this exactly.

no offense. takes a few guys in Bangladesh to put together this quality art/Wordpress site -- honestly isn't that hard.

without legitimate linked-in links to profiles, and those people actively tweeting or taking a social role in their coin, you can bet these are scam coins or cash-grabs (at BEST).

good idea's with little real world utility.

like honestly? MULTI MODULE? "hey guys, we can't pick one thing to be good at, so, let's pick multiple that require an exponential amount more of capital investment to get going" --- how naïve.

Another quick and easy payment system?

Seriously. Another? Do you public realize we have about 100 "quick and easy and secure" payment systems from coins claiming that as their "real world utility" -- how benign.

Pump and dump, make your cash from MN, move on.

Thanks for the popcorn. 

Hi team HADRON,

I'm very excited about the project, here are my specs:

Device 1 - PC
Processor - Intel Core i7-7700k
RAM : 32GB
OS: Win 10
Browser: Chrome

Device 2 - Laptop
Processor - Intel Core i5-6200
RAM: 8GB
OS: Win 10
Browser: Chrome

Device 3 - Pixel (gen 1)
OS: Android
RAM: 3GB
Browser: Chrome

I can't find it under RACE ticker symbol...

Hahah, I had a good laugh.

Seriously, good question mate.

Even thinking logically, knowing little about economics must think was a troll post?

Why USD and not another FIAT? Why arbitrarily $10,000? Why try and control something not meant to be controlled by nature of design?

Why not let free markets do their thing, (with slight regulation to keep fraudulent activity minimum), why tie it to anything like that when it's its own thing, ergo, it's correlated to USD volatility, but no direct link or causal relationship.

When tied to any FIAT, it will act with their volatility, ie. America goes to war with NK, what happens to their dollar?

Again, why 10k? Just why... so you can feel more confident and think this should be less volatile? IT'S VOLATILE BY DESIGN, trying to control this would be a silly waste of resources, as it's still, at the end of the day, a speculative asset, not a currency.   

https://qz.com/1200204/bitcoin-regulation-cftc-and-sec-weigh-in-on-crypto-oversight-at-us-senate-hearing/

It seems that, in short, from the US, at least, (we can address Asia after);

- The SEC is going after ICOs = Clayton (head of SEC) says every ICO he has seen has been a securities offering. The problem is, none of them has registered as offerings with the SEC. “ICOs that are securities offerings, we should regulate them like we regulate securities offerings, end of story,” he said.
- The SEC is going after lawyers and accountants who enable illegal ICOs = “A note for professionals in these markets: Those who engage in semantic gymnastics and elaborate structuring exercises…are squarely in the cross-hairs of our enforcement division,” Clayton said.
- But some ICOs, like those conducted with a “SAFT” agreement, are probably safe = "This includes some of the biggest offerings of last year, like Filecoin, with marquee investors like Union Square Ventures. “I don’t think it necessarily follows that the SAFT is within the SEC’s sights,” said Preston Byrne, a structured-finance lawyer and a fellow at the Adam Smith Institute. Byrne has been a major critic of ICOs."
- The SEC draws a distinction between “pure cryptocurrencies” and ICOs = It’s not entirely clear what that distinction might be. But Clayton said ICOs should be regulated like securities offerings, without mentioning the regulatory status of “pure cryptocurrencies.”
- US Congress could give the SEC or CFTC more powers to oversee cryptocurrency exchanges = “I think we may need [additional legislative authority], I think we may need it,” Clayton said.
-The FBI is assisting = The FBI has recently seconded agents to the CFTC to analyze transactions in the bitcoin futures and spot markets to detect signs of terrorist financing and evasion of sanctions by countries like North Korea, Giancarlo said. The oversight might explain the recent bitcoin price crash. Said Giancarlo, “Word is getting out that we will go after misconduct, I think you’re seeing it in the price, and it’s an important step.”

^^ this/these statements hint at more regulation in the USA, giving cryptocurrency, or whatever it gets deemed in the future, much more viability in the long-run, not other way you can interpret direct quotes from the hearing today... so, yeah, while highly volatile because of recent Asiatic activity, I think it's safe to say, we're moving forward with it, regardless, in one way or another on a global scale.

oh, and this gem, which I don't quite understand;

- Don’t expect a bitcoin ETF any time soon = Clayton said the fact that exchange-traded funds (ETFs) are aimed at long-only retail investors, combined with issues concerning price discovery, custody, and volatility, mean that the regulator isn’t comfortable with green-lighting any applications yet. The crypto industry believes the hearing went well. Both Giancarlo and Clayton talked up the potential of “distributed ledger technology,” although Giancarlo noted that there would be no blockchain without bitcoin. The technology has “enormous potential,” Giancarlo said. Jerry Brito, the executive director of Coin Center, a blockchain-focused think tank in Washington DC, said the hearing showed that lawmakers want to fight crypto frauds and scams while letting Americans exercise a right to own cryptocurrencies. One prominent lawyer, who advises corporations on cryptocurrency matters, judged the SEC chief’s comments to be “neutral” while assessing the CFTC chief’s remarks as “positive.” Crypto is turning out to be the rare industry where regulation is welcomed rather than opposed.

