What is Peercoin: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know Heavy.com

Is there a media agenda to kill off altcoins so that Bitcoin can grow?

Is there a media agenda to kill off altcoins so that Bitcoin can grow?
A couple of days ago on the Dash Nation Discord longtime community member toknormal shared some thoughts about Bitcoin and altcoins. It's shared below in its entirety in the hopes that it'll be thought-provoking to those on this subreddit and may spark some conversation.

TL;DR: This post is about an emerging media agenda to "kill off" altcoins so that bitcoin can grow. The (faulty) perception by bitcoin maximalists that altcoins are a deadweight. How they are going to attack us. Why this is a crucial moment to try to kill off alts and how Dash as a community can constructively address it to its advantage. See also #markets [channel in the Dash Nation Discord linked above] where I've posted some observations about the very long range nature of the Dash market VS bitcoin and its prospects.

I usually try not to write long posts anymore. But my nerves are getting the better of me and all charts are sending the same message so I decided make this a bit of a ramble.
Lately I've been debating (on and off) with the maximalists in the BTC Wall Observer thread (who are very nice people and not trolls) but are convinced that alts are going to get wiped out. I've noticed a common theme in all the conversations that suddenly took me aback - along the lines of "ok - this is it, Bitcoin is now established, we don't need alts any more". Then I saw Max Keiser suddenly declare himself to be a "bitcoin maximalist" out of the blue.
This made me think for a bit because whatever one thinks of Max Keiser, he's not a monopolist. I also noticed how consistent his arguments were with those that I'd encountered in the "Wall Observer" thread and other places such as various Twitter feeds.
The common mantra was that "Bitcoin can do everything".
I'd like to bring this agenda to the community's attention - i.e. that there's some kind of co-ordinated effort afoot to kill off alts going on (even from people who don't believe in monopolies) and offer some tips as to how to address it.
Why now ?
Without knowing much about the politics, it's easy to see why people like Max Keiser might be - albeit guardedly - positioning themselves as "maximalists" at this particular moment in time. Also why there might be a wider coercive effort to kill off altcoins. You only have to look at the Bitcoin dominance charts. (To find this, go to coinmarketcap.com and find the little "Dominance" link right at the top of the page - quite small).
Alts have "eaten" bitcoin's lunch in 3 distinct phases, each of which lasted around 3 years. The first was the "dawn" of alt coins around 2013 when we saw Peercoin, Feathercoin et al emerging and that died off around halfway through the post 2013 bear market. The second was in 2015 when bitcoin was doing basically nothing but consolidating and Dash hit its second ATH on the ratio of 0.02+. The third was the "perfect storm" of ICOs and Bitcoin contentious hard forks when Bitcoin's very existence was in jeopardy. Now we're about to commence a new altcoin dominance rally.

The "maximalists" are aware of a potentially massive impending "Phase 4" altcoin capitalisation beyond anything that has been seen to date. If you look at that chart you can see we are on the cusp of completing a consolidation which - if sustained - will lead to a new influx of growth. You can also see that the growth profiles of altcoin dominance is asymmetrical - there are very long bear markets but right at the end there's an almost vertical, massively invasive bull market. That's what the monopolists are trying to mitigate.
My contention is that this is good for bitcoin. It is natural because bitcoin is a reserve asset that can only capitalise from utility assets that lie above it in "Exter's Pyramid". There is no conflict between bitcoin and other crypto assets and Dash should easily have a 2x to 10x growth against BTC in front of it if BTC functions as a reserve asset in the crypto space. That growth will ultimately find its way into bitcoin, being the reserve.
But many maximalists don't see it that way. They see competing assets as draining capital, brainpower and marketcap from bitcoin. This is ridiculous and not true, but it doesn't matter - they are going to start a media war (possibly worse) against alts. So we need to be aware of this and be able to field authentic challenges to their attacks.
How to address institutional challenges ?
There are 2 core themes IMO:
  1. DIVERSITY (Is an essential component of any market)
  2. ECONOMIC THEORY (Bitcoin is not a natural monopoly)
Most people can understand the idea of "trading pairs". If you don't have a trading pair in the same asset class then you ain't got no market. So from that perspective alone Bitcoin is not a go-er on its own. Side chains, Mimblewinble, whatever technology BTC comes up with, it can't be independently valued as long as it's all pegged to BTC. So that on its own is a dead duck. Then, economic theory has quite a lot to say about whether bitcoin can "kill of all alts" or not. It all depends on whether bitcoin is a natural monopoly:
A natural monopoly is a monopoly in an industry in which high infrastructural costs and other barriers to entry relative to the size of the market give the largest supplier in an industry, often the first supplier in a market, an overwhelming advantage over potential competitors.
What is a "Bitcoin maximalist" ? It is someone who's advocating that cryptocurrencies are a natural monopoly. Natural monopolies are well known and researched phenomena in economics. We can test this thesis against the definition of natural monopolies and compare each aspect of the definition as to how it applies to cryptos. Intuitively, it seems ridiculous that there can only be one crypto but the media war will try to portay it as such. Dash has made huge advances and we must not take our eye off the ball at this crucial time when altcoins are at the cusp of a new growth phase.
The monopolists have noticed this "end of phase" period and they think we haven't.
Having been engaged in much of this debate lately I've been wondering if I should ditch Dash and go all in Bitcoin as I realised that altcoins in general are at a watershed phase. Is there going to be another bull market against BTC or isn't there ? I've spent a lot of time thinking about this, engaging bitcoin maximalists on other threads and so on. Disclosure - I'm holding BTC as well as Dash. But the truth is I'd rather Dash succeeded and grew against bitcoin. It would be better for bitcoin, better for crypto and better for the world because diversity is a measure of freedom and like it or not, Dash is now one of the significant digital assets.
Regarding 1, I will link to one of my posts on the Wall Observer thread. Obviously it is a huge subject and many will have opinions but
High Infrastructural Costs
Dash has already overcome these as a "barrier to entry". The Dash network hashrate is huge in comparison to what's required to secure a viable cryptocurrency. It has also captured enough of a relative market size to be significantly traded, reviewed and invested in. Over Dash's lifetime, ROI is better then bitcoin. (See Dash/BTC).
William Baumol Criteria
According to this definition, "multi-firm" production would (and is) making cryptocurrency cheaper. If Bitcoin had been unique in the market it would not have had to compete with other blockchains for miners for example. We would not have had mining profitability ranking that tell miners which coin is most viable for them (almost never bitcoin). We would not have had proof of stake. Therefore Bitcoin does not meet the William Baumol criteria for a natural monopoly as "multi-firm" production has made the bitcoin network more efficient (by demonstrating competitively its inefficiencies)
Cost of Production
The original concept of a "natural monopoly" was made by John Stuart Mill according to the Wikipedia entry for "natural monopoly". His motivation was that in the absence of a natural monopoly, prices would reflect the cost of production.
submitted by TrustThyself to dashcrypto [link] [comments]

It's time for r/bitcoin to die

There will never be consensus. There will never be consensus. There will never be consensus.
If history has taught us one thing it is that there will never be consensus. A group of people didn't want to pay taxes so they founded a WHOLE NEW COUNTRY! Then those same people years later could not agree on "labor laws." One group wanted to continue to enslave people, the other group wanted freedom for all people. That SPLIT that whole "new" country. Now just about every country is fragmented into dozens of groups. Meat eaters. Non meat eaters. Socialists vs Capitalists. And now there is a political group founded on the fact that they don't get enough pu**y. No...I'm not making this up.
There will never be consensus.
Bitcoin was supposed to be the thing that united us all. The world NEEDED an alternative to banks. And the creators of bitcoin succeeded in that. The blockchain was born. What an accomplishment. It is a technological marvel that can solve so many problems.
The problem is, humans got in the way.
Perhaps being there in the beginning and watching the bitcoin community grow made them BTC maximalists. In the beginning, there WAS only one coin. True bitcoin people did not pay litecoin, or namecoin any attention. (I did invest in peercoin though) I remember when litecoin was $4 and I bought ZERO of that coin because I didn't think it had a purpose. Today my opinion of litecoin is the same...but I'm not going to create a subreddit called allltcholderssuck
I am a big enough person to allow someone to have their own opinion without it imposing on my beliefs. But with bitcoin - which is probably the first subreddit a new crypto wannabe would go to, this is not the case.
If you've never been on bitcoin I can sum up every thread like this. ALL NON BTC COINS ARE TRASH. ALL PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE IN ANY OTHER COIN ARE STUPID. ROGER VER IS TRASH. ALL HAIL Bitcoin!
Did I miss anything? (nope that sums it up right there).
Any opinion, any new idea, any suggestion is met with a digital beating and a ban. Can we increase the block size? BAN. Is BTC harmful to the environment? BAN. Will BTC ever have smart contracts? BAN. At one point even Ethereum was a bad word.
Why does this matter to you??
Because now, the community that built itself around inclusion and democracy, and the "we hate banks" motto has been fractured. And most of the hate is coming from bitcoin. Now we have people who were in Bitcoin when bitcoin was $300, that don't own any bitcoin! (like me) Not because we don't believe in bitcoin, but because we don't believe in the people behind bitcoin. And this ANTI-bitcoin attitude is growing.
Every coin or token that comes out in hopes to improve the blockchain is a vote against bitcoin. They are saying "we don't believe BTC is enough"
Rather than try to learn from these people, and improve the technology, bitcoin shuts itself off to the rest of the world, and continues to shout BITCOIN ONLY from inside their digital barricades.
Make no mistake THIS is the reason the market is down. Network congestion, led to high fees, led to people selling, led to understanding more about the people behind bitcoin, led to a dislike of the bitcoin maximalist community, led to moving money to other projects.
Its not charts. Its not whales. It is people saying "I want nothing to do with bitcoin." As long as bitcoin continues to spew this nonsense, it WILL be a drag on the entire community. New people (which is the life of any business) will come in - see the hatred - and take their money with them. Whales, will simply invest in other projects. Bitcoin will continue to fall, and unfortunately the entire crypto market will fall with it.
As long as people have a Bitcoin first mentality the crypto market will fall. We have to move towards an inclusive crypto mentality. Any project that actually adds value to the community should be given the opportunity to stand on its own merits. And its not just bitcoin, other coins have also developed this (insert coin here) only mentality.
This is not a zero sum game. Having various options is the definition of democracy. bitcoin mods are literally the hitlers of the crypto world. Spewing hatred, and totalitarianism will get you nowhere...eventually.
It's time for bitcoin to die
submitted by truffledust to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

DOGE market analysis for February 19th 2014

1 DOGE is currently valued at $0.00139 or 0.000002196 Bitcoin/DOGE. DOGE has become 5% more valuable vs. the Bitcoin since yesterday, and roughly 5% more valuabe vs. the USD since Bitcoin's price is holding steady around $630/Bitcoin.
The DOGE market cap (total value of all DOGE) is $71,123,000 today, with a total of ~52 billion DOGE in existence. The market cap of DOGE is roughly 1% the size of Bitcoin's market cap, which is impressive. DOGE currently has the 5th biggest market cap out of all the digital currencies, behind Bitcoin, Ripple (not really a mineable currency), Litecoin, and Peercoin.
DOGE has seen a steady decrease in value this week, losing 40% of its value vs. the USD, and 11% of its value vs. Bitcoin. Alot of this can probably be explained by instability in the Bitcoin market due to Mt. Gox's shutdown.
However, in the longer term DOGE is showing strong growth. It has increased in value 315% vs. Bitcoin since it opened 67 days ago. DOGE has strengthened 31% vs. the USD since opening, however since DOGE's weakest point on January 8th DOGE has strengthened 650% vs. the USD!
In other news, miners are currently mining around block 108,000. Rewards for blocks won't be halved until 92,000 blocks from now. The current reward is 0-500000 per block.
submitted by turtlecane to dogecoin [link] [comments]

The intelligent investors guide to Particl (PART): Part 8 - What are the current major criticisms of the Particl Project?

