what it appears. This part is important in understanding how insignicant current price is. Right now, one NEBL is $0.47 - that is down 138 TIMES from it's all time high. That looks fucking ALARMING! But is it? Let's look at total market cap distribution. Neblio's price right now, is based off it's rank position of #393 - which gives it a $7 million market cap. This is where the price is down 138 times. But, during the first week of January 2018, the #393 ranked project had a market cap rank of $24 million - just because of the distribution of total market cap across the entire market. If Neblio sat in it's exact same rank right now, and the market returned to $850 billion - Neblio's price would jump to $1.61 JUST from distribution of the higher market cap. That would make Neblio down 'only' 40 times from it's ATH as compared to 138 times it's currently down, while staying at the same rank. Now, like the Crypterium example above - we see how fast a project can fly up in rank based off of news, partnerships, performance, etc. So stop letting price and how far a project has 'fallen', discourage you from buying into a legitimate project. The reality is that if the total market cap returns to it's previous ATH, Neblio only needs to get to the rank of #150 to be down only 5 times from it's ATH.
Stop letting present price dictate your views. Look at what matters, and ONLY what matters - project DEVELOPMENT. If the github and coding ever stalls and stops, then you can worry. For now? Stfu. Code is all that matters, don't be one of these noobs buying into hype and hype communities. You should be thankful they didn't blow project funds on hype campaigns and marketing during the current bear market. We'll have a bankroll while hundreds of other projects go bust.
submitted by GreatWhiteBuffal_o to Neblio [link] [comments]

Why is it so difficult to get bitcoin

Alright so I am trying to get just like $500 worth of bitcoin and it’s been a nightmare. Coinbase is the most garbage company I’ve ever ran into. They are handing millions of dollars but they offer no customer support over the phone? No thanks. Also trying to put in money with Gemini and people have said that it can take months to get your ID verified. I truly believe the biggest long term setback for bitcoin, and probably the reason it never makes it mainstream, is that it is incredibly difficult to get into. I’m an engineer in my 20s and consider myself above average in terms of being tech savvy, but I’m not quite sure how all of you saying that BTC is going to the moon can say that while realizing that getting BTC is a huge multi-week struggle and Wells Fargo is 2 blocks away
submitted by irishhuskers007 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Subreddit Stats: CryptoTechnology top posts from 2017-12-23 to 2020-01-20 15:51 PDT

Period: 758.36 days
Submissions Comments
Total 956 13660
Rate (per day) 1.26 18.01
Unique Redditors 584 3144
Combined Score 21553 44566

