Maybe it is being used that way, but I don't think it is a valid measure. I've had to join a few Telegram channels to participate in Airdrops. Once joined, I never look at them. And I knew nothing about the tokens before joining their channel, and probably won't learn anything about them before playing with the tokens, if they ever come.

So full channels on Telegram are probably a great indicator of how much it is being used to give stuff away. And there is no reason to connect that to the likelihood of the project succeeding.

But Telegram is also a really well designed service that handles large numbers flawlessly. There's a thread that I've posted to about why ICOs use Telegram here:
https://blockchainforums.info/topic/392/is-telegram-useful-to-icos

The fascinating thing about this situation is that if they try and make it hardy to access and use, they will bias usage towards those who have no other alternative, which brings in a larger proportion of criminal usage. Then as a result, a large proportion of tools and services supporting its use will also be targeting the most profitable customer base, criminals. So attempting to fight cryptocurrency adoption increases the problem they are trying to avoid.

Accepting that a minority of people will use cryptocurrency for criminal activity, in exactly the same way that cash is used, would enable them to focus on how to encourage adoption with systems that favour those who are open about their transactions, such as those that accept cryptocurrency payments in exchange for legitimate goods and services.

And there are already strong drivers for the market to develop identity management systems based on blockchain technology. As this becomes available, people are likely to want to bind their identity to blockchain transactions for a variety of benefits. If you can prove it was you who paid for an item that becomes faulty, there's your receipt. If you must have purchased a product before you review it, there's your authentication. If your coffee shop introduces a loyalty card and includes previous purchases by cryptocurrency, there's your reward card with digital holes already punched in it. And if the majority of transactions using cryptocurrency voluntarily link their identities, the remaining transactions are easier to identify, and harder to conceal when they are then used in conjunction with patterns that already have identities.

So fostering an environment where cryptocurrency usage for legal products and services is favoured, results in less services focused on meeting criminal requirements, easier detection of suspicious transactions, and a greater ability to connect illegal activities with identifiable transactions. Once this is made clear to our powerful leaders, and they continue on their anti-cryptocurrency path, it will become clear that reducing criminal activity is their justification, not their aim.

Where 2FA is used to add another factor of certainty that the user has access rights, SMS can be useful. But using SMS to enable password reset is a great risk because you are relying on the phone security, and the service provider refusing to transfer the number to a different SIM without sufficient authorisation.

It is like that crazy scheme of protecting your account with a password that contains very high entropy, but if the 'user' forgets it, they can then gain access to the account with simple questions that can be answered by searching their Facebook account. Poorly implemented 2FA can reduce security instead of increasing it. DNotes Global Inc. always do their research and never rush into untested solutions, so I'm sure they'll get this right.

There are so many variables and approaches to cryptocurrency, that it is usually impossible to bet on which technology or solution will end up being the most successful. But when it comes to the POW v.s. POS discussion it gets really simple. POW was necessary with the beginning of bitcoin because work was the only way to force value into an idea. Since then, the concept of blockchain based currencies has been tested and gained public confidence. Because of this, POW is no longer required to inject value into the coin. But security and trust will always be necessary.

So long as a POS solution is able to provide security and trust, it will always be superior to POW. To support a POW cryptocurrency, electricity must be purchased and processing time must be used. Until both are free, this cost must be born by the network. This means that there must always be a drain on the value of the currency. It is also very common for the POW solution to cause a drain on performance which affects transaction time and fees.

POS is much less demanding on electricity and processing time. This means that cryptocurrencies based on POS are more efficient, with all of the flow on effects that generates.

There are many other advantages to POS in general, even if some of them are shared by a few POW solutions. POS enables and encourages a healthier network of nodes by being less demanding to maintain, and less profitable to concentrate into large operations. POW mining companies have much more control over accepting or rejecting code, than the people who own the POW cryptocurrencies affected by their choices. So POS cryptocurrencies are much more likely to act in the interests of currency holders than POW systems are. Because POS does not need to wait for a complex puzzle to be solved, transaction periods can be much more regular, and much more frequent. And this is just some of the main advantages.

Due to this, I am confident that all cryptocurrencies, including bitcoin, that make it through to 2028 and are used in regular transactions will be POS or some other alternative to POW.