What are the current major criticisms of the Particl project?
This is the final part of the intelligent investors guide to Particl!
The following is not an exhaustive list of criticisms or further areas for exploration when discussing the Particl project but merely an introduction to show that potential problems have been considered at length. I welcome feedback in the comments section and I'll respond to any queries with my own thoughts if requested.
The proposed escrow design feels broken: The particl team with their Buyer risks [100% price of good + 100% escrow deposit] = Seller risks [100% price of goods + actual good] assumes that all sellers and all buyers are honest (200% risk on both sides). In reality though where a scammer is concerned the escrow works out as Buyer risks [100% price of good + 100% escrow deposit] = Seller risks [100% listed price of goods]. The scammer has no goods to sell so the buyer risks losing 200% the value of goods if they do not settle the escrow vs 100% value of goods if they do.
The distribution is heavily skewered towards a minority of stakeholders: Granted the Particl network is still small and relatively unheard of but as of writing the top 10 accounts hold 42.5% of token supply (https://chainz.cryptoid.info/part/#!rich). Granted 15% of this was specifically earmarked for distribution in a second crowd fund stage post marketplace beta minimum viable product launch in Q1 2018 but that still means 27.5% of supply is held by the top 10 wallets. I've attributed this in part to the circle-jerk mentality of PoS coins (which I believe encourage concentration of poweownership over time as accumulation is incentivised) rather than PoW (where constant sell pressure of mining leads to diversification of ownership and hoarding and accumulation of mined coins is not incentivised as strongly as PoS).
The legal aspects have yet to be defined/clarfied: Although TOR integration and end-to-end encryption into the client software offers some protection against track down and although the intention of Particl is not to be a DNM, I feel it would be naive to assume the private listings will not be abused for that purpose. Where node hosters/stakers stand in terms of legal liability has yet to be defined. It would seem unfair though to penalize the node hosts for verifying transactions and listings that are invisible to them, much like it would be unfair to penalize banks for unknowingly facilitating money laundering; it would make more sense to trace the actual sellers instead.
The current distribution creates potential issues in early governance: Although 15% of total supply is currently off limits (i.e. locked from circulation), 27.5% to 42.5% of token distribution being in the top 10 comprises a potential oligarchy of interests in voting. The top 100 wallets currently hold 77% of the supply so don't assume your vote (in the on-chain governance) in the early stages accounts for much if you fall outside this bracket. You will effectively be needing to appeal to a minority at this stage for decisions to go through which doesn't feel like the fairest democracy (although it certainly resembles most current one's). To be fair these holders are the earliest adopters, took significant risks accumulating at the stages they did and so their stake in any vote is justified by their holdings in the network. The problem is though that if one of them decided to never sell any minted stakes whilst the rest of the group did then with perpetual supply inflation set at 2% (after year 4 onwards), there is an ongoing risk that a single holder could after many, many years acquire 51% of the network, thus compromising it. Although I suspect this would take decades under the current distribution, it is still a risk. The falling inflation rate (from 5% -> 2% PA) was designed specifically to mitigate this risk by the way.
There is competition: If I think about current solutions such as Syscoin, District0x, Openbazaar; firstly the user interface is weak, secondly as the native token isn't essential to use these platform they cannot piggyback off the network effects of rising speculative value in their token's spot price as PART could (as the value of the token is disconnected from the proportional use in the network), thus any rise in the spot price of the token for these networks is less likely to create and retain investors and promoters in those platforms. In the case of openbazaar it has no native token, no anonymity and to me serves no purpose other than being decentralized for the sake of being so.
There is currently a potential future competitor in the form of Bitbay: This project recently came to my attention. Although the privacy/anonymity aspects of transactions on the network haven't been fully explained, merely asserted and I could find no white paper explaining the proposed implementation in detail thus I'm uncertain if their anonymity of transactions and private listings is merely pseudo-anonymity inherent to blockchains. In contrast Particl implements a working version of RingCT on it's testnet which will be deployed on main-net once it is third party audited. That said the feature-set and road-map of Bitbay is very similar to Particl so this project is worth keeping an eye on since it may turn out to be better than my initial impressions (lack of community, disorganized, lacking in finer detail) suggest.
Price stability of the token isn't guaranteed: Transactions are not occurring via use of a stable coin; there is no pegging as far as can be understood and we know how volatile cryptocurrencies currently are. While I do anticipate the value of the PART token to increase with non-speculative use meaning that early adopters (especially sellers) can likely sell goods at a significant discount to usual price (accounting for potential tax benefits available via selling goods in PART), that overall the value of PART increasing will lead to much larger profit margins for early adopters e.g. I might sell you $150 of goods via PART at a rate of $10/PART but say in a months time the value of PART doubles to $20/PART (feasible if there is exponential uptake and use of Particl as a marketplace as opposed to just a non-speculative platform) then my true earnings would be $300.
Thus whilst I feel the design of the Particl project isn't perfect, I think it is much more elegant and adaptable than many other systems and present s stronger case overall. I've not gone into detail over potential scalability questions which I feel will be better answered when the marketplace module beta is deployed in Q1 2018. Most of the problems I've outlined here have reasonable solutions in sight (or one's which will likely evolve in the near future anyway) so I'm really not worried. We are entering potentially paradigm shifting territory with regards to international commerce as far as the implications of the Particl project are concerned and this alone is reason enough for me to watch, hold and stake my PART tokens closely.
This also very much brings the series on the Intelligent investors guide to Particl to a close for now (it does not conclude the Intelligent investors guide to cryptocurrency which is still very much ongoing). I haven't discussed cold staking, recent exchange implementations or any of the number of significant UI, hardware, partnership, adoption or extended technology aspects of the Particl project at length; I feel these are better covered elsewhere. I've tried to make the economic case for Particl and in my mind I feel there is a strong one. It's been a pleasure creating this series and I hope you've learnt how I evaluate projects and something about what I believe brings economic, speculative and financial value to a project.
Even if you don't look at Particl further, I hope if you've taken the time to read this guide, that you will look at other projects in a similar way; i.e. What do they provide beyond speculation?, Will they help the entire cryptoeconomy grow as a whole?, Would people actually use these services casually in real life?, Does this product create a new efficiency? and Does this project retain value or keep it within it's system someway?
With that in mind I encourage you to research the Particl project and other decentralised projects like it much further. This is a fascinating area to be involved in and a genuinely paradigm shifting area of research. The next few years are promising so trade well!
Further articles in this series:
Foreword -
Part 1 -
Part 2 -
Part 3 -
Part 4 -
Part 5 -
Part 6 -
Part 7 -
Part 8 -
Full disclosure/Disclaimer: As of posting I am long Particl (PART), Ethereum (ETH), Wetrust (TRST), Augur (REP), OmiseGo (OMG) Factom (FCT) and Iconomi (ICN). All the opinions expressed are my own. I cannot guarantee gains; losses are sustainable; do your own financial research and make your decisions responsibly. All prices and values given are as of time of writing (November 2017).
submitted by joskye to Particl [link] [comments]

How to use your GPUs to support bitcoins and hinder altcoins

A few days ago, several community members, including several prominent members, expressed alarm at the recent price rises of altcoins. Litecoins, for example, trade at 0.0387 bitcoins at the time of writing, a value which cannot be explained by merchant acceptance or widespread usage.
Regardless of your personal beliefs about the technical specifics of altcoins, it is difficult to argue that having three or five crytocurrencies on equal footing will result in a net benefit to society. The HD DVD vs. Blu-ray format war, for example, delayed the introduction of HD movies into the home for several years, during which HDTV owners had to watch DVDs despite movies being aired in HD over the air. Imagine going to a cash register at a Subway, and people being presented with the option to pay in bitcoins, litecoins, peercoins, and novacoins. Consider the immense investment in making software compatible with all these types of coins. That doesn't count the economic cost of having to train employees to understand all these different coins. Altcoins contribute to confusion and people's thinking that crytocurrency is a joke, given that anyone can start a new coin and call it an altcoin.
Perhaps Quarkcoins might even have been a better design than bitcoins had they come first, but that doesn't matter. If there is a protracted battle between bitcoins and some other currency, the adoption of crytocurrencies will be delayed or even killed. Further, any cryptocurrency that is sufficiently better than bitcoins will need to be so different that it doesn't look like any of the current batch of coins. Most of these coins even use copies of the bitcoin-qt wallet with a few cosmetic changes and a different hashing algorithm.
If you have GPUs, you can do your part to help bitcoins succeed by using the middlecoin.com pool. Unlike pools that just allow you to mine altcoins, this pool mines altcoins that are pumped up, sells them immediately, and pays out in bitcoins. This forces down the price of altcoins, since the pool operator sells everything he mines, and raises the price of bitcoins. Incidentally, the most profitable algorithm is also the algorithm that is most damaging to altcoins, because if enough people join, it prevents any one coin from rising too high in value.
Watching this pool operate, I discovered that it even unintentionally performs 51% attacks on many altcoins by switching to them when prices are high and mining huge numbers of blocks. When the difficulty rises, the pool leaves for a different coin. Yesterday, I saw a coin with difficulty 57 generating blocks every few seconds. When the pool leaves, the difficulty is stranded so high that confirmations take hours for the remaining miners not part of the pool.
It's simple to set up - just enter your bitcoin wallet address as username with any password. It is also far more profitable than what the people who spend millions on ASICs are making - I made $26 per Radeon7970 per day this weekend. You don't have to do anything except hash - the operator takes care of selecting coins and selling for you. If enough people join, hopefully this could be a significant drag on altcoin prices.
If you agree with my view of how altcoins present a threat to bitcoins, consider donating your GPUs to this cause.
Disclaimer: I don't own this pool and I don't know who does.
submitted by quintin3265 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Discussion on the Coin Maturation Rate.

Hi fellow Minters,
Today I am petitioning to the development team a proposal to reduce the time needed for coins the "Mint" from 20 days to 36 hours.
I have put a lot of thought into this and I believe this to be very important to the future of this coin. As many of you know, Blackcoin has a coin maturation rate of 8 hours with a confirmation time similar to ours. I have heard from many people that they have switched over to Blackcoin for this very reason. People do not want to wait 20 days to be able to use their coins.
Although I understand the idea that the coin will have value because the incentive to hold is greater than the incentive to spend (20% interest), this is not appearing to be the case. Traders make or break a coin and for them, the opportunity to make that 20% in less time is more favourable, especially when going from 10 to 11 satoshi is 10%. This is due to the amount of Mintcoins that exist. One of the reasons the orders for Blackcoin are so much thinner is because there are fewer coins giving them more satoshis of breathing room to spread between. We are jam packed in a small space with no where to go.
Peercoin was the founding PoS coin. They have a coin maturation rate of 30 days. The reasoning for this length of time is based on security. By ensuring that the coins that are staking are deep within the blockchain (by this time 4,320 confirmations), we are sure that these coins are secure. Taking this reasoning and applying it to Mintcoin, the same amount of confirmations would require a coin maturation rate of 36 hours. I believe this to be a fair amount of time to have to wait in order to start minting new blocks.
I look forward to hearing your questions or comments. This is an important feature to discuss for the future of the coin.
Update: I posted a question in the Peercoin subreddit(http://www.reddit.com/peercoin/comments/20x62o/reason_for_30_day_coin_maturation/) about the reasoning behind having the 30 day coin maturation rate in the first place since they are they found fathers of PoS. They had someone insightful and informative replies that I wanted to share here.
Here is what one member had to say:
"To say you have an actual stake in the currency you should own Peercoins for a while (and not move them around) because that is why it is considered proof of your stake. If I could buy 10K coins, immediately mine with them, then sell them off, that really wasn't much proof of my stake then, is it? That's more like proof of monetary parasitism." -OrderAmongChaos
and also:
"the idea behind it is that you must have a stake in the coin to mine. Allowing all transactions to mine PoS means having stake is an option, one that is nice to have, but an option nonetheless. A security proof must make sure people have an active stake in the outcome of the system. For Bitcoin, your investment in an expensive computer ensures you actively want Bitcoin to thrive, for Peercoin, your issuance of stake assures that you are actively interested in the system, as it contained your wealth for an extended period of time. Allowing anyone to mine straight away opens the system up to drive-by stake mining, which means the miner more than likely doesn't care about the ultimate outcome of the system. This would open up Peercoin to a tragedy of the commons scenario much more quickly than it would occur otherwise." -OrderAmongChaos
The discussions that we have had have allowed me to further reflect on this issue and I now believe that having a longer maturation rate is not such a bad thing. brainmaster7000 brings up the good point that reducing the coin maturation time creates an unfair playing field for the rich vs the poor.
http://www.reddit.com/MintCoin/comments/20xugz/discussion_on_the_coin_maturation_rate/cg7xn1g http://www.reddit.com/MintCoin/comments/20xugz/discussion_on_the_coin_maturation_rate/cg7xem8
I summarize the problem here: http://www.reddit.com/MintCoin/comments/20xugz/discussion_on_the_coin_maturation_rate/cg7yww7
submitted by ahbartsch to MintCoin [link] [comments]

Regarding the "Bitcoin and Magical Thinking" blog post spotlighted on Techmeme today - The network, the infrastructure, and the community behind it is hardly a "magical thought."

