Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 32 results by bahatassafus
Re: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread
MasterCoin will not allow the trading of assets against BTC on their DEX - assets could only be traedd against MSC. On his blog David Johnston (Chairman of the MSC Foundation Board) presents this limitation as an advantage, and later in the comments he claims Counterparty has the same issue - requiring XBTC for trading on the DEX...
http://en.reddit.com/r/mastercoin/comments/2g4mmp/utility_is_the_mother_of_liquidity/
http://en.reddit.com/r/mastercoin/comments/2g4mmp/utility_is_the_mother_of_liquidity/
That's not correct. BTC can be traded with any Counterparty asset, and any Counterparty asset can be traded for any other Counterparty asset.
XBTC is a BTC proxy token created by a community member that merely expedites the process of DEx trading.
I know that
you can check my comments on the reddit postRe: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread
MasterCoin will not allow the trading of assets against BTC on their DEX - assets could only be traedd against MSC. On his blog David Johnston (Chairman of the MSC Foundation Board) presents this limitation as an advantage, and later in the comments he claims Counterparty has the same issue - requiring XBTC for trading on the DEX...
http://en.reddit.com/r/mastercoin/comments/2g4mmp/utility_is_the_mother_of_liquidity/
http://en.reddit.com/r/mastercoin/comments/2g4mmp/utility_is_the_mother_of_liquidity/
Re: [ANN] Slimcoin : Proof of Burn NEW BLOCK GEN, Mineable by low power computer!
Re: [ANN][SHARE]ShareCoin - Pure POS - MultiPool - Official exchange launched
Everything is brandy dandy for Sharex developers, but us, all of us who received sharecoins hoping for new currency that is fair (check) and successful (not check) it is not.
As it stands now
imagine hypothetical situation: Out of a chance everyone removes sharecoins from their wallets and buys Feeshares, all 5000 of them as their is no more sharecoins left (5.000 x 20.000 = 100.000.000). So
as long as their is no more sharecoins on hands of the public we get a situation that developer holds ALL sharecoins, public holds feeshares (so far 5000 of them). So far developer got nothing in terms of profit, because whatever they created (all sharecoins) out of thin air and gave to us, came back to them. But developers intend to sell 45.000 more feeshares which means public must bring into sharex (read: developers) or simply his PONZI scheme their BTC 9 times over the volume of all sharecoins multiplied by whatever the price of those sharecoins at that moment is. So far looks good for sharex, as they are pricing their sharex exchange bussiness roughly 10 times more then price of all sharecoins in existence. Not bad.... Again for developers.
I have a huge problem with that.
First of all I took part (and initially intended to stay/invest/help)in all this free giveaway under impression that it is a new cryptocurrency that is fair, has a big base of holders fight from get go,who would be interested to develop sharecoin into potential rival to litecoin, NXT, ripples or ultimately to bitcoin. What I got instead is a try on developers part to sway me into using those free shares and potentially bringing more mine bitcoins for "owning"(lol) part of sharex exchange, of which I have no interest as that is SO MUCH SMALLER THEN WHAT SHARECOIN COULD ACHIEVE.
I wish to all remaining participants good luck, as what they are offered is pretty much something along the lines of : "We give you 1 part (of coins) for free, the rest 9 parts of your bitcoins you bring yourself, buy feeshares and lets hope sharex would pickup nicely".
this business is not about new coin, it is about exchange.
Not my cup of tea, I am out, all BTC removed from sharex. Again, good luck.
As it stands now
imagine hypothetical situation: Out of a chance everyone removes sharecoins from their wallets and buys Feeshares, all 5000 of them as their is no more sharecoins left (5.000 x 20.000 = 100.000.000). So
as long as their is no more sharecoins on hands of the public we get a situation that developer holds ALL sharecoins, public holds feeshares (so far 5000 of them). So far developer got nothing in terms of profit, because whatever they created (all sharecoins) out of thin air and gave to us, came back to them. But developers intend to sell 45.000 more feeshares which means public must bring into sharex (read: developers) or simply his PONZI scheme their BTC 9 times over the volume of all sharecoins multiplied by whatever the price of those sharecoins at that moment is. So far looks good for sharex, as they are pricing their sharex exchange bussiness roughly 10 times more then price of all sharecoins in existence. Not bad.... Again for developers.
I have a huge problem with that.
First of all I took part (and initially intended to stay/invest/help)in all this free giveaway under impression that it is a new cryptocurrency that is fair, has a big base of holders fight from get go,who would be interested to develop sharecoin into potential rival to litecoin, NXT, ripples or ultimately to bitcoin. What I got instead is a try on developers part to sway me into using those free shares and potentially bringing more mine bitcoins for "owning"(lol) part of sharex exchange, of which I have no interest as that is SO MUCH SMALLER THEN WHAT SHARECOIN COULD ACHIEVE.