I certainly agree MiningHabit, we've got plenty in common. I'm a big believer in the power of social filters to bring like minded people together, and this DNotes thread, with its well informed discussions has certainly done that for me. With AI, I'm really right at the beginning, but want to actually understand the emergent properties, not just that they're there and how to leverage them. So I've got a working ANN with 1 input node, 1 middle layer node, and 1 output node. And it still works. So technically it is just a single complex algorithm. Next step is to tease that apart and understand it.

I'm glad you find the spreadsheet useful, and you'll probably see that my first week didn't go well. This week will be better.

Weekly Review of Annual Goals 2018
I just created a Google Sheet to track goals this year. I've made it so you can edit goals and then hide empty columns. I've also used an international date format. So feel free to visit it and make a copy for yourself.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PmNj-X5EliEPLp7V8pV2bzewviaXzuPGYY0NS3Kp-T4/edit?usp=sharing

Okay you've both inspired me to and made me think about it, so here goes…
I don't have that button that fires off on new years because we're at the same point around the sun as we were last year. I've rarely started and only once finished a new year's resolution. That one that I did was to stop me being so damn emphatic. So I removed the word 'is' from my vocabulary for a year.

This year:

• I'm doing a yoga retreat in March and walking the 600km Camino de Santiago in July. So getting closer to touching my toes is on the cards.
• Mentally; I'm aiming for at least two 10 minute sessions of meditation a week.
• Skills; I'm learning python and experimenting with writing AI code.
• Creative writing; Proofread and edit my novel "Demon Spawn Goes to High School"
• Commercial writing; Try my hand at writing scripts/screen plays for short Youtube videos.
• Emotionally; I'm working on being more present when feeling hurt or in trouble.
• Musically; I'll be focusing on the ocarina because I just bought a new one that is an octave lower and easier on the ear.
• Languages; Khmer is a long term project, but I'll add some Spanish in this year, I bought the Language Hacking Spanish book.
• Artistically; sadly I don't think I'll have time to keep learning the 3D software Blender this year.
• Charity/Social; I still believe that nearly all of the little fires that everyone spends their energy trying to put out, would all go out on their own if we banned all forms of donations to political parties accept personal donations capped at a level where the majority of the population would donate, like $20–$80. So that will continue to be my battle.  

That was worth spending the time thinking about, MiningHabit. And because of this, I'll probably stay more focused on it and get better results by the end of the year. It was a good exercise, so I'll quote you to end this:

What's our top self-improvement goals for the year? ... edited as per Alan's excellent suggestion.

Australian Banks Respond to Cryptocurrency Competition

I always guessed this was coming, but I'm surprised to see them move so fast. I've always seen banks as the slowest industry to change in response to a shifting market. But it appears that Australian Banks are moving to a defensive position by thwarting bitcoin purchases, and preparing to compete by introducing a fast and user-friendly, inter-bank transaction system.

This article in the Sydney Morning Herald draws together a number of stories that show how the big four banks of Australia are freezing accounts and blocking transactions where they detect activity involving bitcoin exchanges.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/bitcoin-tensions-rise-as-investors-claim-banks-freezing-their-accounts-20171229-p4yy3z.html

It seems like the obvious solution; if you don't want cryptocurrency to be successful, block customers from exercising their right to purchase it. The trouble is that there are now so many different options for transferring money that, while it can certainly slow down a lot of the business, it won't stop it. And where money is there for the making in the exchange between cryptocurrency and fiat currency, someone will always find a way to make it work.

But I believe their other strategy will have a more significant effect on cryptocurrency adoption. "Provide the services that the public want, at a good price." This is a tried and tested strategy that the big four banks have never needed to turn to. In their monopoly, they've been able to provide very poor quality service for fees far above the cost of delivering it. But cryptocurrency has provided competition by enabling people to quickly transfer value to each other via the Internet, for (until recently with bitcoin) significantly lower costs.