I'm referring to this post, which a Bitcoin-opposing friend just sent to me with the subject line, "An damning indictment" -
I responded with this:
The network, the infrastructure, and the community behind Bitcoin is hardly a "magical thought" (Here's the definition of that concept from contemporary Western psychology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_thinking)
Two weeks ago, there was very good debate about Bitcoin -
Ultimate Bitcoin Showdown - Posted Dec 2, 2013 - [30:14] - Goldbug/dollar-skeptic Peter Schiff vs. Erik Voorhees, Bitcoin entrepreneur formerly of BitInstant (https://www.bitinstant.com/), now of Coinapult (https://coinapult.com/) - http://www.linkedin.com/pub/erik-voorhees/b/804/385
I'll post the link to the full video below, but I first want to quote from it:
As Voorhees says, gold-backed digital curencies have been attempted and were then quickly shut down by the gov't. He later says (at 9:20), "[Bitcoin] could absolutely go to zero and the whole thing is completely experimental right now. So I'm not here to say that Bitcoin is a good investment. What I'm here to say is that the Bitcoin payment network is one of the most important technologies that has ever been invented, and it's important to understand that there is value in that technology [and] it's important to understand why that technology is so useful to people, especially people who care about liberty around the world." And he explains later that this infrastructure cannot be reproduced easily...even if Bitcoin is not the winner of the crypto-currency market competition. He also compares the hardy vitality of P2P currencies to that of P2P file-sharing. The free, independent Napster file-sharing service was launched in June of 1999 an rocketed to popularity, but the shutdown of it in July of 2001 was not exactly the end of free P2P music-sharing... In fact, just going by the services that I can just recall fellow college students using at the time, there was:
SoulSeek (launched in 1999/2000)
Gnutella (early 2000)
BearShare (December 2000)
Morpheus (2001)
Kazaa (March 2001), and
LimeWire (May 2000).
And of course there are the file-sharing services that are popular today, from Dropbox to these:
to these:
Now. As far as digital crypto-currencies today, there's Litecoin, Peercoin, Namecoin, Quark, Protoshares, Worldcoin, Megacoin, Primecoin, and Dogecoin, and dozens other listed here, totaling in 54:
The point that Voorhees makes about the pooled inventiveness and ingenuity of the crowd reminds me of something both revolutionary and prophetic that was said by John Gilmore (an American computer science innovator, Libertarian, Internet activist, and one of the founders of Electronic Frontier Foundation). He said:
"The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it."
-As quoted in TIME magazine (6 December 1993) (yes, 1993!)
Furthermore, on a separate note, the media angle that Bitcoin is practically "over" because of China blocking it (which that same friend was gloating about), here's all I have to say as well:
Here's a list of enterprises that were hardly destroyed after being banned in glorious all-powerful China:
Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Wikipedia, WikiLeaks, and the New York Times' online edition (and a few others, named at the following links) were each NOT blasted into nonexistence by the force of "the Golden Shield Project," which we Americans call "the Great Firewall." Yup, Bitcoin is "over"!
Hey, but waddaya know - Some of the 1,350,695,000 people in The People's Republic have ways around that censorship, as do the millions of people in so many other Internet-censoring countries:

Here's the full video of the Bitcoin debate:
Edit/Follow-up: To extend the analogy of P2P digital currencies and P2P file-sharing (and most notably, music-sharing), what would be the currency equivalent of iTunes, which came ou in January 2001? Will JPMorgan's crypto-currency project (as I saw here, and it was downvoted to hell: http://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/1sp6hh/jpmorgan_is_looking_to_copy_bitcoin_and_the_coin/), even though it was initially rejected 175 times, find some way to charge/surcharge people small amounts at a time for usage (a la iTunes' 99 cents per song), in traditional-bank-style?
submitted by wazzzzah to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

I rewrote the sidebar text

Markdown (source): First, Rev 1, Rev 2, Rev 3, Rev 4, Rev 5, Rev 6. Use RES or orangered me to get latest.
Changes (First->Latest): (excl. minor edits)
“third” to “fourth” “annum” to “year” Remove “to” Restore paragraph split Restore peerco.in since it's back online Numbered list to bullet points Edit descriptions of exchanges Update link Add marketplace Clean up Link to Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Namecoin Wikipedia pages (last Rev 6 edit) Link to Proof-of-{Stake,Work} explanations Edit cointip text Change FAQ/wiki links Add example screenshots Remove btcto.com until they come out of testing Add link to service list BTC-e now supports two-factor authentication Add Mt.Gox Add important facts link 
Screenshots: current sidebar vs suggested sidebar.
Comment with any suggestions or ideas you have.
PPCoin or Peercoin is the cryptocurrency with the fourth highest market cap after Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Namecoin. It is the first known iteration of a combined proof-of-stake/proof-of-work coin.
It is designed to be energy efficient in the long run, have a steady inflation rate of one percent per year, and (through proof-of-stake) be free of dependence on miners.
/PPCoin FAQ, wiki
Official website, FAQ, wiki
Wikipedia article
Important facts
Getting started
Walkthrough for Peercoin wallet setup
PPCoin.org faucet (free Peercoins)
PPCoinTalk marketplace
List of exchanges and other services
All support two-factor authentication.
USD converter (peerco.in)
Cryptocurrency value tracker (altco.in)
Ticker for Chrome (Creator's announcement thread)
Ticker for Firefox (Creator on reddit)
BitcoinTalk.org (alternative currencies section)
Related subreddits
BitcoinTip (Quick Start Guide)
BitcoinTip and ALTcoinTip enabled on /PPCoin.
submitted by AnonymousEntity to ppcoin [link] [comments]

Part 3. What is Blockchain doing Tomorrow?