Top Submitters' Top Submissions

  1. 1166 points, 43 submissions: Neophyte-
    1. "Do you need a Blockchain?" - this paper is fantastic, everyone should read this before evaluating a coin and if requires a block chain to solve a solution the coin is promising to solve. (136 points, 41 comments)
    2. Do any of you foresee a crypto being widely adopted as a general purpose payment coin? nano, btc, btccash etc (take your pick). I think it won't happen for reasons in this post. What do you think? (59 points, 54 comments)
    3. Noticed the huge rise of EOS lately what does it have over NEO and ethereum and to a lesser extent Cardano? I tried researching it, but wasn't sold. (54 points, 55 comments)
    4. Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later ~Vitalik (46 points, 1 comment)
    5. I had a Q&A with Bruno head architect / CEO of oyster, thought you guys might like it. (45 points, 2 comments)
    6. A good article that explains in simple terms how Eth2 works, how it will be rolled out and migrated from eth1 (42 points, 4 comments)
    7. DAI the stablecoin can now be transferred GAS free (article explaining how it works via new MCD DAI contract). This holds alot of promise for the so called "Web3" (40 points, 8 comments)
    8. Veriblock is consuming 27% of bitcoins block space - what does this mean for bitcoins future? (39 points, 16 comments)
    9. Vitalik: Alternative proposal for early eth1 <-> eth2 merge (38 points, 3 comments)
    10. Is launching a PoW permissionless blockchain still possible today? or would it be too susceptible to a 51% attack? (37 points, 37 comments)
  2. 578 points, 16 submissions: crypto_ha
    1. Why is Ripple considered a cryptocurrency (by many)? (109 points, 63 comments)
    2. So reportedly there are serious vulnerabilities found in EOS’ code. And it seems like those are more than just random software bugs. (97 points, 29 comments)
    3. Guide: How to get started with Blockchain development? (60 points, 6 comments)
    4. A newly found vulnerability in Nano's Android wallet (44 points, 12 comments)
    5. The history and state of Ethereum's Casper research - Vitalik Buterin (39 points, 4 comments)
    6. What is the difference between Sidechain vs Child Chain vs Off Chain? (39 points, 12 comments)
    7. EOS mainnet is official live (finally), but... (36 points, 24 comments)
    8. Bitcoin's "doomsday" economics - Bank of International Settlements (34 points, 23 comments)
    9. How Wall Street’s embrace could undermine Bitcoin (30 points, 9 comments)
    10. Ethereum ERC 1497: DApp Dispute Evidence Standard (24 points, 0 comments)
  3. 513 points, 20 submissions: ndha1995
    1. Ethereum Classic is currently being 51% attacked (103 points, 31 comments)
    2. Why are there so many garbage posts the past 24 hours? (58 points, 10 comments)
    3. Google Unveils 72-Qubit Quantum Processor With Low Error Rates (48 points, 24 comments)
    4. IOTA's Network-Bound PoW consensus, is it feasible? (42 points, 13 comments)
    5. The Challenges of Investigating Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain Related Crime (29 points, 7 comments)
    6. Deep dive into zk-STARKs with Vitalik Buterin's blog posts (26 points, 3 comments)
    7. Tether discussion thread (26 points, 21 comments)
    8. Vitalik Buterin Proposes a Consensus Algorithm That Requires Only 1% to Be Honest (24 points, 8 comments)
    9. Can somebody compare Qtum vs. NEO, technology-wise? (E.g. PoS vs. PoW; smart contract protocols...) (21 points, 15 comments)
    10. Introduction to Non Fungible Tokens (NFTs) (21 points, 9 comments)
  4. 377 points, 16 submissions: turtleflax
    1. Around 13% of DASH's privateSends are traceable to their origin (69 points, 3 comments)
    2. "Big Bang" attack could leverage Monero's dynamic blocksize to bloat the blockchain to 30TB in only 36 hours (52 points, 3 comments)
    3. The case for the obsolescence of Proof of Work and why 2018 will be the year of Proof of Stake (41 points, 29 comments)
    4. Monero vs PIVX: The First Scheduled Privacy Coin Debate Thread on /CryptoCurrency (38 points, 12 comments)
    5. Introducing the Privacy Coin Matrix, a cross-team collaboration comparing 20 privacy coins in 100 categories (26 points, 25 comments)
    6. Do permissioned blockchains have any merits? (25 points, 23 comments)
    7. The State of Hashing Algorithms — The Why, The How, and The Future (21 points, 4 comments)
    8. How Zerocoin Works in 5 Minutes (19 points, 5 comments)
    9. Errors made by Satoshi (17 points, 8 comments)
    10. How Much Privacy is Enough? Threats, Scaling, and Trade-offs in Blockchain Privacy Protocols - Ian Miers (Cornell Tech, Zerocoin, Zerocash) (17 points, 4 comments)
  5. 321 points, 6 submissions: Qwahzi
    1. Technical comparison of LIGHTNING vs TANGLE vs HASHGRAPH vs NANO (133 points, 37 comments)
    2. Addressing Nano's weaknesses (bandwidth usage and disk IO). Nano voting traffic to be reduced by 99.9% by implementing vote by hash, lazy bootstrapping, and reduced vote rebroadcasting (x-post CryptoCurrency) (78 points, 8 comments)
