Man throws out computer carrying $90 million worth of Bitcoin

How London Real and David Icke fooled the world. And everyone fell for it (long read) TL/DR included

[TL/DR at the bottom if you don't wanna read the whole thing]
HOW LONDON REAL AND DAVID ICKE FOOLED THE WORLD.
... AND EVERYONE FELL FOR IT
It's May, summer is coming in the Northern Hemisphere, but most of the people cannot enjoy the sun because they are trapped inside (unless they can chill in their gardens). Most social interactions happen between screens, and people go crazy on social media platforms about what is "really going on". An uprising began among ordinary folk regarding the origins of the so-called Covid 19 (and no, it's not the 19th Covid).
Few weeks back a very controversial Interview (some people call it a documentary; I tend to disagree, documentaries try to bring at least some proof to the table) surfaced on YouTube as a broadcast (meaning you could watch it as if it was Live) by London Real (basically a Joe Rogan style podcast channel) with the infamous conspiracy theorist David Icke. In the video, Mr. Icke makes extarordinary claims regarding Covid 19, 5G, Population control etc. The problem I had when the original video aired was that, although Mr. Icke mentioned sources, he did not cite almost anyone (and I researched his website, there's no actual studies cited anywhere to back up his claims), and most of the information seemed from someone who just read a few headlines here and there. (if you pm me I can give you examples, will stick to the story for the moment)
The video gathered millions of views and millions of shares across social media, and hyped a lot of people up against the "tyrant hand of the ones that want to control you", pretty soon people started attacking 5G towers (and if I recall correctly normal cellphone towers as well).
And YouTube did its job. Coronavirus was influencing people and who knew what desperate and angry people would have been capable of. So they deleted the video, to stop its spread. and so did all other platforms (Vimeo, facebook, etc). Rightfully so. What if there was no conspiracy? You hosted videos that encited people to commit crimes, you will be sued for billions and billions and billions (in Trump's voice).
People were outraged. The truth was being silenced. The government did not want to let the people know what's actually going on. Well... not really.. and you'll see why in a second.
[but now from our sponsor RAID Shadow Le... nah I'm kidding]
You see... it all goes back to the guy making the interview. His name is Brian Rose. He is the CEO and Founder of London Real, Dollar Store Joe Rogan (personal opinion based on intreviewing skill), and not many people know this, but he is what's called a "financial guru", basically a guy that, if you pay him a lot of money, will tell you how he made a lot of money by telling people how to make a lot of money (he's in the same boat as Dan Peña, Dan Lok, Tai Lopez etc (you get me). He has a course called the Business Accelerator which costs $2500 and upon researching former students and reviews, it seems all the positive ones are from websites where anyone can submit articles. Then there's the army of people (a lot of them right here on Reddit) who got scammed out of their money, were promised a LIVE Session which was actually a pre-recorded session, requested refunds which they never got and described the contents of the course as "below mediocre". (classic financial guru... the only one making money is the teacher). Also the courses were advertised as 96% completion but had a completion in the mid 40s (from one of the former students). Also, he was involved in some bitcoin scams and is basically banned from almost everwhere on the internet. While trying to find his net worth I found that he might be making about 200-300k a month with his courses (not too hard to imagine that basically the course has 60-70 people and it costs 2.5k).
Now, back to Coronavirus. When the videos got deleted Mr. Rose went on the social media platforms where he wasn't banned yet and yelled: THEY ARE TAKING YOUR FREEDOM. I CAN GIVE YOU FREEDOM: the DIGITAL FREEDOM PLATFORM.
AND EVERYONE FELL FOR IT.
Basically, what he's selling now is a video platform where the videos won't be deleted, and he's asking for donations (of course he is). What astonished me is that he managed to raise about 1 MILLION DOLLARS, which is "to get he platform up and running, get banned guests back on air, and TAKE YOUTUBE TO EU COURT" (you have to be an idiot to fall for that one - sorry - he basically violated the ToS, YouTube has its a$$ covered). Now the problem is the money he says he needs is astronomical. But he technically has lots of money, why does he need YOUR MONEY? (he is a financial guru after all).
I searched the cost of running a Netflix-like website (between 10k and 50k a month) - and he claims his platform has 600 long format videos (nowhere near comparing it to a streaming platform such as Netflix). You, you the one angry that the government was manipulating you just got manipulated into making this 1 million dollars. (there's no way in hell he would win a court of law against YouTube's Terms of Service that he agreed on when making the account). Not only that, Reddit is FULL with people complaining that they tried donating small amounts and then got charged hudreds of dollars, and nobody seemingly operating a refund policy (unless they did chargebacks but that's the long way around it).
You basically paid for a streaming platform where people can say what they want without any quality control. Some might be good interviews, others complete garbage, Unless you RESEARCH for yourself, you will never know. You want freedom of speech? Get ready for a lot of truckload of garbage.
.
.
AND WE ALL FELL FOR IT.