Back for more? Great! Today's article is going to cover What Blockchain is doing in the future.
1. Proof of Stake vs. Proof of Work
2. Pooled Computing
   2a. Grid Computing
   2b. Blockchain Security
3. Financial Sector Disruption
   3b. ERC-20 Tokens
   3a. ICO's
A short disclaimer: The following Blockchains are discussed purely at my discretion. I did my best to remain unbiased, but I do own most of the coins that are brought up here. I hold the coins because I believe in them, this belief is not just that they will increase in value, but also that they will accomplish the goals they've set for themselves. I could be wrong.
1. Proof of Stake (POS) vs. Proof of Work (POW). For a Blockchain to be secure it must have measures in place to keep bad folks from changing the digital ledger. When Bitcoin was first created it implemented a solution to this problem called Proof of Work, or POW, which made altering the Bitcoin Blockchain very difficult.
Essentially what happens in a POW Blockchain is that all of the Nodes (computers running the Bitcoin client) race each other to solve a cryptographic puzzle. The first Node to solve the puzzle wins the right to chain a new Block onto the Blockchain. Solving this puzzle uses a lot of each Nodes computing power (Time x Electricity), but there is no way to chain a new Block onto the Blockchain without first solving this puzzle. This secures the Blockchain from alterations to its past Blocks, because a malicious Node would have to solve the puzzle for every single past Block AND be the first Node to solve the current Blocks puzzle. Since it obviously takes much more Time x Electricity to solve multiple puzzles instead of just one, the malicious Node will never be able to catch up to the current Block without a massive advantage.
So what is this Massive Advantage? For a malicious Node to alter a POW Blockchain, it would need direct control over a 51% majority of the entire Hashing Power being used by the Blockchain. Hashing Power is the amount of Time x Electricity a computer uses on behalf of the Blockchain (resources spent Validating Requests, solving puzzles, etc). In the case of Bitcoin (and Ethereum), there are literally millions of computer Nodes dedicating their Hashing Power to solving the puzzles. It would take a 51% majority of all Nodes to agree that they wanted to alter the Blockchain before anything could be changed.
Proof of Stake, or POS is an alternative to Proof of Work. Despite the terrible acronym, POS is a much more energy efficient method of securing a Blockchain. Rather than winning the right to chain a Block by quickly solving puzzles, in the POS system the Node who wins the right to chain a new Block is chosen at random, with a few caveats. Essentially the process proceeds like this:
  1. Each Node that wants to participate in chaining a new Block onto the Blockchain selects an amount of that Blockchains CryptoCurrency to Stake. When a CryptoCurrency is Staked it is basically locked in a vault that is untouchable until a certain amount of time passes.
  2. A Node with a Stake is chosen by the Blockchain to chain the newest Block onto the Blockchain.
  3. The other Nodes with Stakes verify that the winning Node is following the rules. If the winning Node is following the rules, the new Block is chained onto the Blockchain and the process repeats for the next new Block.
  4. However, if the winning Node is NOT following the rules, the other Nodes with Stakes tattle on the winning Node. When enough Nodes with Stakes tattle on the winning Node for not following the rules, the winning Nodes entire Stake is burned (deleted) and a new winning Node is chosen to chain the Block.
To date, only a few CryptoCurrencies are using a purely Proof of Stake system (Peercoin & NXT). The majority of CryptoCurrencies use Proof of Work (Bitcoin, Litecoin, Ethereum), and a few use a hybrid system of both POS & POW (Decred).
Ethereum is trying to make the transition from POW to POS, and their lead developer has cited the enormous amount of energy used for Proof of Work as the reason why. The solving of puzzles for POW is the culprit of this energy use, but Proof of Stake has not been tested on a live Blockchain at the same scale as Proof of Work. Time will tell if Ethereum and the other Proof of Stakers are correct, and I hope they are for the sake of the planet! It is estimated that both Bitcoin and Ethereum burn over $1 Million worth of USD in Electricity and Hardware PER DAY to secure their Blockchains.
In my opinion, following the progress of the Casper algorithm for Ethereum is the best way to stay up to speed on the current state of Proof of Stake research, and to better understand the benefits that POS may bring if it goes live on the Ethereum Blockchain. Link to Casper FAQ
2. Pooled Computing. Do you know what the fastest computer in the world is today? It is the Sunway TaihuLight, a Chinese supercomputer that can do 93 Quadrillion floating-point operations per second, also know as FLOPS. This is incredibly impressive, especially because this is the only way we have to perform Molecular Dynamics Simulation, or to simulate what Molecules do under changing situations. All of this computer power being in one place creates an issue though. The issue is that the amount of heat the supercomputer generates while running is enormous, and it is the main factor limiting humanity from building even faster, centralized supercomputers.
    2a. Enter Grid Computing! The decentralized solution to a supercomputer has already been achieved with Grid Computing. Grid Computing is the networking of many different devices (Personal computers, smartphones, servers, etc) for the purpose of carrying out computations each device could not accomplish by itself. This idea sounds great, but the issue Grid Computing runs into is that a single malicious computer can ruin the entire Grid of computers that are connected to form the supercomputer, so opening a Grid Computer to allow the public to participate is currently not feasible.
    2b. Enter Blockchain! With its cryptographically secured trustless system, any computer can be linked into the grid. And since there is no trust required, anyone who wants to interfere with the Grid Computers harmony should not be able to do so. Currently there are no successful Blockchain based supercomputers that I know of, but Golem and SONM are supposedly getting close. Neither of these CryptoCurrencies has released a working version that you can perform computations on as of yet, but if they do Grid Computing will greatly increase access to powerful computers for everyone the world over.
3. Financial Sector Disruption. In the first Quarter of 2017, crowdfunded Blockchain tokens raised more money for new ideas than the entire amount of capital invested by traditional Venture Capital firms. Sound impressive? This is only the beginning of the disruption that Blockchain is aiming to bring to the traditional Financial Sector of the global economy. From super cheap borderless payments to home mortgages, Blockchain based CryptoCurrencies have already made progress on vastly improving the way these services work.
In parts of the under-developed world, services like those mentioned above barely exist or are not even feasible. It is estimated that 2 Billion adults do not have a bank account today. However, with a simple CryptoCurrency wallet installed onto a Smarthphone, an unbanked adult can go from having no way to interact with the global economy to being at the technological cutting edge of global economic participation.
The furthest progress being made with the goal of turning unbanked people into banked is probably HumanIQ. Their goal is to allow users to create their own economies locally, and then to tie those economies into the global reach of the Ethereum Blockchain. HumanIQ (and other CryptoCurrencies with a similar goal) has a decent shot at leveling the playing field for folks in under-developed regions. What sets HumanIQ apart from prior attempts to accomplish this same goal though, is that the HumanIQ Coin is an ERC-20 Token. This means they are exclusive to the Ethereum Blockchain. A more thorough explanation of an ERC-20 Token will be given in the next section.
    3a. ERC-20 Tokens. In the last article, Part 2. What is Blockchain tech doing Today? it was mentioned that Ethereum supports a Programmable Element in addition to the typical Blockchain function of recording transfer of value transactions. One of the ways this Programmable Element has been used is in the creation of ERC-20 Tokens. These Tokens act like an entirely separate CryptoCurrency, but are able to be secured by the massive amount of users on the Ethereum Blockchain. This allows developers of new CryptoCurrencies to save time and money to get their idea off the ground, as the amount of work to create an entirely new and secure Blockchain is quite intense.
This option to use an existing Blockchain as the security for your CryptoCurrency has led to an explosion of new ideas that are all aiming to take advantage of Blockchain Tech. A few of the more notable use cases for ERC-20 Tokens are:
The Golem project: With the aim of creating a decentralized supercomputer, Golem uses an ERC-20 Token as a means of rewarding participants for linking their computer into the Golem supercomputer.
GigaWatt: Created an ERC-20 Token that will be used to rent Hardware space at their Hydro-powered CryptoCurrency mining farm in Washington state.
It is important to note that an ERC-20 Token does not directly gain any monetary value from the price of Ethereum. The advantages that the ERC-20 Token creator receives are:
  - Anywhere Ethereum is accepted, their ERC-20 Token can also be used.
  - Their ERC-20 Token is secured by the Hashing Power participating in the Ethereum Blockchain.
      3b. ICO's.The ease and advantages of creating an ERC-20 Token have also had the effect of promoting a new type of crowdfunding. The ICO, or Initial Coin Offering is when a CryptoCurrency Team allows a "Pre-sale" of the Coin they are creating for a project. Anyone who likes the goal of the Team can send Bitcoin, Ethereum, or any accepted CryptoCurrency to the Team in exchange for some amount of the Team's new Coin. After the Pre-sale is over the Team opens their Coin to the Public and the people who bought at the Pre-sale can either hold the Coin or sell it.
Currently, even though it is not required, a large amount of ICO's are happening with ERC-20 Tokens. This is mostly due to the easier method of creating an ERC-20 Token vs. building a Blockchain from the ground up.
As is the case with anything, tons of money being thrown at ICO's without any regulation creates some problems. The biggest issue that many people have with ICO's is accountability. An alarmingly high percentage of ICO's raise millions of dollars and have little to show for it, other than some proof they hired a team of developers and a Whitepaper (paper outlining their goal and how they will accomplish it).
Obviously not every great idea succeeds, but when the idea is backed by millions of dollars of other people's money, fiduciary responsibility becomes a central issue. The United States SEC (Securities & Exchange Commission) recently stated that:
"U.S. Securities Laws May Apply to Offers, Sales, and Trading of Interests in Virtual Organizations."
While this is not outright regulation, in my opinion it hints at some type of future restriction for ICO's. I am not a fan of the Guv'ment telling me what to do, but I have to admit if the Crypto-sphere doesn't regulate itself to a higher standard the long, fat, uninformed hand of bureaucracy is going to do it for us.
Thats all for today, hope you enjoyed the article! Thanks again for reading, and please comment below. Parts 1-4 can be found here.
submitted by artlimber to denvercryptogroup [link] [comments]

Debunking exaggerations of the security of Cosmos peg zones. Copy of tendermint.slack.com #cosmos debate between rilly and ashgreen

rilly 4:14 AM (I'm trying to migrate a conversation from the ourchain.slack) @ebuchman I wanted to ask about how Cosmos peg zones compare with BTC Relay. Here is what tendermint said on reddit. "Cosmos keeps the Bitcoin bridge as a separate zone because we want to keep the Cosmos Hub a simple blockchain agnostic to PoW verification logic. If you have Ethereum act as a hub ala BTC Relay, how do you deal with future forks where e.g. Dogecoin change the PoW/consensus algorithm? Also, AFAIK there are functional limitations to BTCRelay as compare to Cosmos Bitcoin pegs." https://www.reddit.com/Synereo/comments/5v00k5/cosmostendermintethermint_might_have_the_fastest/ddztrms/ (edited)
rilly 4:21 AM I'm not sure how you would deal with a hard fork. Maybe this would mean you would have to "hard fork" (reissue and recreate) every token and contract that depends on BTC Rely? That is the price you pay for making things "read-only". For these sorts of things you need an alert system to let everyone know to upgrade. Bonded messaging is a decentralized alert system where bonds are used to ensure the receiver appreciates the message (if enough of them disapprove the bond is taken). 4:23 Who does a Cosmos zone trust to decide which forks to follow? ebuchman 4:31 AM i dont think btc relay provides a peg, its just a light client for bitcoin (edited) 4:31 the cosmos bitcoin pegzone will actually be a peg to bitcoin 4:32 handling forks is somewhat unresolved/unspecified. it will depend on the conditions 4:32 eg if bitcoin hard forks, the peg zone will need to upgrade the mechanics of the peg to keep up - its effectively a bitcoin client like anyone else (edited) rilly 4:42 AM Will Cosmos Hub validators all be signatories of a Bitcoin multisig wallet to hold the Bitcoins to back the pegs? (edited) 4:46 Or are these the sorts of pegs that aren't actually backed by Bitcoins, ie they use ATOM or something and hope the price stays in a certain range? (edited) krzysiekj 10:05 AM joined #cosmos. Also, @gxinterest joined, @dthn joined. ashgreen 12:30 PM @rilly Bitcoins on Cosmos Hub will be backed by actual Bitcoins on the main chain 12:31 it is really important to make the software in a way that people even can not tell which one is which 12:32 Once btc on both of the chains feels the same, the whole blockchain industry is ready to integrate into the Cosmos ecosystem starting from any services using btc. (edited) rilly 1:55 PM @ashgreen I'm such an idiot I believed that the "bitcoins" were so pricey at Mt Gox because they were the most trusted exchange. Now I understand what I was seeing. The BTC-IOUs became more valuable than the USD-IOUs because Gox was redeeming more of the BTC-IOUs than the USD-IOUs but eventually they stopped redeeming both. Therefore I think it really important to make a very clear distinction between IOUs and the actual bitcoin in your own wallet. Thus my solution is bonded messaging alerting people to upgrade. ashgreen 1:58 PM @rilly Cosmos btc peg is more than just an IOU. It is technical guarantee that btc on Cosmos represents the ownership of btc on the main chain 1:59 but yes your concern is very important and that is why Cosmos also wants to build a hybrid style distributed exchange 1:59 so that MT.Gox won’t happen again rilly 2:17 PM @ashgreen If you tell us how it works will it undermine the sacred trust? Maybe we need to write "In God We Trust" on these tokens LOL AFAIK bitcoin scripts cannot hold bitcoin in contracts to be released when an IOU is redeemed on a "sidechain" so I believe this "technical guarantee" you speak of is not as strong as BTC Relay. Here you can find a list of less secure "technical guarantees" for redeeming IOU tokens on "sidechains" https://www.reddit.com/Synereo/comments/5hm7xn/rchain_will_not_require_amps_to_function/db36lzy/ (edited) ashgreen 2:22 PM I think we are considering a bunch of ways and you can join the discussion on Reddit. Not a certain solution Cosmos team can tell at this moment. 2:22 How are they different? Pegging by sidechain and btc relay? don’t they both use multi sig? rilly 2:30 PM The problem is that you can't put a light client for a "sidechain" on Bitcoin. You can't make scripts/contracts on bitcoin that execute when your BTC IOUs are redeemed on the sidechain. But with BTC Relay you can have a decentralized exchange with half an order book. The ETH seller can put ETH on the order book, go offline, and people can buy the ETH with BTC, only trusting the contracts. You can't put BTC-IOU on the order book and go offline without trusting the signatories of a multisig. If you have a multisig that is as large as your validator set you have similar security. Thus I asked whether Cosmos Hub validators would all be a part of a BTC multisig wallet. I believe the answer is, "no". ebuchman i dont think btc relay provides a peg, its just a light client for bitcoin Posted in #cosmosApril 25th at 4:31 AM rilly 2:45 PM @ashgreen "Pegging by sidechain and btc relay? don’t they both use multi sig?" BTC Relay might be used by someone claiming to peg an IOU to actual BTC but the closest thing to a "technical guarantee" for a BTC IOU is a token backed by far more ETH/ATOM than the value of the BTC that is to be redeemed. That is probably more expensive that it is worth and it only guarantees the IOU until the price of ETH vs BTC hits a certain value. You cannot guarantee that (during a TheDAO hack, for example) the ETH can be automatically traded for BTC on a decentralized exchange, to force redemption of the IOU before the orders can be taken off the exchange. (edited) krzysiekj 2:58 PM left #cosmos ashgreen 3:26 PM @rilly 1) you only need to go through the signatories when you pull out btc onto the mainnet, the transfer between blockchains, not when you trade and the signatories are supposed to run the nodes 24hours. If the ecosystem including the PG companies move over to Cosmos, the IOU wouldn’t be IOU anymore, which I don’t think is IOU in the first place. It will have its own value. 2) maybe you are mentioning about Atomic swap but Cosmos Dex is hybrid. The trade can get settlement finality in realtime using the hybrid feature (see the github note for the detail). (edited) rilly 4:12 PM @ashgreen PG = peg? Mainnet = Bitcoin blockchain? "If the ecosystem including the PG companies move over to Cosmos" Are you assuming major exchanges will choose to run on Cosmos zones (like Open Transactions was/is hoping for with voting pools) (if you offer them enough ATOM)? How many are interested thus far? "the IOU wouldn’t be IOU anymore, which I don’t think is IOU in the first place. It will have its own value" Yes these "non-mainnet bitcoins" could have a radically different price from actual bitcoins so I suggest we not call them "bitcoins" nor create any illusions or exaggerations of a "technical guarantee" to maintain a peg without a way to enforce this via blockchain contract. Of the two blockchain pegging mechanisms I am aware they both have been broken already and this is with a stable asset unlike BTC. BitUSD on Bitshares and NuBits which I think is on the Peercoin blochain. rilly 4:21 PM "2) maybe you are mentioning about Atomic swap but Cosmos Dex is hybrid. The trade can get settlement finality in realtime using the hybrid feature (see the github note for the detail)." I barely understand atomic swaps or state channels. I'm reading up on that. subtillion 4:43 PM joined #cosmos. Also, @akibabu left. ashgreen 6:48 PM @rilly PG = Payment Gateways such as Bitpay or Circle, the major Bitcoin users or service makers. Mainnet = Yes, Bitcooin main blockchain. 1) If there are enough and clear incentives for the service providers, it is possible that they immigrate to Cosmos. I think faster transaction speed, smart contract availability for BTC using smart contract zone, way cheaper transaction fee, and unlimited scalability should be the incentives strong enough to convince them to join. They are not individuals. They are business operators. If something proves to maximize the profit and streamline the processes, they will take a proper managerial decisions. 2) Yes. You can say that btc on mainnet and Cosmos Hub are different. If a right tech and safe pegging architecture is implemented, the difference between those two should be only a “location” where btc is getting confirmed. In that case, it is not IOU, it is btc itself. If it is not the case, yes it is something different and will have different names with a proper explanation about risks and how it works which I don’t deem as a good thing to use. If btc on Cosmos Hub is just an IOU, I personally don’t put much value on even creating it. 3) Pegging solutions that use a reserve fund such as BitUSD(bitshares), Steem dollar(Steem), Tether(with HongKong bank reserve), Labor Hour(Chronobank), and other stable currencies, these are NOT IOU nor the pegging subject itself. They merely back a certain token’s value pegged to a subject with a reserve fund. This value pegging system using reserve funds can always break down when facing high degree of fluctuations and steady price trend that goes only one way(mostly trend going downwards). 4) Unlike the value pegging system with reserve funds, Cosmos Hub pegs the token itself on the main blockchain physically and technically. If the peg is not guaranteed technically in a safe way and the way people agree to come onboard, I don’t see any improvements Cosmos brings to this decentralized world, at least in that sector. However, if it does, I think it will be strong enough to reconstruct the whole industry. (edited)
rilly 10:56 PM @ashgreen @faddat @eudu @asmodat https://tendermint.slack.com/archives/C1ER2AN4C/p1493146086530837 "4) Unlike the value pegging system with reserve funds, Cosmos Hub pegs the token itself on the main blockchain physically and technically." That appears to be nonsense. On Ethereum you can write a contract that is a Cosmos client just like BTC Relay is a Bitcoin client. The Cosmos client contract can trigger an IOU contract release actual ETH when the ETH IOUs are sent to the corresponding contract on the Cosmos exchange. Bitcoin scripts can't run a Cosmos client, so you have to hold Bitcoin in multisig wallets. Am I wrong so far? Who are the signatories? I don't fully understand atomic swaps or state/payment channels but I don't think that matters because I think these still require someone to hold bitcoins if they are to be backing for a token on another blockchain. Atomic swaps require both parties to be online at the time of the swap and state/payment channels mitigate this somehow with a third party. I thought I saw a video of Buterin arguing that state channels were insecure from network failure, but maybe I have it confused. (edited) ashgreen 11:05 PM @rilly you are right. Bitcoin has to have signatories since it doesn't support smart contracts. Think in this way. Smart contracts on Ethereum rely on Ethereum miners, the signatories. So basically every blockchain model has to put a trust in the native validator set. Of course they will act exactly on the protocols written in advance but they still can influence the system. Having signatory doesn't mean it is any bad but rather means the operation of signatories has to be put in an agreed and safe way. Cosmos is working on how to empower the signatories in a way that secures trust and safe. I believe that Jae will write something about it and then we can discuss further about the methodologies. rilly 11:33 PM "Having signatory doesn't mean it is any bad but rather means the operation of signatories has to be put in an agreed and safe way." It is not bad unless you are pretending it is more secure and trustless than it is. 11:33 If the DEX is deployed according to the projected timeline, Tendermint will only have been tested for 4 months on a public blockchain, and DEX will be completely untested in this reality. So you have all the possible vulnerabilities of Bitcoin plus the unknown vulnerabilities of Cosmos. You decided to put a cap on the fundraiser presumably because you didn't want to take on too much responsibility but here you are hyping this thing like it can't fail. Bitcoins are more secure than a peg/IOU token but these tokens can be put on order books and traded faster and cheaper. It can distribute trust for making instant exchanges in comparison with Shapeshift or Changelly (at the cost of privacy?). (edited) 11:33 "Cosmos is working on how to empower the signatories in a way that secures trust and safe. I believe that Jae will write something about it and then we can discuss further about the methodologies." Maybe you haven't decided who the signatories would be. If it is just exchanges that may be less secure than if it is all the Hub validators. But either way exchanges may not trust anyone else to hold their bitcoins. It doesn't necessarily give you better security if your security is better than the others in the multisig. Having many independent exchanges means that many can get hacked without jeopardizing the most secure ones. The more Bitcoins you put in a single multisig the higher the bounty for hacking it. Some of what I was reading sounded like anyone could make a peg zone so couldn't they have one signatory or pick whoever they want? (edited) ashgreen 11:43 PM @rilly nobody is pretending anything. It is just an obvious and simple thing that we need to make it secure and trustless to the level that we can actually commercialize and open up to public with all risks clarified. (edited) balibalo 11:46 PM joined #cosmos rilly 11:51 PM https://tendermint.slack.com/archives/C1ER2AN4C/p1493146086530837 "In that case, it is not IOU, it is btc itself." They should be called pegs, IOUs, or something other than bitcoins. (edited) ashgreen 11:52 PM @rilly right 11:54 pegs sound good rilly 3:36 AM Someone should make a proposal to the on-chain gov to use the validator's atom bonds to back the multisig wallets.
submitted by ioniza to cryptonomics [link] [comments]