    3. Emergent centralization due to economies of scale (PoW vs DPoS) – Colin LeMahieu (52 points, 37 comments)
    4. Nano community member developing a distributed "mining" service to pay people to do PoW for third-parties (e.g. exchanges, light wallet services, etc) (32 points, 20 comments)
    5. What do you think about OpenCAP, the cryptocurrency alias protocol that mirrors traditional email addresses? (15 points, 12 comments)
    6. Bitcoin would be a calamity, not an economy (11 points, 52 comments)
  6. 256 points, 4 submissions: rockyrainy
    1. Bitcoin Gold hit by Double Spend Attack (51% attack). The Attacker reversed 22 blocks. (179 points, 102 comments)
    2. ZK-starks white paper published (44 points, 16 comments)
    3. [Q] How does a network reach consensus on what time it is? (21 points, 17 comments)
    4. Stateless (no history) Cryptocurrency via snapshots? (12 points, 7 comments)
  7. 244 points, 3 submissions: HSPremier
    1. From a technical standpoint: Why does every blockchain projects need their own coins? (181 points, 50 comments)
    2. What is Reddit's obsession with REQ? (61 points, 43 comments)
    3. What is the technological difference between a privacy coin and a privacy coin platform? Won't a privacy coin platform be more superior than a privacy coin? (2 points, 3 comments)
  8. 234 points, 2 submissions: Realness100
    1. A Guided Reading of Bitcoin’s Original White Paper (202 points, 10 comments)
    2. A Guided Reading of Ethereum's Original White Paper! (32 points, 5 comments)
  9. 185 points, 4 submissions: tracyspacygo
    1. My brief observation of most common Consensus Algorithms (159 points, 49 comments)
    2. What are the main Trends/Challenges for Bitcoin and whole crytpocurrencies industry? (12 points, 33 comments)
    3. Guideline for Newbies: Trying out Bitcoin transactions with TESTNET (7 points, 1 comment)
    4. Most advanced Cryptocurrencies Comparison Table (7 points, 8 comments)
  10. 177 points, 9 submissions: benmdi
    1. What's the best argument against cryptotechnology? I.e. Steelman the cryptocurrency skeptic (43 points, 42 comments)
    2. Would there be interest from this community in crypto resources aimed at developers? If so, what topics? (29 points, 14 comments)
    3. Has the window for bootstrapping a new PoW coin closed? (24 points, 57 comments)
    4. What can we, as a community, learn from the rise & acquisition of GitHub (23 points, 8 comments)
    5. 🍱 Rollup Roundup: Understanding Ethereum's Emerging Layer 2 (19 points, 1 comment)
    6. Video Tutorial: Introducing An Experience Dev To Smart Contract Coding (17 points, 3 comments)
    7. Do we need a blockchain to be decentralized? What questions would you ask a self described fan of decentralization, but blockchain skeptic? (11 points, 19 comments)
    8. ETH Block Rewards And Second Order Effects On Hardware Availability (7 points, 8 comments)
    9. Which Of The Big Tech Companies Is Most Likely To Bring Crypto Mainstream? Here's Why I Think It's Apple (4 points, 7 comments)
  11. 175 points, 9 submissions: galan77
    1. Is the Lightning Network a massive threat to the blockchain? (49 points, 66 comments)
    2. TPS of Lightning Network vs. Sharding, which one does better? (28 points, 7 comments)
    3. Are there any major downsides to sharding? (21 points, 33 comments)
    4. What's the difference between trustlessness and permissionlessness (19 points, 7 comments)
    5. Which consensus algorithm is the best, PoW, PoS, PoAuthority, PoAsset? (18 points, 57 comments)
    6. How can XRP reach 50,000 TPS when they have no sharding and every node has to validate every single transaction. (15 points, 14 comments)
    7. A few questions about the Lightning Network (14 points, 6 comments)
    8. Pascalcoin can do 72,000 tps apparently. Is this legit? The new Nano? (8 points, 39 comments)
    9. How does Ripple's (XRB's) consensus algorithm Proof of Correctness work, are there any downsides? (3 points, 23 comments)
  12. 175 points, 1 submission: ilielezi
    1. Why white papers in crypto world are so unprofessional? (175 points, 88 comments)
  13. 165 points, 6 submissions: CryptoMaximalist
    1. Facebook's Libra (48 points, 55 comments)
    2. “Fake Stake” attacks on some Proof-of-Stake cryptocurrencies responsibly disclosed by researchers from the Decentralized Systems Lab at UIUC (31 points, 9 comments)
    3. Quantum Computing and the Cryptography in Crypto (27 points, 14 comments)
    4. PING and REJECT attacks on ZCash (Patch available) | Stanford Applied Crypto Group (22 points, 1 comment)
    5. Introduction to Cryptography: Part 1 - Jinglan Wang (19 points, 1 comment)
    6. New site howmanyconfs.com shows the amount of time and confirmations of Proof of Work coins to match 6 confirmations on Bitcoin (18 points, 11 comments)
  14. 163 points, 10 submissions: GainsLean
    1. Videos For Developers Who Want To Learn Blockchain In A Practical Way (36 points, 17 comments)
    2. What Do You Want To Learn? (32 points, 20 comments)
    3. Get Involved With The Smart Contract Coding Challenge (25 points, 4 comments)
