i would venture to say this statement is everything that is wrong with crypto today. people look at it like its a get rich quick scheme, when the most important thing is what functionality a coin provides or what problem it solves. ANYTHING can go up in value based on speculation. tulips for instance. but it is this idea of having found themselves a money tree which gets people tied up in the scummiest projects like Bitconnect and other lending platforms (and verge lol). some people are investing to be on the ground floor of a revolutionary technology that has the potential to improve the lives of the poorest among us as well as those in the developed world. but others seem to be getting involved solely based on greed and the idea that they are going to make 10,000% interest; when many stock/bond portfolio managers will never make 10% interest. often when it seems too good to be true it is, and those that FOMO hard when everything was sky high in November have went on to lose their shirts...

i would say this man hit the nail on its head!!


  mic drop

haha of course not! im sure he bought extra BTC beforehand tho and was experimenting to see if he could influence the price on the most established coin out there.

i am not afraid to admit that i do not read every single whitepaper of the coins or tokens i have bought or have been interested in. that being said, it is often the case that the most important details from the whitepapers are generally covered in a concise way in the FAQ, or in videos by the developers, or the about section of the website for that coin. combining that with looking up the people who are on the development team tends to give me a good idea of how serious the project is and how likely they are to successfully deliver their product to market. there are some coins like BAT which after i watched the introductory videos i was so interested i wanted to know more about what they were doing in a more technical form, so i went through the white paper.

i believe reading the whitepapers can be kind of difficult to grasp for some people who are not technically inclined. and in that case i feel like a good secondary source of information is if you can find one or two highly qualified youtubers who have done videos breaking down the aspects of the coin which are important. Ivan on Tech is one youtuber whose opinion i certainly trust. though there is SO much money in the space going to marketing, that the blessing of a youtuber with a large following can significantly impact the success of a coin, and for this reason i always take their videos with a grain of salt. sometimes you can stumble across a video where it is the developer themselves doing a lecture on their coin and what makes it different, or an interview between the developer and another knowledgeable person who can ask the hard questions and get the developers answers to questions which may not even be answered in their whitepaper. videos that feature the developers i feel are a reasonably good resource if you are not going to read the whitepaper yourself.

I too have been trying to find lesser known ICO's which are worthy of investment. Ivan on Tech recently did an interview with the developers from ELIGMA. i was not impressed at all at first, as they resembled Russian mobsters to me (lol, they ended up being from Slovenia). i did some additional looking into it and was kind of interested. they claim to be integrating AI with blockchain in order to help customers to find the lowest possible price for everyday consumer products like phones, appliances, ect..

have any of you heard of Eligma, or do any of you have any thoughts on their project?

does not surprise me one bit! dude has always been one of the scummiest people in this space. hes done tremendous damage by lending his name to shilling piece of shit pump and dump coins like verge. people who do not know any better or do their own market research end up buying these shitcoins on his advice. then they just end up losing money because he not only charged a shit ton to shill whatever coin, but he gradually buys a bunch of that coin in the days leading up to his tweet, just to dump those coins on the unsuspecting people who took his shitty advice. so hes not making 100,000 per tweet, its surely alot more.

the short answer is no, no there is no chance it vanishes. if anything it could begin to pick up in daily volume and popularity because it has such low fees compared to most of the big coins out there. i would venture to say the most widely adopted coins to date as far as being used to transfer value between individuals are BTC, ETH, BCH, LTC, and XMR.  personally i occasionally purchase hashing power at mining rig rentals dot com. i have found that out of the three coins they accept payment in (BTC/LTC/ETH) the one which gives me the most bang for my buck is consistently LTC because i lose significantly less on transaction fees than either of the others. so as long as this is the case i would venture that LTC has a bright future. not only that but the development team behind LTC has, in my opinion, always been one of the best and most active teams who are really vested in the successful adoption of their coin.

can i ask why?

i personally do not see anything about verge that that makes it a worthwhile investment. like maybe there is something i dont know about that i am missing, but if i am not mistaken the main attribute which verge boasts is its privacy. however there are already some very well developed privacy coins with very active development communities. just because it is cheaper per coin does not mean that you will make any more money when it appreciates (or more likely depreciates) in value. verge already has a very high market cap for a privacy coin. if you were getting in on a coin when it is still sub 100 million in total market cap, then it may be more worthwhile (it would also be more risky) because it would have a large amount of room to grow. however with verge, as was mentioned by another person, it would seem that you missed your opportunity to get in on it early.