[140731] ~$1!!! What the h3ll is happening?

What the h3ll is happening?
Kind of what I suspected would be happening: http://www.reddit.com/PeercoinMarkets/comments/2blh0y/140606_broken_support_analysis/
What about peercoins vs other coins?
Peercoins come in at fifth place on coinmarketcap. It's a well known fact that both Ripple and NXT have huge "bag holders", which means that a few people are withholding a whole lot of supply from circulating which skews the metrics somewhat. Looking at the exchange rate of PPCUSD, one would have guessed that peercoins were going down the drain, but compared to other crypto currencies actually that much haven't changed.
Peercoins vs bitcoins?
It's fairly obvious that people prefer to hold bitcoins over all other crypto currencies. This is also true for PPCBTC, which have been trending down since December. Before then peercoins was gaining on bitcoins. This uptick in PPCBTC coincided with bitcoins first exploding on the upside and then crashing. Why? I think it works like this. 1) People buy BTCUSD and make an insane amount of money. 2) Eager to repeat the "smart investment" they sell some of their BTC to buy the next big AltCoin. Checking sites such as coinmarketcap gives a hint of which the next big coin is going to be. 3) They buy XXXcoin. 4) Price of XXXCoin goes up which creates a gold rush, euphoria and pump-n-dumpers of course latch on to this to make a quick buck.
What happens next?
I think its very likely that people will sell whatever they have to buy bitcoins, when price starts to break out on the upside. Then I suspect to see the same thing happens as happened last time; people making truckloads of money will diversify into other crypto currencies. Peercoin being the first PoS coin, high ranked in coinmarketcap and a lot of happening (peer4commit, Peershares, NuBits, etc) I think will get its fair share of the next gold rush. I suspect it will go up because of speculative money rushing into the currency.
Future of Peercoin
Peercoin was created to improve on some of the properties of Bitcoin. While these improvements are great for the long term value of peercoins, I suspect it will only be used as one of the arguments for the next goldrush into peercoins and not the actual reason. I should probably elaborate more on this, but I'll save that for another post. The point here was only to share my view that the fundamentals have probably little to do with the price of peercoins right now. I think it's only price speculation that is driving price up and down.
submitted by peerpillow to PeercoinMarkets [link] [comments]

[Table] IamA (newly) full time, self-employed professional day trader. AMA!