I wish to all remaining participants good luck, as what they are offered is pretty much something along the lines of : "We give you 1 part (of coins) for free, the rest 9 parts of your bitcoins you bring yourself, buy feeshares and lets hope sharex would pickup nicely".
this business is not about new coin, it is about exchange.
Not my cup of tea, I am out, all BTC removed from sharex. Again, good luck.
Couldn't agree more, and i'll add - if at least this complex structure they created was standing on a reasonable valuation of a new exchange - we could forgive the elegant pivot from coin into exchange kickstarter. But when simple math shows that even Cryptsy's volume won't get you ROI, the whole story of "the real value of ShareCoin" becomes ridiculous. And the developer's response? of course it's expansive, sahrecoin is overvalued, "i'm the only dev of a coin that doesn't want the price of that coin to rise"... How will anyone reasonable not dump his coins after reading that? And if "ShareCoin only purpose is to distribute FeeShare" then why the multipool? And why not just sell feeShares for BTC? I'm out.
The dev do not want to just give FeeShares (another word for "a % of the business profit") as a pure generosity gesture. He want something in return. What does it want the most? Obviously not money. That why he simply doesn't sell the FeeShares for BTC. He want a group of enthusiast who will promote his business. His idea to recruit those enthusiasts was to create a cryptocoin.
Good or bad idea? Like any novelty it's hard to judge so soon.
Re: [ANN][SHARE]ShareCoin - Pure POS - MultiPool - Official exchange launched
Everything is brandy dandy for Sharex developers, but us, all of us who received sharecoins hoping for new currency that is fair (check) and successful (not check) it is not.
As it stands now
imagine hypothetical situation: Out of a chance everyone removes sharecoins from their wallets and buys Feeshares, all 5000 of them as their is no more sharecoins left (5.000 x 20.000 = 100.000.000). So
as long as their is no more sharecoins on hands of the public we get a situation that developer holds ALL sharecoins, public holds feeshares (so far 5000 of them). So far developer got nothing in terms of profit, because whatever they created (all sharecoins) out of thin air and gave to us, came back to them. But developers intend to sell 45.000 more feeshares which means public must bring into sharex (read: developers) or simply his PONZI scheme their BTC 9 times over the volume of all sharecoins multiplied by whatever the price of those sharecoins at that moment is. So far looks good for sharex, as they are pricing their sharex exchange bussiness roughly 10 times more then price of all sharecoins in existence. Not bad.... Again for developers.
I have a huge problem with that.
First of all I took part (and initially intended to stay/invest/help)in all this free giveaway under impression that it is a new cryptocurrency that is fair, has a big base of holders fight from get go,who would be interested to develop sharecoin into potential rival to litecoin, NXT, ripples or ultimately to bitcoin. What I got instead is a try on developers part to sway me into using those free shares and potentially bringing more mine bitcoins for "owning"(lol) part of sharex exchange, of which I have no interest as that is SO MUCH SMALLER THEN WHAT SHARECOIN COULD ACHIEVE.
I wish to all remaining participants good luck, as what they are offered is pretty much something along the lines of : "We give you 1 part (of coins) for free, the rest 9 parts of your bitcoins you bring yourself, buy feeshares and lets hope sharex would pickup nicely".
this business is not about new coin, it is about exchange.
Not my cup of tea, I am out, all BTC removed from sharex. Again, good luck.
As it stands now
imagine hypothetical situation: Out of a chance everyone removes sharecoins from their wallets and buys Feeshares, all 5000 of them as their is no more sharecoins left (5.000 x 20.000 = 100.000.000). So
as long as their is no more sharecoins on hands of the public we get a situation that developer holds ALL sharecoins, public holds feeshares (so far 5000 of them). So far developer got nothing in terms of profit, because whatever they created (all sharecoins) out of thin air and gave to us, came back to them. But developers intend to sell 45.000 more feeshares which means public must bring into sharex (read: developers) or simply his PONZI scheme their BTC 9 times over the volume of all sharecoins multiplied by whatever the price of those sharecoins at that moment is. So far looks good for sharex, as they are pricing their sharex exchange bussiness roughly 10 times more then price of all sharecoins in existence. Not bad.... Again for developers.
I have a huge problem with that.
First of all I took part (and initially intended to stay/invest/help)in all this free giveaway under impression that it is a new cryptocurrency that is fair, has a big base of holders fight from get go,who would be interested to develop sharecoin into potential rival to litecoin, NXT, ripples or ultimately to bitcoin. What I got instead is a try on developers part to sway me into using those free shares and potentially bringing more mine bitcoins for "owning"(lol) part of sharex exchange, of which I have no interest as that is SO MUCH SMALLER THEN WHAT SHARECOIN COULD ACHIEVE.