i think it is a good idea to have as part of your portfolio at least one privacy coin. that way you not only have diversity of coins but also a diversity of use cases. i would personally suggest that you invest in monero (XMR), as it seems to have less volatility than others and appears to be the coin of preference in the dark net markets. i do not endorse buying anything illegal or avoiding taxation through the use of the darknet, but if there are a large group of people who are asking to be paid in a currency then at least it has a steady source of demand.

for you it may be that the best coin is moneroV. i have not done alot of research into this fork of monero, however i do know that it is VERY new still. so it would possibly offer you the best of of both worlds; an established name and use case, as well as being new and having a small enough market cap to have room to grow. just remember this is just my opinion and in no way investment advice since i am no professional in this; and i cant not stress enough how important it is for you to do your own do diligence.

finally in addition to monero i would suggest that you look at both DASH and PIVX. both are very similar in the way that they have masternodes, which offer additional functionality to their coins. if you are making a sizeable investment you should look into their masternode requirements, since owning a masternode is a way of making passive income kinda like a miner would by taking a portion of transaction fees. it is not difficult to own and operate a masternode. all you have to do is own a certain amount of that particular currency, and i believe have a wallet that is open and continually syncing 24/7 (this may be a little more involved, you would just need to do a bit of your own research first).

i hope this helps. i would never recommend verge; i just personally got burned on verge in the early days and since then have gotten the impression that it is mostly a pumper and dumper.

if you want a real scam get you some p3d tokens

uhhhh.... im sorry for the original poster. tron just imploded, down almost 20%

buying opportunity?

lol WHAT BUBBLE?!?!!? are you talking about the crypto recession? and honestly it will probably get worse before better. i am not necessarily one who believes that bitcoin and crypto is always able to be analyzed using traditional market analysis; however, there is some merit to analyzing previous resistance and support levels, and that 7500ish was a support for a long time that we just broke through downward. the next level is around 5k. i believe that bitcoin will retest this 5k support before it goes up, and when it does retest these lower levels of support it could very well go down as far as the 3k support level.... this sure hasnt been a good month, alot of people went into march thinking they could get back in and the worst was over, however we went lower still...

 your English is kind of wonky, im not sure what you are trying to say at all right there...i understand how the dividends work. they are done in ETH, not in tokens, unless you choose to reinvest. you can compute exactly what affect you yourself would have on the price if you sold by multiplying the number of tokens by the .00000001. so the point was that you will be sharing the amount of dividends you receive based on how many tokens you have. sure it would be nice to get some dividends, but if a group of people sells a large amount of tokens the price will crash, and not only are you going to lose your 10% from withdrawing but you will also have lost a huge percentage of your initial eth as well.

hi guys! i hope this is the right place for this...

i have been doing alot of thinking lately on releasing my own coin. initially i thought about doing just a clone of BTC and messing around with the attributes like the total supply ect.. however i then started thinking about how about instead of creating ANOTHER new blockchain that needs miners to verify transaction which would use up alot of electricity that may not be necessary. i dont expect this coin to explode or need tremendous resources, i was really visioning something that will offer utility but not necessarily need to incredibly fast, and i want it to be as efficient as possible. so then i started to think about the possibility of just merge mining the coin. this would probably be ideal because i can take advantage of the robust network already in place and hopefully not use a burdensome amount of electricity. can someone help me out with information on what it takes to create a coin which is merge mined with the BTC network? or point me in the direction of some documentation or tutorials online which may be of help? ANY help is appreciated, i have really scoured the internet for a few days and cant seem to find any documentation on what it takes to set up merge mining for a coin or how to implement it. i look forward to any replies !

eh i fucked up when i initially read the contract i looked specifically at the initial price and incremental price and when i first checked it out the numbers are so similar that i wrote down .0000001 for both and didnt even realize i missed the extra zero in the incremental number.

either way doesn't change the scummy nature of this coin and the attention that it has attracted from straight up crooks..... even with a purpose to produce passive income as you stated, that's not the whole picture. its creating passive income by taking the money directly from people who come later than you. if your only good at ripping people off then this is the thing for you! because it doesn't appreciate based on having any actual value, it goes up because of a line of code. in the real market individuals do not have the ability to force a change in the price with their buys and sells, all you can do is ask for a price and if someone else feels its a good deal they buy it. with it not being useful or tradeable for anything other than getting a fraction of your ether back it means that people will have to sell eventually and its always the ones who sell first who get out before it collapses. there is still no case for why the devs and the "ambassadors" should enjoy 10,000% interest, and others should take massive losses when hoping for marginal gains. the people this is targeting are for the most part ignorant of many of the scummiest aspects of this token and being straight up taken advantage of for wanting to get rich quick. this is the same thing bitconnect did... targeted advertising to people who don't fully understand what it is or why its a scam. its just taking from one person and giving it to another for no reason other than greed.