Verified? (This bot cannot verify AMAs just yet)
Date: 2014-01-19
Link to submission (Has self-text)
Questions Answers
How many hours a day do you work? How many hours a day do you work? - 6.5 actually trading, and probably another 3-4 doing analysis, scanning, finding stocks for the next day, preparation in the morning, etc.
Are you in front if the screen for the whole trading day? Are you in front if the screen for the whole trading day? - Generally, yes. Unless I have a hot morning at which time I just quit and take the day off and go to the beach!
How do you handle being alone for the whole trading day if you are in front of your screen ask day? How do you handle being alone for the whole trading day if you are in front of your screen ask day? - Well, I talk to a lot of other traders on Skype and/or Google chat, and I try to get out of the house and trade in different locations to keep things interesting. It can get lonely, but I have a lot of friends and have no problem inviting people over to chill while I trade and it benefits them too cause a lot of people want to learn it and sitting here w/ someone doing it full time is a really cool and fun way to learn!
What do you use for analyzing your trade history? What do you use for analyzing your trade history? - www.tradervue.com, and lots and lots of Google doc spreadsheets lol.
However by the end I couldn't handle being alone and stuck in my chair all day. Did you have to cope with any of that? I'm curious as after the last 4 years or so where I've been studying and watching, I feel I've got a nice KISS method. I did 2 months of full time paper trading to see how I did. However by the end I couldn't handle being alone and stuck in my chair all day. Did you have to cope with any of that? - Yes it is definitely an adjustment. I worked in IT so I was pretty much glued to a computer all day anyway, so it wasn't AS much of a change for me, but I do read a lot and hear a lot that day traders start to go crazy after a while just from the lonliness/lack of human interaction. That's why I do things like this Reddit, and my courses that are taught via live webinar though. Keeps me from goin nuts and going postal ... on myself!
If I do go part time how do I keep my life balanced so I can watch the trades closely but not be consumed by them? The Importance of Happiness: Link to justanotherinvestingblog.blogspot.com
What's your P&L ? What's your P&L ? - I try to shoot for a $500-1k gain per day and keep my loss days when they do occur to $250-500. Per trade, I try to risk no more than $200-300 depending on market conditions, and during certain markets I will increase or decrease risk if I feel it is worth it. I also have a detailed risk management plan that I use to make sure if I have a string of losses they are cut to $0 within 3-5 days so I can re-evaluate, and if I have a string of wins, risk increases based on my wins so that I can capitalize when I'm on fire and minimize losses when I am in a slump.
What degree do you have ? What degree do you have ? - I have a bachelors in MIS (unrelated to finance, lol)
Are you interested in HFT ? Are you interested in HFT ? - Not really. As an IT geek I do find it fascinating that there are applications that can scalp all day long and consistently make money over the long term, but I just do not believe that in such a dynamic environment that anything like that is really sustainable. It would just be way too much work for me to try to develop something to trade for me, plus it would take all the fun and challenge out of it!
With how much money did you start ? With how much money did you start ? - I originally started investing with only $1k. I swung that very slowly (up and down) while saving from my job(s) up to about $5k. I then injected another $5k of savings and started getting very serious with trading with around $10k. Then I lost about 50% of that in like 2 months (lol). The whole time I worked full time and saved every penny I could until I had saved up enough to open a PDT (pattern day trading) account with $25k and also became fully immersed in trading talking to other traders and taking a few trading courses here and there to tweak my strategy. Now I trade that account (I keep $26.5k in it and build it up as much as I can each month then withdraw back to $26.5k and that is how I get paid) and I have a small $5k account that I use for swing trades and experimental strategies.
Are you interested in working for big firms (GS, JP, City...) Are you interested in working for big firms (GS, JP, City...) - Not really. I have debated it in the past but I think it is just way more satisfying to do it on my own. Also, I don't want to be part of the firms that everyone complains are corrupt/evil/etc. For me it is more fun and exciting to just trade on my own, and it is more rewarding because if I decide I want a raise I just work harder and trade better and boom! I get a raise!
I'm sure you're familiar with the high failure rate of day traders (80%-98% within two years, depending on your source). Not trying to be an ass, but how us your investing method different than the typical day trader? That's actually a very valid question. My method of picking stocks or buying/selling really is not different at all. What is different is that I have the emotional discipline to cut losses quickly and let my winners run. Most traders that fail, and I have seen many come and go even across the very few years I've been doing this, fail because they do not cut losses quickly and they are not good risk managers. I have always been frugal and very cautious with my money, and I am the same when I trade.
I trade very systematically, and analyze everything I do with statistical analysis so I always know the stats between each type of pattern I trade. For example, if you look on my tradervue link in the OP, you'll see tags like IFB (intraday flag break), IBD (intraday breakdown), TTB (triple tap breakout) identifying the patterns I am trading so that I can go back and find all those tags and see how profitable they are, by tag. I also very systematically trade with a 2:1 reward to risk ratio at a minimum, so if I am risking 10 cents on a trade I will always be able to make at least 20, 50 cents for a buck, 1 buck for 2 bucks, etc. It takes a lot of self control to actually cut those losses where they cross that level of risk, but if you can do that there is no reason 98% of people could not be profitable in this profession.
Obviously there are a ton of other factors that go into it, and I am still very new so who knows, maybe I will blow up and go insane and fail and go broke, but for now I'm doing ok, so I can only speak to what I currently know.
BTW, my blog is very reminiscent of my overall strategy and trading philosophy if you want to check it out (it's free). I just recently rolled it from Blogger to Wordpress so some of the links might point back to my old blog but all the info is at both places: Link to www.greenbartrading.com
If you have a consistently-performing strategy, how come you aren't rich yet? Consistency does not equal wealth. I live comfortably on what I make but I am not trading to become rich, really. I trade for a living because I like the freedom it offers me, being able to work for myself and go wherever I want and take my work with me (for example spending more time w/ family/friends, traveling, etc)
To answer your question, I am very new in this game so it would be foolish to assume I should be rich already. My strategy works so that I can pay my bills and have money to spend on the things I like and the things I want to do, but I am still limited to the money I have in my account and the buying power that it gives me. If I had millions of dollars in capital and $20m in buying power, sure I could use similar strategies and probably make $100k a day but it takes a long, long time to build up that kind of power in a trading account.
It is a common misconception in trading that as soon as you have a consistent strategy you will instantly be able to scale it to become super-wealthy. That theory leaves out the obvious aspects of being able to handle the swings in P/L emotionally and especially the issue of liquidity. I can identify a pattern on a chart and say I'm going to buy 100k shares and make $10,000 in 5 minutes, but actually getting filled on that 100k shares is a totally different story. It is much harder to execute strategies like mine when you are playing with huge sizes. That is why I try to rack up small gains with a consistent win rate vs just trying to home-run every trade and get rich quick.
What do you think of companies that are making software for retail investors to engage in HFT when they don't even know anything about coding, etc? I don't know much about that field so I don't want to say too much, but in general I think that like many people in this business they are just out to make a quick buck, by selling something to others who are trying to make a quick buck.
Don't you think its bad advice to tell a beginner to trade on 2:1 margin? Not at all. Margin is only dangerous if you don't know how to use it. If you understand that trading a $5k account on 2:1 margin means you're trading with $10k, but you still need to manage the risk as if you have $5k, you'll be fine. When I first started getting really serious with trading, I actually traded a $10k account with 10:1 margin but I never used more than 2:1 or 3:1 because I just didn't want to risk that much.
The margin is only bad if you let it get out of control. Also, it is impossible to short without margin and shorting is vital if you are going to be consistently profitable in the long term. Most people say shorting is more risky but if you short properly, managing risk with stop losses just like when you go long, then there is absolutely no difference between shorting and longing in terms of risk. I don't generally recommend swing shorting for beginners, only because news releases can make things really ugly, but in general, trading on margin and shorting is fine as long as you are smart about it and you understand it (which is not that hard with a little reading).
Edit: To clarify, most of the risk associated with margin comes when people get greedy. If you have a $10k account with 10:1 margin on it and you dump $100k into a stock and risk $2,000 to make $4,000 sure you could make 40% on your account but you could also lose 20%. It makes much more sense, especially with a small account, to trade w/ a reasonable amount of margin so that you can maximize your gains without destroying your account w/ too much risk. This is also just personal opinion. Whether or not trading on margin is a bad idea really depends on the person. I know people who have 50:1 margin and trade 100% in cash, and people who have like $5k and trade as if they have $100k cash rather than $95k of it being margin, lol. It all depends on your personality and how well you understand the risk you're taking.
"...there is absolutely no difference between shorting and longing in terms of risk." Fair enough. That is true. In my experience though I have only in very, very rare cases seen a stock double in an overnight session unless it was a penny stock or something very thin being pumped. In the stocks I generally trade I almost never see that. While I do see large gaps I don't really trade stuff that tends to gap more than 100%.
You can lose more than 100% of your investment overnight through shorting, which you can not do by going long. Stop losses do not guarantee that you can prevent this from happening - crazy things can happen while the markets are closed. In theory, you are correct though, and it is important to realize that for sure!
While this might be rare, it's still a critical difference that people should be aware of. Edit: BTW, it's worth noting that nothing in the market is guaranteed. I believe that if you trade with the fear of losing 100% on an investment overnight you are, in general, being a bit too paranoid. Yes it happens, and it blows bigtime when/if it does, but it is not common enough to really worry about IMO. Just something to be aware of.
Can you explain what it means to invest on a margin? I understand that it is investing money that you don't currently own, but where is the additional money coming from? Usually the broker. If you lose too much, they will do a margin call, which basically means they can protect themselves by forcing you to sell your positions to protect their money if you're investing with it.
This risk is generally mitigated though. I trade on margin every day but I am still only risking a very small percentage of my capital on each trade. If I were to hold trades for longer term timeframes, I might worry more about margin calls but still, in most situations you are going to be pretty well protected by stop losses unless the stock is making huge moves of 40%, 50%, 100% etc which is not all that common in the names I generally trade. In my experience I have not seen margin calls until people have lost like 70-80-90% of their account values on a single trade already. If you can't cut your losses before that point you probably should not even be trading :)
How do you feel about Fannie and Freddie? Release from conservatorship and skyrocket? Or wind down and loss of shirt for the common shareholder? On Fannie and Freddie I never touch them as they are super thick and riddled with manipulation. There are certain stocks I just do not trade and those are two (FNMA/FMCC)
Ariad Pharma (ARIA) - Thoughts? ARIA is actually another on my ban list. Don't know anything about it fundamentally but statistically I have lost money almost every time I traded it so I just don't anymore.
Zogenix (ZGNX) - Thoughts? ZGNX is a great trader. I actually recently bought 2500 shares at $3.59 average (building on a 500 share swing I held from $3.35 the day before) but like a fool I sold it flat after it didn't immediately take off. I caught the top of that recent GIANT 5m share block buy and it killed my average price so since I did not want to risk $800-1000 on the trade I opted to exit flat when it didn't go right away. I don't really know anything about the company itself but I have traded it several times over the last couple years and it usually behaves pretty predictably, so I like it for day/swing trading.
How much did you start with when you began day trading? When I got serious about day trading I started with $10k and traded through a prop firm (as an independent contractor so I was working on my own and only received whatever money I made, no paycheck or boss). I did that because it offered me 10:1 leverage and good trading software (DAS Trader Pro). Once I had the cash built up from that I opened a $25k ameritrade account and now I use that ... I bailed on the prop firm because their software was $125 a month and thinkorsim through TDA is free.
What is your daily routine? Do you spend some time reviewing the daily news before the markets open, do you spend time afterwards reviewing your performance, etc? Yes to both questions. I generally get up around 8:00am EST and do a quick breakfast and shower, maybe go for a run or get outside to do something active. Then I will go through Yahoo Finance inPlay (finance.yahoo.com/mp) and scan for any major news headlines (earnings misses/beats, FDA news, etc). I go through the stockmarketwatch.com premarket section (Link to thestockmarketwatch.com and look at anything that is gapping up or down and use finviz.com to determine why they are gapping. This gives me a bunch of ideas for the day. Also, I usually have a small watchlist prepared from the night before, which is prepared with a scanner I use called StockFetcher (www.stockfetcher.com). I pay 8 bucks a month for that (super cheap actually for how powerful it is!)
Right at 9:30 I am mostly just watching stuff. I seldom trade the first 15 minutes only because it is way too volatile and it is difficult to determine a pattern in only 15 minutes. After 9:45 I will look to see if any of the morning gappers held their gaps and perhaps find a couple trades in those ideas. I also have alerts set at various prices from the night before which will be triggering the whole time giving me ideas.