I wish to all remaining participants good luck, as what they are offered is pretty much something along the lines of : "We give you 1 part (of coins) for free, the rest 9 parts of your bitcoins you bring yourself, buy feeshares and lets hope sharex would pickup nicely".
this business is not about new coin, it is about exchange.
Not my cup of tea, I am out, all BTC removed from sharex. Again, good luck.
Couldn't agree more, and i'll add - if at least this complex structure they created was standing on a reasonable valuation of a new exchange - we could forgive the elegant pivot from coin into exchange kickstarter. But when simple math shows that even Cryptsy's volume won't get you ROI, the whole story of "the real value of ShareCoin" becomes ridiculous. And the developer's response? of course it's expansive, sahrecoin is overvalued, "i'm the only dev of a coin that doesn't want the price of that coin to rise"... How will anyone reasonable not dump his coins after reading that? And if "ShareCoin only purpose is to distribute FeeShare" then why the multipool? And why not just sell feeShares for BTC? I'm out.
Re: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty Protocol, Client and Coin (built on Bitcoin) - Official
A very simple interface for Broadcasts / Bets: http://xcpfeeds.info/
+1what are the plans for this project? is it / will it be open?
Re: The Official Mastercoin Foundation, Master Protocol & Mastercoin Thread
Can i ask why, it even goes from
Bitcoin -> MSC -> Safe coin
Why is MSC the intermediary
Why doesn't it just go
Bitcoin -> Safe coin
i must be missing something here
Bitcoin -> MSC -> Safe coin
Why is MSC the intermediary
Why doesn't it just go
Bitcoin -> Safe coin
i must be missing something here
I'm not aware of any ways to currently issue your own currency on top of bitcoin. There are ways of colouring coins, yes, but not issuing new tokens. Mastercoin permits this.
CounterParty? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.0
Re: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty Protocol, Client and Coin (built on Bitcoin) - Official
i'm getting the {'message': 'TX rejected', 'code': -22} error on an order command.
unsigned tx:
0100000001c89e23e1f025a50bbf45bf220f1af59800246858700321af5c8e81d02da7996f02000 0003237366139313430316461613038613431373362363265303030653364323562393061313663 37656535326338653138386163ffffffff020000000000000000386a36434e54525052545900000 00a000000000000000100000002540be40000000000000000000000000005e2f540012c00000000 00002710c0670000000000001976a91401daa08a4173b62e000e3d25b90a16c7ee52c8e188ac000 00000
Thanks for the help
unsigned tx:
0100000001c89e23e1f025a50bbf45bf220f1af59800246858700321af5c8e81d02da7996f02000 0003237366139313430316461613038613431373362363265303030653364323562393061313663 37656535326338653138386163ffffffff020000000000000000386a36434e54525052545900000 00a000000000000000100000002540be40000000000000000000000000005e2f540012c00000000 00002710c0670000000000001976a91401daa08a4173b62e000e3d25b90a16c7ee52c8e188ac000 00000
Thanks for the help
Re: Is Ripple a Bitcoin Killer or Complementer? Founder of Mt Gox will launch Ripple
Ripple is an idea that is both way too ahead of its time and obsolete simultaneously. It depends on trusting people to be honest about competing for limited resources. Ripple is like the old charge plates from the 1940s. It will work better when people are not competing for scarce capital.
well im not sure what this ripple reloaded will be like, but the original was about creating money where / when it's needed and by the two parties who need it. In this sense it is not the old competition over scarce capital as fiat and bitcoin are.
Re: community backed legal entity to defend bitcoin related projects is a must
I'm not sure how it works in the US. In Israel, where i'm from, banks are regulated and can't refuse business without legal ground. About a month ago the regulator "released the banks from their duty to provide service for gambling sites" - http://www.yogonet.com/english/2012/01/11/israel-banks-can-refuse-to-handle-transactions-for-suspicious-websites
And take my word for it, Israel is not the most liberal country when it comes to human rights...
Just wait till somebody "up there" hears about bitcoin. The Israeli regulator will whip up a bitcoin clause in the same way
faster than you can say Satoshi Nakamoto.
Maybe they will. Why just sit and watch it happened? And why letting the banks do what ever they want when it didn't yet happen?
It won't happen in the same way as there are rules in Israel against gambling and no rules [yet] against bitcoin.