So now they are introducing a new protocol, NPP (New Payments Platform) to enable immediate payments between nearly all Australian bank account holders. BPay Group is also adding functionality with an extra layer called Osko. This will then enable the payments to be made using the recipient's mobile number or email address. The new protocol enables transactions to also contain additional text information and links to external documents. This will give Australians the ability to do one of the main things that makes cryptocurrency attractive, simple fast electronic payments to each other.

To be fair, this project was first discussed in 2012, long before bitcoin's rise to general public awareness. But it was also a long time after Satoshi Nakamoto put the writing on the wall. And while this leap in banking services might seem localised to Australia, the task of writing the code was given to SWIFT.

"NPP Australia also signed a 12-year contract with global provider of secure financial messaging services Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) to design, build and operate the basic infrastructure. This organisation is the powerhouse behind international banking transfers and owner of the SWIFT keys you need to make them. So while I don't know what IP arrangements were made for this project, it is easy to see how an agreement could easily be reached to role out this service at an international level. Doing so would be like handing out the Paypal.me service to everyone without them having to incur the extra fees charged by Paypal for using it. When it comes to providing a useful alternative to cryptocurrency, this could be a game changer. Though, so far as  I have searched, there has been no indication of proposed fee structures for using Osko on the NPP.
http://www.apca.com.au/about-payments/future-of-payments/new-payments-platform-phases-3-4

The article about this failed to breakdown the NPP acronym.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/banking-and-finance/cash-payment-decline-tipped-to-gather-pace-in-2018-20171222-p4yy03.html

It always makes me happy to hear that someone I like hearing from is taking action to improve their odds of being on the planet longer and participating in it more. (I'm assuming that you have objective information that this is excess weight).

I really like it that you've found a way to gamify and enjoy the process. So I'm wishing you more than success with this venture, I'm hoping it brings lots of fun as well.

Your point 4 is the only one I disagree with. In my experience, these extreme and fringe groups have the least consistent internal culture and are most likely to break up into more factions. The only one I know that breaks that rule seems to be the NRA in the US. Instead, I'd like to propose an alternate theory about why the extremes have the loudest voice.

Most people, by definition, share a majority point of view which is neither unusual or newsworthy. Fringe groups and extremists, also by definition, have unique and sometimes outrageous points of view. These groups are much more newsworthy and are much more likely to be shared on social media, both by those that agree and those that are upset by them.

I think this natural phenomenon is a great thing because it amplifies the new ideas and generates reaction and discussion in mainstream cultures. Unfortunately the Internet has continued to build algorithms that amplify the effect so that the offensive and extreme points of view have an abnormal dominance in our media feeds. This effect has then been monitized so frequently that it earned the term 'click bait'.


As for the term "made it" everyone has different measures for that. For a long time my benchmark was whether it had appeared on The Simpsons. Ethereum has certainly done well and always sits in prime positions on the charts. But I think it has not reached anything like its potential.

I tried for a long time to get a full node working and as tenacious as I am, gave up in frustration. During this ordeal I came across many pages and tutorials looking for workarounds to their problems and felt like I was only one of a vast number of people experiencing the same frustrations. And while Ethereum executes a phenomenal number of transactions per day and currently leads in this regard, I still hold the opinion that a shift to POS will further enhance its performance. So if they have made it now, it will be fun to see where they end up once running a full node is something my mother can set up, and doing so won't take a performance hit out of her computer.

I find this whole scenario absolutely fascinating and am really hoping that at least the infrastructure and coding is solid, and the petro does indeed get released soon.

1) Venezuela has the 'first to market' advantage for a nation to introduce their own cryptocurrency.

2) I believe it will also be the cryptocurrency backed by the highest real-world value.

3) Unlike other considerations for a national cryptocurrency, there is no likelihood that it will be pegged against the country's fiat currency.

In combination, these three qualities are breaking new ground in the industry and will be a valuable test case for any states that follow. I've had a quick look for information on how to mine the petro and found nothing. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised because if it is intended for daily use, then POS is the far superior option. POS is also the best option to ensure people in all economic circumstances are able to participate without expensive hardware. I'd like to know what code their blockchain technology is based on.

I'd also be glad to know the mechanics behind the backing of $US267 billion. If I were to mine an early block and hold 1 percent of all existing petro, would I then be able to assert my claim to $US2.67 billion dollars worth of oil?