    4. Solution To $10K Art Prize (25 points, 3 comments)
    5. Blockchain Course Outline Has Been Released - Feedback warranted (22 points, 12 comments)
    6. Introduction To Distributed Systems And Consensus Protocols (9 points, 2 comments)
    7. Are there any closed source crypto wallets? (4 points, 19 comments)
    8. Are there any successful proof of identity projects? (4 points, 8 comments)
    9. SPV Wallets Vs API Wallets (4 points, 1 comment)
    10. 12 Popular Consensus Algorithms - Explained (2 points, 0 comments)
  15. 163 points, 7 submissions: QRCollector
    1. Part 5. I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the fifth part of the series talking about an advanced vulnerability of BTC. (43 points, 43 comments)
    2. I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the third part of the series introducing Quantum resistant blockchains. (36 points, 4 comments)
    3. Part 4B. I’m writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the fourth part of the series explaining the special quality of going quantum resistant from genesis block. (25 points, 21 comments)
    4. Part 6. (Last part) I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. Failing shortcuts in an attempt to accomplish Quantum Resistance (24 points, 38 comments)
    5. I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the first part of the series introducing the basic concept of blockchain and what makes it reliable. (23 points, 10 comments)
    6. I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the fourth part of the series explaining the special quality of going quantum resistant from genesis block. (7 points, 1 comment)
    7. Part 2. I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the second part of the series: An accessible description of hashing and signature schemes. (5 points, 0 comments)
  16. 162 points, 3 submissions: FashionistaGuru
    1. How do we change the culture around cryptocurrency? (118 points, 54 comments)
    2. Which cryptos have the best new user experience? (30 points, 34 comments)
    3. Why does Apple prevent many crypto apps from entering the App Store? (14 points, 8 comments)
  17. 157 points, 7 submissions: SamsungGalaxyPlayer
    1. Breaking Monero Episodes 1-3: Introduction, Ring Signatures, 0-Decoy and Chain Reactions (45 points, 1 comment)
    2. "No, dPoW Isn't a Perfect Solution" (35 points, 48 comments)
    3. Breaking Mimblewimble’s Privacy Model - Dragonfly Research (27 points, 10 comments)
    4. Breaking Monero (and Zcash) Episodes 7-9: Remote Nodes, Timing Attacks, Poisoned Outputs (EAE Attack) (21 points, 2 comments)
    5. "Attacker Collection of IP Metadata" (18 points, 10 comments)
    6. "Tracing Transactions Across Cryptocurrency Ledgers" Using Shapeshift and Changelly (6 points, 4 comments)
    7. Breaking Monero Episodes 4-6: Chain Splits (Key Image Attack), Input Selection Algorithm, Unusual Ringsize (5 points, 2 comments)
  18. 147 points, 1 submission: shunsaitakahashi
    1. Proof-of-Approval: Stake Based, 1 Block Finality & History Attack Defense (147 points, 4 comments)
  19. 146 points, 6 submissions: themoderndayhercules
    1. "The selfish mining fallacy" explained and debunked (60 points, 8 comments)
    2. A Discussion of Stable coins and Decentralized Oracles (35 points, 8 comments)
    3. A Selfish Mining Double Spending attack Simulator (25 points, 2 comments)
    4. Why reputation systems don't work (15 points, 12 comments)
    5. A better incentivization for Swarm (6 points, 0 comments)
    6. When Mises met Szabo - A Discussion of the value of Bitcoin (5 points, 16 comments)
  20. 143 points, 7 submissions: KomodoWorld
    1. Komodo Platform's core developer and founder jl777 has started his own blog on Medium. The blog is aimed for senior developers who want to learn about blockchain. (46 points, 15 comments)
    2. Delayed Proof of Work (dPoW) security explained (36 points, 46 comments)
    3. Proof-of-Gameplay (19 points, 3 comments)
    4. Good guide for getting started with the Custom Consensus tech for Komodo-based blockchains (17 points, 0 comments)
    5. Cross-chain migration of coins with Crypto Conditions - by smk762 (12 points, 0 comments)
    6. A step-by-step example of working with a Crypto Conditions based Oracle - by smk762 (10 points, 0 comments)
    7. Changing consensus rules on the fly with Crypto Conditions (3 points, 0 comments)
  21. 141 points, 8 submissions: Stormy1997
    1. What technical/business advantages does a private blockchain have over a SQL server? (49 points, 79 comments)
    2. Is sharding to scale bad? (24 points, 28 comments)
    3. How would one create a fiat gateway theoretically? (19 points, 19 comments)
    4. Looking for Stellar smart contract/side chain code examples (16 points, 1 comment)
    5. Question - Securing personal information on a centralized server with user-owned keys (13 points, 3 comments)
    6. How do blockchains/smart contracts communicate with oracles? (10 points, 4 comments)
    7. Bandwidth scaling for TPS (8 points, 2 comments)
    8. Best method to transmit detailed data between two parties via existing platforms (2 points, 1 comment)