Epilogue: TL/DR:
Brian Rose (fake financial guru and dollar store Joe Rogan) gets the wackiest coronavirus guest he can (david icke) and gets banned off youtube (he knew it would happen) and other platforms, makes himself the victim and offers the solution: for people to help him build a free-thinking video platform (while seriously inflating the costs) even though he can more than afford it so he raises (at the time of me making this article) 1 MILLION DOLLARS.
If this isn't a story worth $997 in a limited seat (everyone gets in don't worry) online LIVE webinar, I don't know what is.
*EDIT: the whole "platform" is a weekly newsletter where you get a new video every week.
*EDIT: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If you claim something the burden of proof is on you to prove it.
Regards,
Ovi.
submitted by ovivalentino to conspiracy [link] [comments]

Shoreline SNORELINE. The impossible task of 3 PMC headshots from 100m.

It is getting ridiculous. I spent multiple raids on interchange a few days ago and got no luck on having people to kill from the required distance. I went to every spot people recommended and gave up after looking around, running around and also sitting for hours.
Now I have done 8 or so raids on SNORELINE, and nobody goes to ANY place but resort anymore, and quite frankly its impossible to get a 100m kill in the joint. I see nobody go to cottages, pier, or anywhere else. Gunshots at the start of the game at resort then the rest of the game its quiet. Nobody extracts on this map apparently, I have watched paths that people would have to cross to get to the extracts and nobody comes. I leave AI alive so I can hear if they get aggro'd from someone. 20 minutes into the game I now realize everyone is probably dead to one guy who went rock passage after killing 5 hatchlings and got himself a nice Grach sidearm from another guy.
The whole ledx shit needs to be spread to the other places on the map. Cottages, pier (add a door that needs a key for that building). Why is it so EASY to get millions worth of loot with nothing on the line?
May as well rename Shoreline to Resort because the rest of the map is not utilized at all simply due to the 1.5m and 30m roubles chance in the rooms. Every other landmark on the map has garbage loot. Yea you might get a bitcoin or graphics card in the cottage or radar, but apart from that's its all trash you might need for a quest at level 5. This is why nobody desires to go to these places.
It cannot be difficult to add more scavs to the Resort for now until the boss and raiders are brought in. Please do that.
One thing you notice about Reserve and Customs is that the bosses/raiders make the game feel alive because the players definitely don't in almost every case. It gives more stuff to do and a random "hotspot" every game for guaranteed PVP.
submitted by Ranoutofcharact7878 to EscapefromTarkov [link] [comments]