After the trading day, I usually just shut down and forget about trading for a while and then later at night I go back and upload all my stuff to tradervue.com and put in comments/details about why I took the trade, where I bought/sold, if it was a gain/loss, etc and post it publicly on twittefacebook. This keeps me honest and makes sure I am always on my game.
Also, each morning I am usually watching my open swing trades to make sure there is nothing crazy going on with them and I will usually sell into morning spikes to book profit on those and possibly re-enter later on to add back to my full position size.
Finally, every once in a while (maybe once a month) I will just wipe the slate clean, eliminate my entire watchlist, and build a totally new one just to keep my mind fresh and eliminate any bias I have developed toward individual stocks.
What kind of additional research you conduct when swing trading in comparison to daytrading? I always check to see when earnings are, and make sure that there are no major catalysts coming up (FDA panels, upcoming contract renewals, etc). I also go back on the chart for a year and look at all the major moves (gap ups, gap downs and big spikes/drops in price) and research why they moved, so that I can react quickly if I happen to see something similar happen. For most of my swing trades I don't tend to care much about fundamental stuff (PE Ratio, income, etc) because they are not long-term enough for that stuff to make a difference. I am a 98% technical trader, but definitely do pay attention to fundamental catalysts like earnings and things of the like.
One other thing is I will use sites like tickerspy.com to check the performance of the overall sector, and keep the general market (SPY) in mind as there are good and bad times to swing trade so I don't want to be swinging long when the market is going down and vice versa, in general.
I have an X amount of money I want to invest, but I don't have the slightest idea of how things work in the brokerage world. The "I'm cheap and don't wanna spend any money" (aka me) answer is to hit up investopedia.com. Everything you should need to know to get started is there, you'll just need to find it all yourself. You need to learn (at a minimum) order types, commissions, different types of trading, margin, and risk management. I teach all this stuff in my course and it's super cheap relative to the other crap that's on the market so feel free to hit me up via my website and I will hook you up w/ a discount code if you want. Let me know if you have any other questions!
Also, I don't have time for learning how to be a broker. The salesman-y answer is that you are the perfect candidate for my Fundamentals of Active Trading course. Check it out at my website in the OP.
How about brokers investing my money? How foes that work? How do I find a reliable broker? Funny you should ask that - you are one of many who has asked me that very same question and the short answer is I have no idea, because I don't like anyone else touching my money, lol.
I believe through any retail broker (scottrade, etrade, ameritrade, optionshouse, etc) you can probably get a dedicated licensed broker to invest for you while you do nothing but your returns in that situation are probably going to be minimal after the broker takes their cut and also all the commissions/fees and probably a service fee for the service itself. I really don't know though, so that's something you could ask a local branch or call one of the retail brokers and see if that is a service they offer.
I just have never done it because I always wanted to do things on my own so I understood exactly where my money was going and knew that I wasn't being ripped off.
Hope that helps!
Very good, thanks for your answers and good luck with your trading. Is it bad luck to say good luck to a broker? Lol. I don't know, but I'm not a broker so it doesn't matter! I'm just a lowly day trader, scraping by in my underwear, day by day. lol
I just wanted to tell you that you occupy the job I would hate the most, and thus I have immense respect for you. Thanks Joewith! It is definitely not for the faint of heart. I have had many people tell me I swear at my computer a lot when I'm trading, haha, as if that's going to make a difference. For me it is all about the challenge though. I love the challenge and the fact that if I fuck up it is 100% on me, and I can't blame anyone else!
Question: do you plan to/think you can get rich by doing this, considering the risks involved? To answer your question: It is not my plan but I do believe it is possible. I actually, right now, make less money than I did when I worked full time, but I am a lot happier because I have the freedom to do whatever I want whenever I want. In the future I do anticipate being able to far surpass my old level of income but I don't expect to be filthy rich. I would like to see my business grow to $1m+ within a few years and see annual trading profits in the $250-500k range on average, but I have a long way to go to get there. Before I left my job, my best month was September of 2013 in which I made $19.5k on a $25k account which was pretty awesome, so I know it is possible to do amazing things with this profession if we just work hard and manage our risks well.
What advice can you give to an 18 year old looking to trade? I am going to college next year and I have relatively no expenses, so I'm not afraid to lose a little bit of money. I just put some of my money I have saved into a brokerage account and am just trying to see what I can do with it. First, make sure that you REALLY can afford to lose that money. If you can that's great! The best way to get your feet wet is to just dive right in. Risk management is key. You can learn technical analysis pretty easily and use it to identify support/resistance levels on the chart. Always make sure that your risk is at a maximum, 1/2 your potential reward. This will make sure that if you take 100 trades, you lose $50 50 times and make $100 50 times, you have $2500 in loss against $5,000 in reward or a net profit of $2500 (less commissions).
Basically, do not assume that trading is a get rich quick scheme. If you do you will blow up your account faster than you can blink. Trading is a numbers game. Manage your risk and understand what you're investing in and always have a plan to enter AND exit the trade. If you trade with no plan you are doomed.
It's great you're starting to invest as young as you are. If you're a disciplined, controlled individual you will find this is a fantastic way to make extra money and possibly even make a living. Check out my website and look into the Fundamentals of Active Trading course...it might be perfect for you for right now. Email me from the contact page if you decide you're interested and I'll hook you up w/ a discount code.
Have you tried different apps for trading? Wich one is (for you) The Best? Yep! I use Thinkorswim from TDAmeritrade currently. Here is an analysis of four platforms I have used w/ their pros and cons: Link to www.greenbartrading.com
I have a finance degree and am very interested in transitioning to day trading for myself full time. What do you use for a trading platform? I have been looking into Cobra Trading and others that cater to active traders. I use Thinkorswim through TD Ameritrade. I also have used Lightspeed, Scottrade Elite, and DAS Trader pro. I did an analysis of those four here: Link to www.greenbartrading.com
I haven't heard of Cobra Trading, but I also know Interactive Brokers is very popular for day traders and active traders.
What is your opinion on index funds? I often wonder if day traders actually get higher returns or if their gains are just generally in line with the collective increases in the market. I'm not saying that's true in your case I'm just curious! I use index funds as a guideline for what to do in my day trades and swing trades. Most of the professional, full time and well-managed day traders I know are significantly outperforming the index funds. Personally, I don't know if I am because I have not been doing this professionally long enough to have the data to decide. I would say that most of the traders I know are definitely not inline with the market, but are proportionately in-line. For example, if they generally outperform the market, they will outperform it even more when the market rips, and if they generally underperform the market it will get even worse when the market starts to tank. I personally specialize in high-momentum stocks (stuff that is moving on earnings, news, fundamental catalysts), and many of those stocks simply do not care what the market does. They are going to go up (or down) regardless of the market because the volume and the feagreed/euphoria surrounding the news/catalyst outweighs general market sentiment.
Thanks for your answer. As a side note, are you familiar with day trading cryptocurrencies? I am a long term investospeculator of them myself but think day trading them might be a bit too high risk. I assume you're referring to things like bitcoin. If not, I don't even know what a cryptocurrency is, lol. If so, I don't know anything about trading them nor do I care to. Like you said, they are extremely volatile and way too risky. I stay away from very risky investments like penny stocks and bitcoin and try to trade only things that have decent liquidity, are easy to get into and out of, and that are not going to be too susceptible to manipulation by people with way more money than me.
Yes I mean bitcoin and its similar alternatives e.g. "peercoin". I agree its definitely highly volatile and I'm quite skeptical myself, I do find it quite interesting though. Yeah it is fascinating. I actually have a buddy who recently randomly threw $1k at bitcoin on the news that Congress was planning to make it a real currency (or something like that?) and tripled his money in three hours, haha. Fun stuff, but way too crazy for me.
Do you like showing people your fancy monitor setup when they come over? Haha! Actually, I only have one monitor :) That setup that you see in the link in the main post is all I use. I flip between the trade tab where I actually click buy/sell and the charts tab which has three different charts on it (a daily, a 30 min and a 5 min chart) as needed. Generally, since I am day trading and not investing, I only care about the 5 minute chart for snap decisions. I will look at the 30 min and daily to find ideas and identify support/resistance levels on the chart but when I trade, probably about 75% of my time is spent on the screen you see which can all fit on a 15" laptop!
I do have a 24" external monitor which is usually what I'm using, and occasionally I'll open my laptop to throw up my google chats w/ other traders so I don't have to hit alt+tab 8 million times throughout the day. lol if I did have a fancy monitor setup though, I would definitely show it off!
In trading, KISS principle works best IMO :)
Congrats on making the leap! I'm a slow-motion swing trader by comparison, just a step below Graham-style buy and hold. I'm at the saving up stage until I can start playing weeklies with 5k or so. I thought it funny that your ama appeared close to one about flipping items from thrift stores on eBay, as that's what I do now. My question would be, how often do you rebuild your watch list, and how large do you let it get? I know some traders who've been making a living on maybe 5 different stocks a year for the past decade. I like your thoughts on why you're not branching into options yet- when something works, you don't put it down to go try something else! You said you like to get out of the house sometimes while trading- do you ever have issues with WiFi speeds doing this? Or are your trades loose enough that a couple seconds one way or the other isn't a big deal? I rebuild my watchlist every night and mark stuff that I think is ready the next day. For any given day I usually only have 5-6 stocks that I am watching very closely. The rest are just kind of there as "back of my mind" ideas for later. At the end of the day if something didn't go then I will keep it on the list to stalk for a while and use those items if I run out of ideas during the day, to see if there are any opportunities in stuff I had been watching a couple days earlier. Then I usually wipe the whole thing clean and start over about once a month as it crosses 40-50 symbols because that just gets annoying and too much to manage. Interesting question about the wifi - yeah slippage can be annoying if I don't have a good connection, but I usually account for slippage in my position sizes so that if it slips a few cents it won't break me. If I have a slow connection I will usually scale back my risk and be more selective due to the added risk of disconnections, slippage, etc. That used to happen to me all the time at work: I worked in a lab where I couldn't have my cell phone and I'd be in a trade with no stop loss set (since I didn't want to get wicked out!) and the internet connection would randomly drop and I'd have to run out of the lab to get my phone and put in my stop loss or sell from my phone, lol. It cost me a bunch a couple times, so I started to take that into account when trading.
I also know traders who only trade 1-2 stocks and just know them so well that they can hit them over and over and make money for years. Those are a special breed of trader, IMO, and I would probably get bored out of my mind trading the same symbol every day lol.
Do you find technical analysis to provide reliable indicators of stock movements? I do find technical analysis to be reliable. It is a self fulfilling prophecy in a large way so it doesn't really provide any sound long term strategy but for short term strategy it works great. I use probably 98% technical analysis in my trading. EDIT: To clarify I mean that technical analysis is not a reason to make a long term investment in any one stock or financial instrument. However technical analysis can be used to make consistent short term gains over the long term.
Have you ever traded options, and what is your opinion of them? I've never traded options. I hear they are great for reducing risk and capitalizing with a small account but my philosophy in the market is to do what works until it doesn't work anymore. For me, trading equities has worked well so I'll keep doing that until it doesn't. Maybe someday I will get into options, but I have no plan to do that currently.
I don't know if I've ever heard a trader say it could be boring to only have a couple companies to worry about! That worries me more, having dozens and trying to keep an eye on all of them. Haha it's a personal thing I guess! I guess it could be nice to trade the same company over and over again but I like the excitement of finding new ideas all the time and the challenge of learning about different companies and how they behave in the market. I have even traded some companies that turned out to be total frauds and it's funny to me because I look back and see that almost all my trades in them were shorts and when they finally get crushed I am like HA! I KNEW IT!
I appreciate the ama, I'll be checking out your site. Thanks for the kind words - this AMA is a ton of fun.
Thanks for the detailed reply! I'm looking into trading and learning about options and the thinkorswim platform. Really interesting stuff. Perhaps in 30 years I will lose faith in technical analysis as well. Really though, I am pretty confident because more than I trust technical analysis I trust my risk management skills, and they, not technical analysis or fundamental analysis or economic analysis or anything else, are what ultimately make me my money.
Last updated: 2014-01-23 23:41 UTC
This post was generated by a robot! Send all complaints to epsy.
submitted by tabledresser to tabled [link] [comments]

