131–140 of 144 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are ICOs illegal in the USA?
It is illegal to sell securities to non-accredited investors
Non accredited investors buy securities all the time through their brokers.
Advertising to general non accredited public for unregistered securities may get you in trouble with sec.
Selling unregistered securities to non accredited investors happens all the time through private placements.
> When Satoshi Nakamoto released the Bitcoin Whitepaper he defined it as a peer to peer electronic cash system. How do we know Satoshi is a he ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A full archive node currently requires a 400GB SSD! You're only option is to run a light node, Uh, what about running a full archive node? The bitcoin txo set is also much larger the the utxo set
Bitcoin doesn’t need an ssd to sync. Additionally, a bitcoin full node requires just 149gb — and it’s been around much longer than Ethereum! Ethereum is broken.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin doesn’t need an ssd to sync. Additionally, a bitcoin full node requires just 149gb — and it’s been around much longer than Ethereum! Ethereum is broken.
Do you mean full node or archive node? (ie is the 149gb a requirement for storing the txo set or the utxo set)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lightning networks to handle scaling limitations are the first step on the slow re-centralization of bitcoin. Eventually an overwhelming majority mining will be controlled by a centralized/federated oligopoly. Be prepared to rebel and re-re-decentralize in 20 years.
Personally I'm much more bullish on Bitcoin Cash. It's following the same path that got us to this point today, and they're not opposed to Layer 2. But they have a clear understanding that a currency is only as good as it's utility. If they can maintain that balance of decentralization, utility, and security, while picking up the pieces that Bitcoin Core dropped it's likely we'll see a flippening in the coming year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If LOL'ing and making snarky comments about how you understand but it's still underwhelming makes you feel better, good for you. But I have never seen a single person who truly "understand the technology perfectly well" say it's underwhelming. Most of those who actually dug deep enough to "truly understand" do see the limitations, but because by that point they understand the potential, they see the limitations as pr…
In what way is your comment different from 'No True Scotsman'?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you looked into things like Synapse.ai ? They are building exactly what you're talking about in terms of data/AI/ML/currency/ownership. Here is their founder giving a presentation about it at the Decentralized AI Summit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QMgVsbHu98 It ties together things like the "Who owns the future" book by Jaron Lanier and AI/Bots/APIs for new economies.
Thanks for sharing. Reminds me a bit of Numerai
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lol, appreciate the patronising explanation, as if I'm some sort of idiot just waiting to find the road to Damascus. I understand the technology perfectly well. I read the Cryptoassets book to try and undsetand exactly that: the value of them as 'assets'. I came away exceedingly underwhelmed.
If LOL'ing and making snarky comments about how you understand but it's still underwhelming makes you feel better, good for you. But I have never seen a single person who truly "understand the technology perfectly well" say it's underwhelming. Most of those who actually dug deep enough to "truly understand" do see the limitations, but because by that point they understand the potential, they see the limitations as pr…
This is tautological, so i hope you’re aware of how logically useless it is. Either you haven’t seen much, or you define away any disagreers as people who don’t understand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Where before you had to trust one server, now you can have many. Multiple writers, multiple readers. That's all. Those multiple writers, multiple readers are not free. They waste billions in server/electricity costs over traditional architecture designs. The most prominent blockchain bitcoin costs 2.5 billion dollars a year [0] to process a miniscule fraction of what Visa can handle. [0]: https://digiconomist.net/b…
YES, we know! If there truly isn't an alternative to PoW, yes then we are pretty much fucked. Quite a few more efficient alternatives are currently being tested (and I guess a lot more are to come), and it looks very promising.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There is very, very little reason to use a cumbersome data structure when better ones exist Do you not see any value in decentralization? In theory with blockchains, you could replace giant companies with open-source programs that pay for their own server costs with transaction fees, without taking any profit margin off the top. That would be very interesting for stuff like cloud storage and social networks. You ca…
> In theory with blockchains, you could replace giant companies with open-source programs that pay for their own server costs with transaction fees, without taking any profit margin off the top Do you think these applications are viable if the token has significant monetary/speculative value attached to it?