DNotes2.0 Solutions and Interfacing with Blockchain IP groups

After hearing the great news that DNotes Global Inc. has found a great fit with their software development partner Geneca, I realised that they are very likely to develop new solutions to the existing problems faced by cryptocurrencies. So I had a look at how the blockchain sector is handling intellectual property management.

This article shows a strong indication that the industry understands the need to establish groups that protect against patent trolls and find solutions for sharing the technologies they develop:
http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2017/06/30/protecting-ip-blockchain-sector/id=84581/

As I understand it, DNotes Global Inc. express their commitment to providing financial systems that benefit all people by intending to open-source the results of their software development. I'm curious to know more about how DNotes Global Inc. intend to manage ownership of solutions developed in partnership with Geneca, and how they see their role in networking with existing organisations to participate in the protection and sharing of intellectual property.

Does this mean that DNotes Global Inc. would be seen as breaking SEC regulations if it ever sold any of the potentially postmined 10,000,000 DNotes2.0 being considered?


Wiser, I completely agree with you and would love to see a 1:1 spend on financial education : financial regulation.

I believe that more proactive and consistent enforcement of existing laws would also solve a lot of the problems. When an ICO posts a whitepaper that claims it has a team of 10 programmers with a combined 100 years of experience. I'd like to see some complaint against them when it all falls over taken seriously and an investigation into the real number of year's experience of the programming team. If it doesn't match the information in the white paper, jail the participants for fraud. If a whitepaper claims they've completed the working software and they're running the ICO for marketing funds, then it turns out that they don't have working software, jail them for fraud. Not so hard and no new laws required. Same goes for creating or falsely embellishing identities.

And finally, I don't see why filling out forms to provide concise information about your organisation or ICO should incur an expensive fee. Maybe they should offer a two tier system. Tier 1 would gather and publish information after verifying it was signed by an identified responsible party. Then tier 2 could charge a fee for having their claims checked by the SEC and marked as verified. Investors could then decide on the risk they are willing to accept.

This really is great news and I can see by reading the Geneca website that there is more to the perfect match than using the same corporate colours. I was particularly interested in their software development methodology because I've been reading a bit about the subject recently.

From what I've learnt, methodologies can sit on a spectrum from multiple iterations of responsive designs all the way to a single meticulously planned and executed project. No methodology fits all development needs, because they all have their strengths and weaknesses. The responsive methodology is great for projects that have evolving needs and are working in new and unchartered areas. This is particularly applicable to cryptocurrency where things need to fit customer needs and usage patterns and where much of the technology planned is untested.

The other end of the spectrum is great for mission critical software that can't afford to go wrong or get hacked. Things like flight controls for aircraft or the software that manages medical devices. Or the software that manages large and frequent transactions of customer money. This is also a great fit for cryptocurrency.

So in reading Geneca's website I was curious to see which way DNotes Global Inc. had chosen to go. I noticed text like:
"We begin this process first by defining what must be built to ensure that your business goals are achieved.  By understanding the outcome, our team will be equipped to anticipate any issues that could arise.  We accomplish this through use of Geneca’s three proprietary products: Experience Inventory, Virtual Wall Gantt, and Joornal." This looks like it is up the 'meticulously planned' end of the spectrum.

But then straight after this I read:
"Once building commences, Geneca will engage and align with your team using quick sprints and scheduled showcases.  This will allow visibility ensuring that you see progression along the way." In contrast, customer engagement and short development cycles are the hallmark of a 'responsive design' methodology. This is confirmed later by "To make a beloved product, we must stay focused on what matters, listen carefully to employees and customers, and make improvements early and often.

So it seems DNotes Global Inc. have discovered a software development company that takes the best of both methodologies and has integrated them. Seeing that the responsive methodology, popularly referred to as 'Agile' only got a foothold sixteen years ago and only in this decade has really developed in popularity, I then noticed that Geneca had been in operation three years before the movement started and have developed along side it for 19 years. For me, this explains how the company could have begun with much more meticulous methodology and then absorbed the best parts of responsive methodology as they evolved.

In recognising this combination, I really see how Geneca's approach appears to be the perfect fit for cryptocurrency projects. 