  22. 141 points, 3 submissions: seventyfiver
    1. Why does Ethereum use Solidity while other ecosystems like NEO stick with popular ones like Java and C#? (94 points, 26 comments)
    2. Chainlink's initial Go implementation went live this morning. Has anyone reviewed the code and can comment on it's quality? (40 points, 3 comments)
    3. What are some great books on cryptoeconomics or blockchain technology? (7 points, 4 comments)
  23. 134 points, 6 submissions: johnny_milkshakes
    1. Sub dedicated to DAG based coins (42 points, 8 comments)
    2. Thoughts on this? (28 points, 38 comments)
    3. This is very interesting (24 points, 19 comments)
    4. Educational presentation by Clara Shikhelman (18 points, 0 comments)
    5. Ethics question. (12 points, 40 comments)
    6. How to scale on chain? (10 points, 30 comments)
  24. 127 points, 4 submissions: sukitrebek
    1. What are you currently obsessed with, and why? (58 points, 150 comments)
    2. Crypto-based social network without a cryptocurrency. (42 points, 23 comments)
    3. How does underlying architecture affect what kinds of applications are possible? (17 points, 3 comments)
    4. Holochain vs. Radix DLT (10 points, 11 comments)
  25. 126 points, 1 submission: RufusTheFirefly
    1. Everytime I try to investigate the technology behind Cardano(Ada), I come across the words "scientific" and "peer-reviewed" over and over but almost no actual details. Can someone fill how this coin actually works and where they are in development? (126 points, 49 comments)
  26. 112 points, 1 submission: rocksolid77
    1. Can we have a real debate about the Bitcoin scaling issue? (112 points, 89 comments)
  27. 110 points, 4 submissions: kelluk
    1. What one can learn from browsing 30 million Ethereum addresses (72 points, 21 comments)
    2. I wanted to categorize all coins/tokens, and this is my proposal (23 points, 33 comments)
    3. Should whitepapers be understood by ordinary people? (10 points, 41 comments)
    4. Querying the Ethereum blockchain: how to & what to? (5 points, 5 comments)
  28. 107 points, 1 submission: NewDietTrend
    1. Outside of currency and voting, blockchain is awful and shouldnt be used. Can anyone explain where blockchain is worth the cost? (107 points, 166 comments)
  29. 105 points, 1 submission: insette
    1. /CryptoTech PSA: there are broadly TWO TYPES of Decentralized Exchanges. Which type are you investing in? (105 points, 55 comments)
  30. 103 points, 3 submissions: dtheme
    1. How to accept crypto payments for digital downloads if you are a small business? Solutions, e-commerce sites are lacking (46 points, 38 comments)
    2. How many 24 letter seeds and "Bitcoin" keys can there be? (34 points, 24 comments)
    3. Is there any reason why the big tech companies are not getting into crypto? (23 points, 36 comments)
  31. 103 points, 3 submissions: dvnielng
    1. Why do so many of these businesses need a token? (Unsure) (61 points, 86 comments)
    2. DAPPS - Only coins that have intrinsic value? Ethereum , Neo? (31 points, 10 comments)
    3. How could blockchain work for expensive purchases/escrow? (11 points, 2 comments)
  32. 101 points, 1 submission: kickso
    1. Is NANO everything it says it is? (101 points, 96 comments)
  33. 98 points, 3 submissions: heart_mind_body
    1. How can we breathe some life into this sub? (56 points, 22 comments)
    2. Can anyone give an example for a technology that provides a "public permissioned blockchain"? (28 points, 16 comments)
    3. Can we do a discussion on ICON and "clusters of private chains connected to a public chain" ? (14 points, 13 comments)
  34. 97 points, 8 submissions: kelraku
    1. Thoughts on Mimblewimble? (23 points, 13 comments)
    2. Has anyone looked at the lelantus protocol? (18 points, 6 comments)
    3. How much control do developers have over the coins (18 points, 6 comments)
    4. Lesser known protocols? (11 points, 17 comments)
    5. Zerocoin and Blockchain Analysis (9 points, 5 comments)
    6. Zerocoin vs Cryptonote (7 points, 14 comments)
    7. Lightning network privacy (6 points, 13 comments)
    8. Integrity of the DAG (5 points, 17 comments)
  35. 96 points, 6 submissions: blockstasy
    1. How to Get to One Million Devs (32 points, 12 comments)
    2. The Decade in Blockchain — 2010 to 2020 in Review (27 points, 4 comments)
    3. Ethereum by the Numbers – The Year of 2019 (26 points, 9 comments)
    4. Knowledge Drop: Mining and the role it plays with the Ethereum blockchain (5 points, 0 comments)
    5. A great article that explains Ethereum’s Muir Glacier Update (4 points, 0 comments)
    6. Youtube Silences Crypto Community (2 points, 6 comments)
  36. 93 points, 3 submissions: OneOverNever
    1. Which is the last WHITE PAPER you've read that's truly impacted you? (77 points, 81 comments)
    2. [CMV] Bitcoin's intrinsic technological value. (14 points, 29 comments)
    3. What are some weak points that still hold XVG back from becoming a top player in crypto? (Technically speaking, not marketing and etc.) (2 points, 19 comments)