its all good when people are still putting in new money to keep this afloat, but when those 2% and 3%'s go to sell 20,000 tokens at a time the price will tank to a point where any dividends are negligible and you are only able to get back a small percentage of what you put in.

like i said before some people are just lazy crooks and feel like they should be able to take peoples money and get away with it. and to incentivize people to lose their money you offer a negligible dividend and call it "passive income". but because of the way it works the people getting in now have to put in 100,000 to get the same amount of power that someone bought in with 500 bucks in the beginning. the early adopters here are not paving the way for a new platform or technology, they are not developing anything which will change people lives for the better. the whole thing is deceiving and hard to grasp for most people. this is just preying on the FOMO of other people and giving the crypto community's reputation yet another black eye.

everyone should ask themselves what is the motivation behind this token? is it bettering blockchain tech and making it faster? is it facilitating miropayments in africa? does it offer anything of value to the people who buy in? no, the only thing it offers is huge profits for the ambassadors by taking from the ill informed. IT IS A LIE TO PORTRAY THIS AS PRODUCING PASSIVE INCOME FOR ANYONE OTHER THAN THE AMBASSADORS, everyone else WILL lose money. either they will just lose their 20% or they will lose all the value of the tokens they bought and have a small amount of eth to console their losses. when you tell people "look over here you made a few dollars in ETH today as dividends!!" then the price collapses because the big and early guys have gotten out and what someone paid 10,000 for is now worth 500 bucks, thats a scam. the dividends have always been negligible and more of a ploy than a real passive income. lets not forget that you have to make back the 20% you lost for buying in first to ever realize any kind of profit, and as with every ponzi its all about timing and once people start to get out for real everyone else will be stuck holding worthless tokens. some people dont mind that they are ripping off other people i guess but it doesnt make it any less wrong.

HEY there everyone!!!

i am a n00blet according to my forum profile, however i have been a miner on and off and a crypto enthusiast since 2013/14.... and needless to say i have seen some SCAMS in my time in the community. everyone knows the ones which will live in infamy like mastercoin and bitconnect, but there has been SO many it gets hard to keep track. However i believe that it is our prerogative as a community to immediately call out any scammer for what they are, in order to protect at all costs the reputation of the crypto community. if our community is tainted by negative generalizations about crypto derived from the likes of bitconnect and davor coin it will be extremely difficult for us to fix our collective reputation. and without a solid reputation as a foundation to build our projects upon, these projects will have no value to the general public and the hard work of the developers will all be for naught.

this brings me to the reason for this post.... im sure that many of you by now have heard of Proof of Weak hands (p3d is the erc20 token name). there has been alot of buzz about this token recently, especially on youtube, and in the couple short weeks since it was released there has already been more than 2 million dollars poured into it! just like many of you, when i first stumbled upon this i was very interested because they claim to be doing what bitconnect said they were doing, except that all of the code is public and written in solidity, and the token is on the ethereum blockchain. of course we all know the SEVERE damage that our community has suffered at the hands of Trevon James, Craig grant, ryan hildreth, and others because of bitconnect. so the thought of another bitconnect made me quite furious at first. but then if you watch a few youtube videos you see that these guys are shilling this in a whole new "reputable" way. basically these youtube personalities are portraying this token as being totally secure because its all written in a smart contract and is open source for anyone to critique and audit. many claims have been made about how there just is no way to get scammed by buying into this, how an exit scheme is not possible because no one person has access to the contract funds, and that all you have to do is hold your tokens and your guaranteed to make money. however it is quite unfortunate that people who are shilling the idea that its secure because it is a smart contract, cant even read the contract itself! well i did read it and i found out lots of stuff that raised red flags, and hope you all stay far away from this!