And, such rules are not that easy to pass. They'll need to define what bitcoin is, to explain how it differs from facebook money and the gaming industry money, why people living in democracies can't buy bits with their money, etc. It will be even harder if we put up some fight.
Re: community backed legal entity to defend bitcoin related projects is a must
I think just as Tor, BitTorrent, and Silk Road scoff at laws and exist outside/despite them, Bitcoin will exist in the same way. It's getting to the point where the government is passing laws or threatening lawsuits to try to stop something they can't control (SOPA is a great recent example), and the people are just completely ignoring them, since they will have little effect in the end (not counting the anti-SOPA protests, though if it had passed, switching to I2P or Namecoin would've meant the government would have lost even more control).
I disagree. How can you compare bitcoin to silkroad? this is exactly what we should fight against if we want bitcoin to get anywhere. bitcoin is to silkroad what cash is to street dealers. not more, not less.
SOPA is indeed a great example, but saying the people completely ignored it?? The efforts to stop it - probably the biggest campaign in the history of web rights - was successful! This is exactly what i'm hoping to see with bitcoin.
Re: community backed legal entity to defend bitcoin related projects is a must
The bitcoin community is capable and creative in so many ways, but when it comes to the legal field and the interfaces with real world entities, it seems like we accept everything as a force of nature. Currency is all about trust and no trust can be built if the second biggest exchange can go down so easily. Since bitcoin was born there were countless incidents of illegal confiscation of funds by banks, Paypal and others. None of them was supported by court order or any official regulator. Entrepreneur and investors will avoid bitcoin as long as the legal cloud is hanging there. The bitcoin experiment is doomed if we won't be able to defend it legally and if we won't support each other in such cases.
The good news are: bitcoin, in most countries is perfectly ok and has a good legal case. Banks and other financial entities are not allowed to refuse bitcoin business just because they don't like it. In the open source spirit, lets join forces and resources.
What do you think is the right way to go about it?
Citation needed.The good news are: bitcoin, in most countries is perfectly ok and has a good legal case. Banks and other financial entities are not allowed to refuse bitcoin business just because they don't like it. In the open source spirit, lets join forces and resources.
What do you think is the right way to go about it?
I'm not sure how it works in the US. In Israel, where i'm from, banks are regulated and can't refuse business without legal ground. About a month ago the regulator "released the banks from their duty to provide service for gambling sites" - http://www.yogonet.com/english/2012/01/11/israel-banks-can-refuse-to-handle-transactions-for-suspicious-websites
And take my word for it, Israel is not the most liberal country when it comes to human rights...
A quick search brings similar results for the UK and Canada.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2010/03/a_legal_right_to_a_bank_accoun.html
http://settlement.org/sys/faqs_detail.asp?faq_id=4000635
But, if it was that easy, i would not bring the subject up. The legal case should demonstrate the contradictions of such actions with Freedom of occupation the Bill of Rights etc.
community backed legal entity to defend bitcoin related projects is a must
The bitcoin community is capable and creative in so many ways, but when it comes to the legal field and the interfaces with real world entities, it seems like we accept everything as a force of nature. Currency is all about trust and no trust can be built if the second biggest exchange can go down so easily. Since bitcoin was born there were countless incidents of illegal confiscation of funds by banks, Paypal and others. None of them was supported by court order or any official regulator. Entrepreneurs and investors will avoid bitcoin as long as the legal cloud is hanging there. The bitcoin experiment is doomed if we won't be able to defend it legally and if we won't support each other in such cases.
The good news are: bitcoin, in most countries is perfectly ok and has a good legal case. Banks and other financial entities are not allowed to refuse bitcoin business just because they don't like it. In the open source spirit, lets join forces and resources.
What do you think is the right way to go about it?
The good news are: bitcoin, in most countries is perfectly ok and has a good legal case. Banks and other financial entities are not allowed to refuse bitcoin business just because they don't like it. In the open source spirit, lets join forces and resources.
What do you think is the right way to go about it?
And still.. please complete and launch your project. OT is indeed impressing, but its a low level framework and afaik no commercial service is running it yet. The world is big enough and the functionality is needed, Especially if you take it all the way to a running service with a trusted issuer and merchant tools. Good luck!
Quote
Money is only good incentive for manual work.
Unless you include every work that involves typing in a computer's keyboard as "manual work" you're obviously wrong.
An interesting TED piece on money and motivation:
http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html
Quote
That single combine harvester replaced 100 farmers with thousands of engineers
common.. You don't compare the number of engineers to the number of farmers replaced by one harvester. You compare it to the number replaced by thousands of them.LightRider, I admire your patient. It is sad to see how people reduce themselves to slot machines that won't produce anything worthy without being fed money. But this is slowly changing and its ppl like you that bring the change.