Brandon, that 1,416 minutes sounds really bad, and it is just under twenty-four hours. So I looked up the times for bank transfers over Christmas just to compare. Turns out that a bitcoin transaction only takes between 16–25% of the time taken by the banks. Times vary but bank transfers sit between 4–6 days.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/payment-processing-takes-christmas-break-20111219-1p1xg.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/expat-money/8860887/Christmas-is-coming-but-whats-the-best-way-to-transfer-money-abroad-in-time-for-the-festivities.html

And while you're right that bitcoin is a long way from meeting a daily transaction needs, you've made me wonder if other cryptocurrencies are missing out on the poor performance criticism only because their systems are under less load.

Over the last year, bitcoin transactions per day peaked at 490,644 on December 14.
https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions

So I grabbed some other data to compare it with and found that bitcoin was the second highest with Ethereum managing more than three times as many transactions per hour. This is impressive considering that the Ethereum network is also running a lot of other processes through its in-built programming language.

What I get from this little dig around is that the only reason for bitcoin not meeting the current demand is design decisions that determine the bitcoin coding. The fact that decentralised consensus works at all is amazing and fantastic, but in the case of bitcoin, it appears to be failing the general community at this stage. And I'm left wondering if the main cause of this is that it is not community consensus anymore. Instead it is the consensus of a few massive mining operations who seem to carry a lot more weight than the few community nodes mining away on their personal computer.

I really respect what Bittrex did here. They had the choice of increasing their current customer base by accepting new applications, or they could maintain the quality of service for their existing customer base and accept the fact that this will mean turning away new customers. They chose to put existing customers first and maintain their quality of service. I'd like to think that those who were turned away due to peak loads recognise the commitment to their customers that was demonstrated and come back to Bittrex when they've scaled up.

This is the sort of long-term vision that I see in DNotes Global Inc. and if these sorts of attitudes are embedded into the DNotes exchange, they will do well. I understand that the exchange is much further down the road map, but I'm sure that they're watching what both good and bad actors do, and learning from everything so that the DNotes exchange will benefit from this industry experience.


I also agree with what wiser has to say about customer support:

The great thing about the current labour market is that it is now so very easy to maintain a dormant workforce and outsource during peak times. The trick is already having in place a system for sorting and allocating tasks to the appropriate skill level. But even that can be largely automated now.

As for insightful comment by R-J-F recognising the value of moving with the times and trying things now even though they failed before:

I'd like to plug that directly into R-J-F's later comment: "I can't help thinking what things might have been if we had less engineers and more marketing people who understood the customer relationship and the need for a live voice at the other end of the phone. " And suggest that with AI doing a great job of sorting types of issues and getting better at suggesting tech support responses, that some blended solution might soon be the most efficient way of meeting sudden peaks in customer support demands.

But whether it is security, or the voice of customer support, I believe the best way to approach all business decisions is remain focused on the desired outcome. Is it the voice they need to hear, or is it being able to instantly get the exact solution to their particular needs? Is top level security what is required, or do customers really just want to never lose their investment? DNotes Vault having access to matching funds is an example of thinking outside the box when determining security solutions that ensure customers will never lose. And if they continue with this outcome-focused approach when designing their exchange, it could really bring meeting customer needs to a whole new level.

Okay, that artwork needs to be credited, it really made me smile. Great job. And Merry Christmas to all on this thread, you've made it such a pleasant place to hang out this year.

I'm sure Alan knows a lot more about the function of phytochrome in its role affecting circadian rhythms and the blooming of daylilies, but a quick search on the Internet seems to indicate that shortening the nights early with artificial light would work on this species, and give Bob a much better display when he arrives. Sure it would take some electricity, but less then a bitcoin mine requires.

I'm going to have to disagree with your roller-coaster metaphor dzonikg28, but stand with you on your intended points. In fact, I'm going to go a step further. Roger Ver is talking about the weaknesses of bitcoin and this seems to be hurting its value. The more the large holders and miners see value being hurt by disfunctionality in bitcoin, the more they are likely to support genuine improvements to its code. And the more the code behind bitcoin improves, and the more useful bitcoin is, the higher its true value can climb.