so we do have quantum computers today. however they are no practical threat to the bitcoin network or any other at the moment. these types of machines are really only currently used for problems in optimization. for instance if you want to route all the flights of an airline carrier in the most effective way possible. quantum computers can handle problems with many many variables. like for instance taking all starting point and end points of the destinations of all your passengers, as well as all the gates you have available at all the airports in the country, as well as how many pilots you have on staff, and the amount of airplanes the company has in service... then the computer can spit out what it believes is the most optimum outcome for which people belong on which planes in order to to get everyone to their destination in the most cost effective manner possible. quantum computers are also used in weather forecasting, where again there are a tremendous amount of data and variables and the outcome is not necessarily an exact answer but a probability a specific outcome will occur. these types of computers are EXTREMELY difficult to just write programs for and to date we have not unlocked the real potential for this kind of technology. your bitcoins are safe. you should be more concerned about Bitmain tbh.

damn bro im scared for you!!!

i would put half in ELA (look it up if you havent hear of it, its on the neo blockchain and has several million in daily volume. also supported by bitmain and i believe the chinese govt)

good luck though mate, i know tron and ripple have both made me a nice return then burned me hard. i bought ripple at like 1.40 just to hold it all the way to over 3.00 then back down to 75 cents 

 so even when i was writing that, it was blowing my mind. i thought to myself i HAVE to be doing this wrong.... but honestly i don't think i did it significantly wrong. i believe that the formula is actually a linear one and not that complex....

i know that there is a difference between the buy and sell prices and i am using the buy price, and rounding, to make things easier to understand. as far as the price i am just using the higher price to give the coin even more of a buffer and a chance. but it doesn't matter because the buy and sell prices are both incremented together by .0000001 either up or down based on purchases and sales.

so if i currently had 12 tokens and i went to sell what would happen? and then lets scale it up to a larger bag holder?

so price starts at .0098600 (again this is the buy price)
sell one token -> now the price is .0098599 and i also lose 10% of the eth that's supposed to be coming to me (however paying that fee and distributing it is all done in ETH and the fee only affects the token price when you reinvest)
now price is .0098599
sell one token -> now the price is .0098598
now sell 10 tokens -> (.0000001 x 10). sooo... (.0098598 - .0000010) = new price of .0098588

then the selling accelerates because less and less new money is coming into the contract
now sell 100 tokens -> (.0000001 x 100). so increment down the price by .0000100 = new price of .0098488
now sell 1000 tokens -> (.0000001 x 1000) so price decreases by .0001000 = new price of .0097488
now sell 10,000 tokens -> (.0000001 x 10,000) so decrease by .0010000 = new price of .0087488
now sell 100,000 tokens -> (.0000001 x 100,000) so decrease by .0100000 = new price of -0.0012512
THAT NEGATIVE IS NOT A TYPO

so in short... at today's numbers the contract can not afford to pay out more than 110,000 of the nearly 800,000 tokens which are currently in circulation before the code  increments the price of the token so low that it is a negative number (and code is LAW! that's how all you fucks are shilling this to people isn't it). realistically it cant go negative it will just go to zero. so where does that leave the people who own the other 700,000 tokens?!?!?!

WAT AM I GUNNNNA DOOOOO?!?!?

wait wait wait can you say that again? so you mean to tell me that measures were put in place, which are not even best practices in coding, in order to obfuscate the identities of those involved? makes you wonder...

not to mention that in the code the "ambassador list" is all nothing but nicknames, and half of them are just a public key with a couple letters i assume are supposed to represent initials.... and we are supposed to just believe that each public key represents an individual. however there is no way whatsoever to actually prove that all these public keys cited in the code are actually controlled by a small group of people or even possibly one person.

this just blew my mind.... if im not mistaken there is approximately 800,000 tokens in circulation

each token sold would increment the price down by .0000001

the current price is .0098600

so if i was a big stakeholder and i had 4000 tokens i wanted to sell, then the price should be about .009400 once i sold (0.0098600- [0.0000001 x 4000])

so in the same sense, what if a handful of the largest holders sold.... lets say 25 people, each with 4k tokens went to sell...

thats about 100,000 tokens to be sold, each token takes the price down by .0000001.

now its been a few years since i took calculus and big numbers hurt my brain, but i believe that sale of 100,000 tokens would increment down the price by 0.0100000.

so at todays price of .0098600 ETH.... if 100,000 tokens went up for sale (which is only like 1/8th of the total in circulation).... then the ending price would be 0.0098600 - 0.0100000

that would mean an ending price of (-0.00014 ETH) ....

WHAT AM I GUNNNNA DOOOOOO?.....



now this one i would LOVE to see explained