  37. 93 points, 3 submissions: ryano-ark
    1. (ARK) ACES Completes Integration of ARK Channels for Two-way Transfers for Easy ICOs When Paired With ARK Deployer (Push-Button-Blockchains) (57 points, 5 comments)
    2. (ARK) ACES Releases Fast (Ansible) Deployments for all ACES Applications. (23 points, 4 comments)
    3. A Future of Cryptocurrencies and Blockchains (13 points, 3 comments)
  38. 92 points, 2 submissions: BobUltra
    1. Our blockchains are all centralized! (51 points, 34 comments)
    2. List of qualities needed to dethrone Bitcoin. (41 points, 43 comments)
  39. 90 points, 1 submission: refreshx2
    1. CMV: It doesn't make sense for (crypto)companies to create coins linked to their tech (90 points, 18 comments)
  40. 89 points, 1 submission: perceptron01
    1. What does Nano do better than Steem? (89 points, 55 comments)
  41. 87 points, 1 submission: Shuk
    1. How does one begin to develop an employable skill in blockchain development? (87 points, 25 comments)
  42. 87 points, 1 submission: conorohiggins
    1. I spent three weeks researching and writing a huge guide to stablecoins. Enjoy! (87 points, 36 comments)
  43. 86 points, 1 submission: Bacon_Hero
    1. ELI5: Why did it take so long for blockchain technology to be created? (86 points, 66 comments)
  44. 85 points, 3 submissions: theFoot58
    1. If crypto now is like 'the Internet' of the past, where are we? (65 points, 53 comments)
    2. If the Internet had its Genesis Block, what would it be? (14 points, 9 comments)
    3. Coin grouping - ruby and CryptoCompare API (6 points, 1 comment)
  45. 85 points, 1 submission: youngm2
    1. Which decentralised exchange has the most promise for 2018? (85 points, 89 comments)
  46. 84 points, 4 submissions: bLbGoldeN
    1. On Mass Adoption of Cryptocurrencies (28 points, 68 comments)
    2. Join the Bloom team for our first tech AMA tomorrow (Tuesday, March 13th) at 7 PM GMT! (23 points, 2 comments)
    3. Join the Decred team for an AMA - Friday, June 1st from 19:00 to 22:00 UTC (17 points, 10 comments)
    4. Join the district0x team for an AMA Monday, April 2nd at 5:00 PM (GMT) (16 points, 0 comments)
  47. 82 points, 2 submissions: SubsequentDownfall
    1. Has a 51% attack ever been witnessed? (45 points, 46 comments)
    2. Is a DAG coin like RaiBlocks able to be private like Monero? (37 points, 40 comments)
  48. 82 points, 2 submissions: guidre
    1. Tron and other source Code (42 points, 24 comments)
    2. Why Will companies adopt blockchain, the user interface is complex and i'm not sure that many companies want all their internal dealings made public. (40 points, 19 comments)
  49. 81 points, 4 submissions: solar128
    1. New Atomic Swap Tools Released (35 points, 4 comments)
    2. Using Blockchain to make a censorship-resistant Reddit (28 points, 14 comments)
    3. Best security practices for addressing Spectre & Meltdown (13 points, 0 comments)
    4. Influence of on-chain governance weighted by wealth - good or bad? (5 points, 2 comments)
  50. 81 points, 2 submissions: Blockchainsapiens
    1. Blockchain study finds 0.00% success rate and vendors don't call back when asked for evidence (47 points, 30 comments)
    2. The elephant in the room: would the public ever use a volatile currency over a stable currency? (34 points, 45 comments)
  51. 81 points, 1 submission: Mycryptopedia
    1. Understanding the Tech Behind RaiBlocks (81 points, 7 comments)
  52. 81 points, 1 submission: davidvanbeveren
    1. Article thoroughly analysing / comparing IOTA and RaiBlocks (x-post /CryptoCurrency) (81 points, 10 comments)
  53. 77 points, 4 submissions: DeleteMyOldAccount
    1. HD Wallets Explained: What they are, and how to make them coin agnostic (28 points, 11 comments)
    2. Bitcoin Cash May 15th fork (23 points, 22 comments)
    3. So you want to build a Bitcoin HD wallet? Part 1 (23 points, 3 comments)
    4. Applications of Blockchain in Supply Chain (3 points, 9 comments)
  54. 76 points, 3 submissions: kryptofinger
    1. Why would anyone bother using any DPOS coins for dapps like Eos over normal systems like AWS? (44 points, 104 comments)
    2. Could a state backed privacy coin work? (22 points, 32 comments)
    3. Thoughts on Elastos? (10 points, 8 comments)
  55. 76 points, 1 submission: francohab
    1. 55% of the Nano representative nodes are "official representatives", presumably held by developers. How big of an issue is that? (76 points, 46 comments)
  56. 75 points, 2 submissions: MerkleChainsaw
    1. The biggest challenge for cryptocurrencies and how to mitigate it (73 points, 37 comments)
    2. Short and long term design tradeoffs in crypto (2 points, 2 comments)
  57. 75 points, 1 submission: jatsignwork
    1. Raiblocks & Spam (75 points, 60 comments)
  58. 74 points, 1 submission: behindtext
    1. Hello, this is Jake Yocom-Piatt. Ask me anything about Decred! (74 points, 49 comments)
  59. 73 points, 2 submissions: TexasRadical83
    1. Why use a new "currency" at all? (40 points, 48 comments)
    2. Why are big price increases for crypto a good thing? (33 points, 41 comments)