As for futures contracts and commercial traders manipulating the price, I think it is unlikely. I have no doubt that given the skill and opportunity, they would certainly do it. And I imagine that the current low is a great time for them to buy a reserve to sell futures against. I just don't think they've got what it takes to pull it off. But that doesn't mean there hasn't been an incidental effect. It is hard for the whales to cash-out a significant amount without impacting the price. But selling a chunk to futures traders is a good opportunity and it is possible that taking advantage of that has hit the price a little.

This article from a couple of days ago talks about the concept:
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-12-21/bitcoin-billionaires-may-have-found-a-way-to-cash-out

But I'm most comfortable putting it down to the range of complex influences that have caused previous dips in prices. Some of it might be algorithmic trading. Maybe after watching it climb fast, unreasonable expectations have made the slight slowdown seem worrisome. Possibly the fact that bitcoin has attracted many inexperienced investors to try their hand means the market is more emotional and reactive than more standard types of investments. Maybe the weather has more to do with the price of bitcoin than its functionality does. How about Christmas putting a pinch on budgets causing investors to cash in despite a drop in price? If the Christmas budget theory is correct, maybe we can expect a leap in price as people invest their cash presents where they'd never risk money earned through hard work.

So the only thing I know for sure is that Jamie Dimon is green with jealousy that the market ignored him, but reacts when Roger Ver goes public. But you've got to be enjoying the media circus that spends a month calling bitcoin a bubble, and then when the price dips, writes pages speculating about what strange thing could have interrupted such a strong climb.

After reading the article, I can understand why Alan was invited to present at the World Funding Summit. Victoria Silchenko is clearly aware of both the potential of blockchain technology and the lack of substance offered by many ICO projects. And many of her insightful comments made me think again about why people invest in ICOs.

Then I realised that they probably aren't investing at all. They're just gambling. When you invest  in something, you take some time doing due diligence, then after investing, you expect it to take some time to make a reasonable profit. But when you gamble, you rarely calculate the true odds, and while being ready to lose your bet, you hope for a massive short-term profit.

In the article, Victoria stated, "VC deals are expensive: on average it takes 118 hours for due diligence and 83 days to close". And from the effort required by DNotes Global Inc to find registered PCAOB auditors as just one part of establishing a Reg. A+ mini IPO, it is clear that providing a platform that enables investors to conduct due diligence in scrutinising the offering and risk is neither cheap nor easy. Then, as an investor, understanding the provided information and then making an informed investment requires a level of experience or skill that is not common. So when big quick profits are being offered by ICOs, it is understandable that those without training in fintech are attracted to the quick bet over the long-term investment.

Unfortunately, ICOs don't frame their offering as a quick and risky bet with a slim potential of making lasting high profits. The only thing that indicates investors are playing a lottery or some other high-risk game is the slick and eye-catching graphics. Instead, they do their best to imply stability and genuine milestones that will be achieved by experienced developers. And without providing any reliable market research data, many ICOs imply that there is a huge market potential and their product is a unique fit for all of that available money.

So it is understandable that inexperienced investors don't realise how their actions are much more like gambling than investing. And this is made much worse due to a lack of precedence. The failure of ICOs to provide a return on investment, will take a while to become common knowledge. This is likely to be made worse by the greater-fool effect where the first investors know what they're doing and invest large amounts across very few participants. Then they offload their holdings at peak price to many more investors who are investing much smaller amounts. This may go through a few more one-to-many trades until those left holding the worthless bag are great in number, but only invested a very small amount. And while losing a very small investment isn't news and is unlikely to then become common knowledge, it is even less likely to go public because people are embarrassed by bad financial decisions and tend to keep quiet about them.

Everything I've seen DNotes Glabal Inc. do, aligns with the attitudes and processes necessary to attract informed investors who believe they will make reasonable profits over a longer term. Their cryptocurrency DNotes has clearly attracted a range of people from short-term gamblers to long-term investors as well as some very well informed miners. This puts both the company and the currency in a unique position in the market place. And I won't be at all surprised if the investor mindset who are holding DNotes see the logic of participating in a mini IPO that will go towards developing their financial products further and make DNotes2.0 more functional.