71–80 of 145 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And you can't even present a link to purchase digital goods through a browser... You can open Mobile Safari and search Amazon for a Kindle book, but you can't use an Amazon app of any sort to do part of it.
Weird, considering the fact that the Bandcamp app lets you buy music digitally via PayPal. Am I missing some important difference between the two?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I might be wrong, but no one other than banks (if that) can use ripple. I'm not clear on stellar.
nah, anyone can buy Ripple and have a Ripple wallet. Only thing you can't do is mine Ripple.
Tinfoil in me says that bank created Ripple just to get easy Bitcoin.
What's the value of the in-app currency being a cryptocurrency (putting aside hype/pr), vs calling it a virtual currency, a Mysql database with a API on top? Dropping to a technical level, if the miners are all run by Telegram, then I think it's just a pointless overhead over Mysql. On the other hand, if anybody can run miners, I don't comprehend what value that adds, what it means.
I see this same thing happening at some corporations now trying to create blockchain as a service. If one corporation, or just a few, are the only ones participating in the chain then why not just use traditional DBs?..
With a database there's always ways around editing the data if you own the entire system.
With a blockchain it's not possible to edit the data without replacing the entire chain.
I am a happy user of Telegram but I don't think re-inventing ethereum with a small team of developers is a great idea. But then again, using existing tech gives you fewer opportunities for cash grabs...
Strange decision indeed, they could use one of the existing technologies like Ripple or Stellar.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not decentralized if one organization owns 52% of it.
Not necessarily. This is actually orthogonal to decentralization question. Very much depends on their proof of stake implementation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Weird, considering the fact that the Bandcamp app lets you buy music digitally via PayPal. Am I missing some important difference between the two?
They must be paying Apple their percentage of the proceeds, unless they have an exception.
>3.1.5 (a) Physical Goods and Services Outside of the App: If your app enables people to purchase goods or services that will be consumed outside of the app, you must use purchase methods other than in-app purchase to collect those payments, such as Apple Pay or traditional credit card entry.
But if this applies to Bandcamp, then it would equally apply to Amazon... So I don't know.
Telegram founder is also big into cryptocurrency and owns a bunch of bitcoin [1]. I think after kik [2] and Status [3] this was inevitable.
[1]: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-12/cryptic-r...
[2]: http://www.kinecosystem.org/
[3]: https://status.im/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Telegram is not a secure messaging platform, despite marketing themselves as such. Supporting sources?
There's this, by a respected cryptographer who, however, also is the author of Signal: https://moxie.org/blog/telegram-crypto-challenge/
As more and more standalone cryptocurrencies are launched, the total amount of computational power expended on each will decrease and therefore make each more vulnerable to a 51% attack.
This problem is especially pertinent to niche currencies like Telegram's which are tied to a specific company service rather than those trying to act as a general unit of storage or exchange like Bitcoin or even an industry or economy wide tool like Ripple's XRP which. The more specific a currency's use case, the less processing power that will be dedicated to processing that currency's blockchain. And the more vulnerable it will be.
This seems like a real problem for the ecosystem as a whole.