Top Commenters

  1. Neophyte- (1649 points, 746 comments)
  2. ndha1995 (583 points, 98 comments)
  3. turtleflax (406 points, 116 comments)
  4. senzheng (326 points, 193 comments)
  5. holomntn (294 points, 40 comments)
  6. manly_ (286 points, 43 comments)
  7. signos_de_admiracion (250 points, 18 comments)
  8. fgiveme (231 points, 77 comments)
  9. crypto_kang (222 points, 45 comments)
  10. jatsignwork (220 points, 37 comments)
  11. GainsLean (218 points, 76 comments)
  12. benthecarman (211 points, 48 comments)
  13. rockyrainy (200 points, 39 comments)
  14. hungryforitalianfood (197 points, 58 comments)
  15. rocksolid77 (190 points, 20 comments)
  16. bannercoin (189 points, 11 comments)
  17. insette (181 points, 47 comments)
  18. DiogenicOrder (175 points, 41 comments)
  19. islanavarino (173 points, 51 comments)
  20. behindtext (172 points, 14 comments)
  21. takitus (171 points, 25 comments)
  22. sukitrebek (170 points, 42 comments)
  23. UnknownEssence (170 points, 31 comments)
  24. crypto_ha (170 points, 26 comments)
  25. AlexCoventry (167 points, 17 comments)
  26. DragonWhsiperer (165 points, 38 comments)
  27. stop-making-accounts (164 points, 57 comments)
  28. KnifeOfPi2 (157 points, 13 comments)
  29. Edgegasm (156 points, 42 comments)
  30. ippond (152 points, 15 comments)
  31. dontlikecomputers (151 points, 61 comments)
  32. QRCollector (150 points, 46 comments)
  33. alexrecuenco (145 points, 18 comments)
  34. BobUltra (144 points, 88 comments)
  35. SpamCamel (135 points, 22 comments)
  36. InterdisciplinaryHum (133 points, 107 comments)
  37. theglitteringone (132 points, 10 comments)
  38. ChocolateSunrise (128 points, 23 comments)
  39. PM_ME_UR_QUINES (125 points, 4 comments)
  40. narwhale111 (122 points, 15 comments)
  41. pepe_le_shoe (121 points, 47 comments)
  42. Darius510 (119 points, 39 comments)
  43. glen-hodl (118 points, 21 comments)
  44. HOG_ZADDY (117 points, 23 comments)
  45. coranos2 (116 points, 44 comments)
  46. etherenvoy (116 points, 15 comments)
  47. johnny_milkshakes (115 points, 55 comments)
  48. galan77 (115 points, 52 comments)
  49. hybridsole (113 points, 40 comments)
  50. funciton (113 points, 8 comments)
  51. Mr0ldy (110 points, 24 comments)
  52. Corm (109 points, 42 comments)
  53. cryptoscopia (109 points, 7 comments)
  54. ReportFromHell (106 points, 39 comments)
  55. broscientologist (105 points, 26 comments)
  56. straytjacquet (104 points, 28 comments)
  57. Quadling (101 points, 24 comments)
  58. BlockEnthusiast (101 points, 17 comments)
  59. thats_not_montana (99 points, 37 comments)
  60. TheRealMotherOfOP (98 points, 27 comments)
  61. yarauuta (96 points, 11 comments)
  62. pegasuspect93 (96 points, 1 comment)
  63. andrew_bao (93 points, 40 comments)
  64. samdotla (93 points, 6 comments)
  65. melodious_punk (91 points, 34 comments)
  66. Mquantum (91 points, 31 comments)
  67. TJ_Hooker15 (91 points, 27 comments)
  68. NoFaptain99 (91 points, 3 comments)
  69. ilielezi (87 points, 10 comments)
  70. Raapop (87 points, 2 comments)
  71. Allways_Wrong (86 points, 36 comments)
  72. bLbGoldeN (86 points, 19 comments)
  73. ResIpsaLoquiturrr (86 points, 15 comments)
  74. kabelman93 (85 points, 29 comments)
  75. no_pants_gamer (84 points, 9 comments)
  76. AnkurTechracers (83 points, 16 comments)
  77. ric2b (83 points, 11 comments)
  78. Big_Goose (83 points, 10 comments)
  79. Lifeistooshor1 (82 points, 21 comments)
  80. vornth (82 points, 11 comments)
  81. Sargos (81 points, 25 comments)
  82. refreshx2 (81 points, 16 comments)
  83. Qwahzi (78 points, 27 comments)
  84. StupidRandomGuy (77 points, 35 comments)
  85. WikiTextBot (77 points, 24 comments)
  86. SnootyEuropean (77 points, 5 comments)
  87. cryptogainz (76 points, 14 comments)
  88. frequentlywrong (76 points, 4 comments)
  89. the_defiant (76 points, 4 comments)
  90. BrangdonJ (75 points, 28 comments)
  91. hendrik_v (75 points, 7 comments)
  92. solar128 (74 points, 18 comments)
  93. foobazzler (74 points, 8 comments)
  94. ginger_beer_m (73 points, 35 comments)
  95. kAhmij (73 points, 25 comments)
  96. DeleteMyOldAccount (73 points, 20 comments)
  97. sn0wr4in (73 points, 9 comments)
  98. Dyslectic_Sabreur (72 points, 5 comments)
  99. X7spyWqcRY (71 points, 8 comments)
  100. Krapser (70 points, 5 comments)