In Case you Haven't Read the 2nd Community Interview with Sunny King Because you Haven't Signed up at the Forum yet, Here it is...

Some people have not signed up at PeercoinTalk.org yet and don't have access to Sunny's interview, so here it is...
Sunny King: hi all
JustaBitofTime: Hey Sunny, nice to have you with us. Are you ready to get started?
Sunny King: Yes John I'm ready.
JustaBitofTime: Coolbeans94 wanted to know about Peercoin's long term approach, he asks "27. Is its design more for long-term security and sustainability? How does that relate to Bitcoin’s longterm vision?(Coolbeans94)"
Sunny King: @Coolbeans 94. Both PPC and XPM are designed to last. PPC is designed with energy efficiency, XPM is designed with energy multiuse. Bitcoin has a long term uncertainty as to whether transaction fees can sustain good enough level of security. Before that the main concern is how to balance transaction volume and transaction fee levels. Currently I get the feeling that bitcoin developers favor very low transaction fees and very high transaction volume, to be competitive against centralized systems (paypal, visa, mastercard etc) in terms of transaction volume, to the point of sacrificing decentralization. This also brings major uncertainties to bitcoin's future.
Sunny King: @Coolbeans 94. From my point of view, I think the cryptocurrency movement needs at least one 'backbone' currency, or more, that maintains high degree of decentralization, maintains high level of security, but not necessarily providing high volume of transactions. Thinking of savings accounts and gold coins, you don't transact them at high velocity but they form the backbone of the monetary systems.
Sunny King: @Coolbeans 94. Pure proof-of-work systems such as bitcoin is not 100% suitable for this task. This is because transaction fee is not a reliable incentive to sustain network security. If the mining generation amount is kept constant (there have been several such attempts in altcoins) it would work better security-wise but then it would also significantly weaken the scarcity property of the currency. XPM's inflation model is designed in such a way that it could serve as backbone currency better than bitcoin if needed, because it could maintain high security reliably for longer, with reasonably good scarcity property as well. Of course that's only from architect's point of view, whether or not it would be chosen by the market is a whole different matter.
JustaBitofTime: Along those lines the community wanted to know ""If the tax fees are to remain fixed at 0.01 and Peercoin becomes widely adopted, (Thus a sharp rise in value) the fees could become too much for microtransactions. What would happen in this case? What solutions do you imagine to get around the microtransaction issue?"
Sunny King: @Coolbeans 94. PPC is designed to serve even better as a backbone currency. The proof-of-stake technology in PPC is not only energy efficient; it also maintains high level of security without relying on transaction fee. Thus PPC could be safely designed with strong scarcity property yet serving well as backbone currency.
Sunny King: @Coolbeans 94. Both PPC and XPM use protocol enforced transaction fees, which reflects my preference that high transaction volume is discouraged in favor of serving as backbone currencies.
JustaBitofTime: Speaking of security, there's often quite a bit of debate surrounding the PPC vs XPM checkpointing. 27.5 Will checkpoints be optional like they are in XPM in the next client version?
Sunny King: @transaction fees: Right now if we are talking about micropayments in the US$1 range, both PPC and XPM still handle them with much lower overhead than credit card network. In the long term micropayments should be provided by centralized providers, or a less decentralized network optimized for high capacity transaction processing.
Sunny King: @transaction fees: On the other hand there is no promise that minimum transaction fee wouldn't be adjusted. If processing capacity of personal computers continues to advance at the current pace, both max block size and minimum transaction fee could very well be adjusted at some point. However I do take a very cautious approach to adjusting transaction fees, as opposed to bitcoin devs. The impact to the fitness of the currency as a backbone currency is of great concerns to me.
Sunny King: @checkpoint: Decentralization of PPC checkpoint is currently planned to begin in v0.5. It would be a gradual process.
JustaBitofTime: I can tell you from my own Libertarian leaning, being able to add some layer of anonymous transactions is important to me. 47. Can you tell us more about 'sendtoaddressfrom' and Avatar mode? Will this be released in the next client version? (JustaBitofTime)
Sunny King: @JustaBitofTime Yeah this is still at conceptual stage. It shares some similarity to coin control. However from user point of view I'd like them to think in terms of avatars instead of addresses and coins, it's simpler and better for privacy.
Sunny King: The main rule is that in avatar mode the client doesn't automatically assemble coins from different avatars into the same transaction but it can still do so within an avatar
JustaBitofTime: One of the challenges the Peercoin community faces is breaking down all the technical nuances of the coin. Alertness asks "60. Could you please explain exactly how the level of PoW and PoS difficulty is calculated? (Alertness)"
Sunny King: so you probably need to specify which avatar the money should come from in a send
Sunny King: I would wait to see how coin control is introduced in bitcoin first. If bitcoin implements similar concepts first that would be nice too.
Sunny King: @Alertness For simplicity we can think of the difficulty adjustment of PoW and PoS blocks independent of each other. Basically it uses some technique called 'exponential moving' to keep the block spacing relatively constant. It adjusts on every block and smoother than bitcoin's adjustment, responding to change of network hash rate much faster than bitcoin, but at the same time not too fast to make difficulty manipulation exploits difficult.
Sunny King: @Alertness PoS blocks have a constant 10-minute spacing target. PoW blocks have a variable spacing target, between 10-minute and 2-hour, but on average it's about 30-minute when PoS block spacing is close to the 10-minute target. This serves to reduce the variation of block spacing.
JustaBitofTime: Along those lines, 60.5 Could you please spend some time talking about the environmental impact of Bitcoin vs Peercoin now and then in the future? (JustaBitofTime)
Sunny King: @JustaBitofTime I don't like to paint bitcoin in a negative picture because it's indeed a brilliant system with high integrity and reasonably good inflation design. High energy consumption is only a minor blemish. To say that it's gold 2.0 I think is quite reasonable.
Sunny King: But if we can solve one of the issues with gold and gold 2.0, their environmental impact, that would be very nice, wouldn't it? We all want to live on a cleaner and happier earth, right? So we should take this task more seriously and PPC provides a possible solution.
Sunny King: On the other hand we should also respect other people's free will. For example we should not force other people to not mine bitcoin or participate in distributed computing projects, because of the environmental cost. So XPM complements the goal here as it produces additional scientific value from the consumed energy. So people who like to mine cryptocurrency for whatever reason have a better choice to mine, to get more benefit out of the mining activity and environmental cost.
JustaBitofTime: For our non-technical users, how does PoS factor into the environmental impact? In other words, 1 friend is mining Bitcoin and the other is mining Peercoin. How does that look now and how does it look in 1 year?
Sunny King: Currently PPC market cap is still small, so the effect is still small. If PPC becomes as successful as BTC, then the energy saving would be significant, and more and more so as difficulty rises
JustaBitofTime: As difficulty rises, what is the net effect? I feel this is an area that many new to the coin have trouble making the connection.
Sunny King: A caveat here is that the energy consumption on bitcoin mining might drop in the long term as well, due to lack of incentive in mining. However this would drop bitcoin's security level
JustaBitofTime: You spoke about producing additional scientific value from consumed energy with XPM. 55. What are your thoughts about [email protected]? Do you see a place for it in crypto coins?
Sunny King: Difficulty increase in PPC reduces inflation rate, which also reduces the energy consumption. This is assuming market capitalization stays the same
Sunny King: It's hard to say, I am not an expert in protein folding algorithms but I can imagine it would be hard to completely decentralize. There has been a proposal of a less decentralized solution whereas traditional hashing provides network security and half of the minting, whereas folding computation provides the other half of the minting using the existing centralized distributed computing network. This approach is not limited to [email protected] though, people are also thinking about other networks such as BOINC.
Sunny King: The problem with this system is whether trust is required on the centralized distributed computing network to not abuse the system and counterfeit. Without solving such problems it's not a serious currency system in my opinion, but on the other hand we do see existing systems in operation with centralized minting, such as DVC and FRC. So this type of systems definitely has some niche in the market.
JustaBitofTime: Shifting gears here, Jimmy asks "Q1 New: When will the development team release the official ppcoin specification? (Jimmy) Clarification “We got the paper last year, but we need a protocol specification detail similar to https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_specification , especially for POS and the integration of POW with POS. The specification is important to developers and the general users who are interested in ppcoin.”
Sunny King: @Jimmy There is no set plans for this yet. If the demand is strong I could look into getting a summary of difference between bitcoin protocol spec and ppcoin protocol spec.
JustaBitofTime: Between 2 different coins, you obviously have your hands full. Romerun asks "Last interview sunny say if he somehow disappears Scott will fill in. But up till now we don't really know who he is, or how much commitment of him to the project / etc. There could be the issue of impostor too, so it would be benefit to the community to clear this up. And wouldn't it be better to have a few more key devs to PPC."
JustaBitofTime: My understanding was Scott was capable of filling in, however, has not worked on PPC recently?
Sunny King: That's right. For some reason Scott isn't as motivated as I am. I also look forward to having more developers with ppc, right now I think xpm team is in good shape, quite a number of people are working on xpm miners which requires a good understanding of the innerworkings of primecoin.
Sunny King: So I think as our community grows there will be more talents showing up. I am still pounding scott to be actively involved as well
JustaBitofTime: As your development team expands for XPM, Muto asks "35. Do you plan to release another currency? (Muto)"
Sunny King: @Muto 35. No such plan right now. I have recently turned down a few invitations to work on other currency projects due to my responsibility in PPC and XPM. I am committed to further improve PPC and XPM's competitiveness in the market.
JustaBitofTime: Speaking of competitiveness in the market, Romerun would like to know "What are the development priorities/future features of PPC/XMP in Sunny's mind? online wallet? ppc-blockchain.info? etc."
JustaBitofTime: I understand marketing and overall community development/involvement is a big part of the overall plan.
Sunny King: I have touched a few things last week I think, there are other things I have in mind but don't wish to talk about yet. I am constantly evaluating market situation to figure out what's the best features to compete in the market
JustaBitofTime: Let's change it up again 8. Who are your business and personal heroes? (MeBeingAwesome)
Sunny King: As to services and apps I usually leave those to the market to support. If I were to be involved in a service somehow I think it needs to have profit potential
Sunny King: and not divert too much of my resources and time
Sunny King: @MeBEingAwesome Right now I am in the business of cryptocurrency As to my heroes, I think Satoshi qualifies as one. We know that before bitcoin came into existence, several pioneers in the digital currency world have made sacrifices, such as Douglass Jackson the founder of e-gold, Bernard von NotHaus the founder of Liberty Dollar, among many others. These efforts are part of the same movement to decentralize the control of money, from potentially rising oppressive governments. Gold was demonetized to mainly facilitate centralized power, that gives governments power to do a lot more damage, to do whatever they want. Through history we can see the corruption of morality of governments, for example, in the 1860's US governement still had the integrity to return to gold standard after civil war, while in the 1930's it no longer had such integrity after an economic depression. Not only that, it developed audacity to blame the depression on gold. It's very difficult to restore morality of governments.
Sunny King: The cryptocurrency movement, arising from the lessons of e-gold and liberty dollar, gives people a powerful tool to peacefully return to the principle of limited government. We all thank Satoshi whose brilliant mind and effort enabled this movement. Of course there are a lot more things going on in the societies outside cryptocurrency world, to preserve mankind's freedom, to elevate mankind's morality and spirituality, so there are many heroes around us.
JustaBitofTime: I completely respect your desire to remain anonymous. If the code is open, that should speak for itself. With that being said, there are people that claim you might be someone involved with the Satoshi team early on. Can you speak to that rumor? Also, did you have any involvement with Satoshi directly?
Sunny King: I wish I were as that would have made me very rich I am also curious to who Satoshi really is, what led him to such great achievement. But on the other hand I also wish him a peaceful life not having to endure such hardships like NotHaus
JustaBitofTime: For those not familiar with NotHaus, please look into Liberty Dollar.
Look in the comments for the rest...
submitted by Sentinelrv to peercoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Vs. Peercoin Mining - Which Makes you MORE MONEY? Peercoin vs Bitcoin Brief comparison of Peercoin and Bitcoin Bitcoin vs. Peercoin [Extended Edition] Why PPCoin not Bitcoin

Bitcoin is now considered to be the most popular and most expensive cryptocurrency on the market. Bitcoin was launched on 3rd January 2009 by pseudonymous developer Satoshi Nakamoto. On the other hand, Peercoin is fairly newer. It was launched on 12th August 2012 by software developer Sunny King. Peercoin is inspired by Bitcoin, and hence shares much of its source code and 2. There is a .1 Peercoin Transaction Fee on Every Transaction. Unlike Bitcoin, it costs money to send Peercoin. Right now, this is about $0.06, but in the future it could be much higher. The currency has value just because regular people have deemed that it does and there is demand for the currency. While, the concept of cyptocurrencies is not new and dated back to the 1980s; this recent trend was started by Bitcoin, which came onto the scene in 2009. Since then, various other cyptocurrencies have crept up that aimed to duplicate or build up on the Bitcoin protocol. Peercoin ... Unlike Bitcoin, Namecoin, and Litecoin, Peercoin does not have a hard limit on the number of possible coins, but is designed to eventually attain an annual inflation rate of 1%.There is a deflationary aspect to Peercoin as the transaction fee of 0.01 PPC/kb paid to the network is destroyed. This feature, along with increased energy efficiency, aim to allow for greater long-term scalability. BitcoinX Or Peercoin: a Comparison of BitcoinX (BCX) and Peercoin (PPC). Which one is a better investment? - 1 month

[index] [29328] [36084] [3953] [47663] [46479] [5068] [5996] [6785] [38187] [47301]

Bitcoin Vs. Peercoin Mining - Which Makes you MORE MONEY?

Bitcoin vs. Peercoin Bitcoin's Problem & Peercoin's Solution. Close. This video is unavailable. Intro to Peercoin - Duration: 37:42. Chronos Crypto 18,968 views. 37:42. ... Where Does The Value Of Bitcoin & Cryptocurrencies Come From? - By Tai Zen - Duration: 20:29. Cryptocurrency Market ... Why Peercoin is better than Bitcoin. For the Love of Physics - Walter Lewin - May 16, 2011 - Duration: 1:01:26. Lectures by Walter Lewin. Bitcoin is great vary to store value and preform large peer to peer transactions. It is very valuable because, its security was never compromised. Risk it’s ... What Is The Difference Between Bitcoin's "Proof Of Work" Vs. Peercoin & Nextcoin's "Proof Of Stake"? - Duration: 11:09. Cryptocurrency Market 4,559 views. 11:09. State of the Market - #1 Bull ...