...because of this recent article (which already dictates that exists an American ETF).

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/funds-and-etfs/etfs/osc-approves-canadas-first-blockchain-etf/article37828183/

Regardless of that which, also, signifies the strength and confidence in block-chain technology and btc (hello from Canada).

So, I'd say it's neat to see how the USA/CND governments are starting to embrace it, in some hopes of regulation, but, it's even weirder how those that think this (btc, block-chain technology) is philosophically about decentralization also seem to want some form of regulation... I know that is getting off topic, so, let me end with;

A mix of the Asiatic news, the panic selling and likely a hint of market manipulation (some might call it capitalizing on panic selling and is completely legal), but, it's definitely NOT any-one factor.

I think (in my opinion) this was a good and necessary market correction so the experts, miners, owners, traders and consumers can continue to solidify the alt-coin eco-system, the exchanges and the future of BTC and block-chain technology while slowly pushing out the fraudulent aspect that has been so rampart (I myself lost 4 bitcoin in MtGox back in 2012).

Okay so, I think Carlton really just blew my mind with a +1 post. And for a guy who just finished his undergrad and is working towards a PsyD eventually, this is fascinating, and he is exactly right. You don't implore those tactics unless you have a nefarious agenda. Even narcissistic/psychopathic type CEO's don't use these tactics (it's not the norm), and instead correlates HEAVILY with fraudulent activity. So yeah, I really do have to do some more reading on this because;


Seems just like any shady IPO, listed on the OTC exchange, whereas regulation is minimal and audits are almost non-existent and can easily be fudged. These guys hoped to capitalize on that concept, as do what seems some of these alt-coins are hoping to accomplish?... and because of the lack of regulation, it's harder for us to distinguish these malevolent acts until someones lost money and the threads start appearing, and by then, it's usually a little too late...

I don't know, it's quite interesting and fascinating reading what you guys have to say, I have so many questions that I'm working to formulate, but I love how nullius forked this comment from a thread on forks, so less technically inclined people like me can read-in and be a part of the discussion.

thanks guys!

Definitely agreeing with you here RNC, these guys are the aggressive ones... I feel like we're all reading a different conversation, or there is some joke I'm just not getting?

I read this entire discussion, followed the links and sources cited by everyone, did more research on my own to understand the conversation a little better as it's quite meaningful.

All I see is these guys bashing on dinofelis when he/she is the only one keeping their cool, while engaging in discussion, rebuking their points, and them occasionally rebuking his, but after they do, and he replies to their point with more validation, they seem to disappear or get defensive/aggressive and bark about something different.

So, yeah, you all raised different points of which I can't comprehend all of it, but, for the most part, I learned a lot from this discussion, and seeing the negativity towards dinofelis seems pretty unfounded and unfair and completely pointless to the discussion.

As an outsider, learning about this more technical stuff, he/she is the only one that doesn't seem like an asshole. If he/she is wrong, just cite your sources and outsiders like me will side with you, not  your shitty aggressiveness.

Can any other experts please weigh in, as dino has been carrying this thread with good and meaningful discussion, not only on the technology front but the whole different perspectives/philosophies surrounding BTC.

Spurred by a good question from Anyonmous_kid that just sent me down the rabbit hole for 2 hours of reading/researching.

Now please, thank each other for allowing less technically inclined people like me to view/understand a more nuanced technology, still in it's infancy, so that we plebs can better conceptualize/visualize the whole eco-system surrounding block-chain technology/btc. 

Anyway, I literally created this account to say this because I feel that this forum is very useful and much better than reddit, and then I see assholes on here that have "legendary" status that just get away with shit-talking others but not getting modded or actually providing empirical evidence, or any research/sources other than hearsay to refute, what feels like a good discussion.

Bah, whatever, thank you, stop being mean, I really enjoy the discussion and the debate is good for us plebs, make us feel better knowing even you smarter folk have varying perspectives on this whole crypto-movement thing, just drop the attitude, it's quite pathetic and makes things confusing for us less-technically inclined people trying to decipher fact from anecdotal points of view.