Top Submissions

  1. A Guided Reading of Bitcoin’s Original White Paper by Realness100 (202 points, 10 comments)
  2. From a technical standpoint: Why does every blockchain projects need their own coins? by HSPremier (181 points, 50 comments)
  3. Bitcoin Gold hit by Double Spend Attack (51% attack). The Attacker reversed 22 blocks. by rockyrainy (179 points, 102 comments)
  4. Why white papers in crypto world are so unprofessional? by ilielezi (175 points, 88 comments)
  5. My brief observation of most common Consensus Algorithms by tracyspacygo (159 points, 49 comments)
  6. Proof-of-Approval: Stake Based, 1 Block Finality & History Attack Defense by shunsaitakahashi (147 points, 4 comments)
  7. "Do you need a Blockchain?" - this paper is fantastic, everyone should read this before evaluating a coin and if requires a block chain to solve a solution the coin is promising to solve. by Neophyte- (136 points, 41 comments)
  8. Technical comparison of LIGHTNING vs TANGLE vs HASHGRAPH vs NANO by Qwahzi (133 points, 37 comments)
  9. Everytime I try to investigate the technology behind Cardano(Ada), I come across the words "scientific" and "peer-reviewed" over and over but almost no actual details. Can someone fill how this coin actually works and where they are in development? by RufusTheFirefly (126 points, 49 comments)
  10. How do we change the culture around cryptocurrency? by FashionistaGuru (118 points, 54 comments)

Top Comments

  1. 160 points: holomntn's comment in ELI5: Why did it take so long for blockchain technology to be created?
  2. 121 points: KnifeOfPi2's comment in How do we change the culture around cryptocurrency?
  3. 105 points: theglitteringone's comment in Outside of currency and voting, blockchain is awful and shouldnt be used. Can anyone explain where blockchain is worth the cost?
  4. 102 points: benthecarman's comment in If crypto now is like 'the Internet' of the past, where are we?
  5. 96 points: pegasuspect93's comment in If crypto now is like 'the Internet' of the past, where are we?
  6. 95 points: bannercoin's comment in Realistically, why would anybody expect the startup crypto platforms to beat out the corporate giants who are developing their own Blockchain as a Service (BaaS) solutions? Ex. IBM, SAP, JP Morgan...
  7. 83 points: AlexCoventry's comment in Ethereum private key with all zeroes leads to an account with 5000$ on it
  8. 82 points: deleted's comment in Is blockchain really useful ?
  9. 81 points: signos_de_admiracion's comment in Why white papers in crypto world are so unprofessional?
  10. 78 points: NoFaptain99's comment in Why do so many of these businesses need a token? (Unsure)
Generated with BBoe's Subreddit Stats
submitted by subreddit_stats to subreddit_stats [link] [comments]

“2 MILLION BY 2020??? Bitcoin will be worth $1'000'000! Here's why... ✅BITCOIN (BTC) MINING WORTH IT JUNE 2019?? -MAXIMUM PROFIT BITCOIN TO REACH $3.7 MILLION In PRACTICALLY NO TIME, EARN 1000X Your INVESTMENT! WATCH THIS VIDEO! 10 Reasons Bitcoin Will Be Worth Millions.

China's central bank digital currency has been used in 3.13 million transactions worth about 1.1 billion yuan ($162 million) so far, the People's Bank of China's deputy governor has reportedly ... On Friday, the cryptocurrency broke through $1,200, making the missing hard drive worth around $9 million. Howells had been hanging onto it for several years before deciding to clean up his home. The trustee sold off $312-million worth of Bitcoin between January and June 2018. Some analysts believe that these sales were the catalyst for the sudden crash in Bitcoins price around the same time. In Closing – Is Bitcoin the Future of Money? As you can see, there are plenty of strategies for making money with Bitcoin. Which methods you decide to use is up to you, but you can be sure that ... 9. Coins that never materialised. There were a number of physical bitcoin projects that never amounted to anything. Most are either defunct or delayed. Although they never got off the ground, some ... Regardless, 1 million per bitcoin would put the current market cap at 21,000,000,000,000 (generally accepted as 21 trillion nowadays thanks to our friends in the states). To put things into perspective, the current market cap of gold is about 5 or 6 trillion dollars I believe. To my mind, market cap of gold is a good target for long term success. Its much easier to transfer and far easier to ...

[index] [16100] [17387] [27532] [21715] [39079] [31175] [45728] [40091] [50267] [25142]

“2 MILLION BY 2020???" BITCOIN MATH WITH MCAFEE! - YouTube

This man threw away $6 million worth of Bitcoins - BBC NEWS - Duration: 3:13. BBC News Recommended for you. 3:13. Bitcoin Gambling - FortuneJack - Duration: 9:43. ... I just shorted $40,000 dollars worth of bitcoin, 10x Nation covers bitcoin price analysis on the trade they are in and whats next for bitcoin price! Bitcoin price analysis on why bitcoin is ... Bitcoin price predictions with John McAfee! John McAfee shares his thoughts on the current status of the crypotocurrency market and why he believes the futur... Get $10 worth of bitcoin for free if you sign up, invest $100 into a diverse crypto portfolio, and keep your account open for at least 6 months with New Wave... 👇🏻Support the channel by using my affiliate links below👇🏻 Exchanges I'm using: Coinbase FIAT https://www.coinbase.com/join/59398125002bcc03276297d6 Bin...

#