Antminer T19 May Not Affect Bitcoin Hash Rate but Keeps Bitmain Ahead

The Antminer T19 by Bitmain may not have a big impact on the Bitcoin network, and it comes out amid the firm’s internal and post-halving uncertainty.
Earlier this week, Chinese mining-hardware juggernaut Bitmain unveiled its new product, an application-specific integrated circuit called Antminer T19. The Bitcoin (BTC) mining unit is the latest to join the new generation of ASICs — state-of-the-art devices designed to mitigate increased mining difficulty by maximizing the terahashes-per-second output.
The Antminer T19 announcement comes amid the post-halving uncertainty and follows the company’s recent problems with its S17 units. So, can this new machine help Bitmain to reinforce its somewhat hobbled position in the mining sector?
T19: The cheaper S19
According to the official announcement, the Antminer T19 features a mining speed of 84 TH/s and a power efficiency of 37.5 joules per TH. The chips used in the new device are the same as those equipped in the Antminer S19 and S19 Pro, though it uses the new APW12 version of the power supply system that allows the device to start up faster.
Bitmain usually markets its Antminer T devices as the most cost-effective ones, while the S-series models are presented as the top of the line in terms of productivity for their respective generation, Johnson Xu — the head of research and analytics at Tokensight — explained to Cointelegraph. According to data from F2Pool, one of the largest Bitcoin mining pools, Antminer T19s can generate $3.97 of profit each day, while Antminer S19s and Antminer S19 Pros can earn $4.86 and $6.24, respectively, based on an average electricity cost of $0.05 per kilowatt-hour.
Antminer T19s, which consume 3,150 watts, are being sold for $1,749 per unit. Antminer S19 machines, on the other hand, cost $1,785 and consume 3,250 watts. Antminer S19 Pro devices, the most efficient of three, are considerably more expensive and go for $2,407. The reason Bitmain is producing another model for the 19 series is due to what is known as "binning" chips, Marc Fresa — the founder of mining firmware company Asic.to — explained to Cointelegraph:
“When chips are designed they are meant to achieve specific performance levels. Chips that fail to hit their target numbers, such as not achieving the power standards or their thermal output, are often ‘Binned.’ Instead of throwing these chips in the garbage bin, these chips are resold into another unit with a lower performance level. In the case of Bitmain S19 chips that don’t make the cutoff are then sold in the T19 for cheaper since they do not perform as well as the counterpart.” The rollout of a new model “has nothing to do with the fact that machines are not selling well,” Fresa went on to argue, citing the post-halving uncertainty: “The biggest reason machines probably are not selling as well as manufacturers would like is because we are on a bit of a tipping point; The halving just happened, the price can go anyway and the difficulty is continuing to drop.” Product diversification is a common strategy for mining hardware producers, given that customers tend to aim for different specifications, Kristy-Leigh Minehan, a consultant and the former chief technology officer of Genesis Mining, told Cointelegraph:
“ASICs don’t really allow for one model as consumers expect a certain performance level from a machine, and unfortunately silicon is not a perfect process — many times you’ll get a batch that performs better or worse than projected due to the nature of the materials. Thus, you end up with 5–10 different model numbers.” It is not yet clear how efficient the 19-series devices are because they have not shipped at scale, as Leo Zhang, the founder of Anicca Research, summed up in a conversation with Cointelegraph. The first batch of S19 units reportedly shipped out around May 12, while the T19 shipments will start between June 21 and June 30. It is also worth noting that, at this time, Bitmain only sells up to two T19 miners per user “to prevent hoarding.”
Hardware problems and competitors
The latest generation of Bitmain ASICs follows the release of the S17 units, which have received mostly mixed-to-negative reviews in the community. In early May, Arseniy Grusha, the co-founder of crypto consulting and mining firm Wattum, created a Telegram group for consumers unsatisfied with the S17 units they purchased from Bitmain. As Grusha explained to Cointelegraph at the time, out of the 420 Antminer S17+ devices his company bought, roughly 30%, or around 130 machines, turned out to be bad units.
Similarly, Samson Mow, the chief strategy officer of blockchain infrastructure firm Blockstream, tweeted earlier in April that Bitmain customers have a 20%–30% failure rate with Antminer S17 and T17 units. “The Antminer 17 series is generally considered not great,” added Zhang. He additionally noted that Chinese hardware company and competitor Micro BT has been stepping on Bitmain’s toes lately with the release of its highly productive M30 series, which prompted Bitmain to step up its efforts:
“Whatsminer gained significant market share in the past two years. According to their COO, in 2019 MicroBT sold ~35% of the network hashrate. Needless to say Bitmain is under a lot of pressure both from competitors and internal politics. They have been working on the 19 series for a while. The specs and price look very attractive.” Minehan confirmed that MicroBT has been gaining traction on the market, but refrained from saying that Bitmain is losing market share as a result: “I think MicroBT is offering option and bringing in new participants, and giving farms a choice. Most farms will have both Bitmain and MicroBT side by side, rather than exclusively host one manufacturer.”
“I would say that MicroBT has taken up the existing market share that Canaan has left,” she added, referring to another China-based mining player that recently reported a net loss of $5.6 million in the first quarter of 2020 and cut the price of its mining hardware by up to 50%.
Indeed, some large-scale operations seem to be diversifying their equipment with MicroBT units. Earlier this week, United States mining firm Marathon Patent Group announced that it had installed 700 Whatsminer M30S+ ASICs produced by MicroBT. However, it is also reportedly waiting for a delivery of 1,160 Antminer S19 Pro units produced by Bitmain, meaning that it also remains loyal to the current market leader.
Will the hash rate be affected?
Bitcoin’s hash rate plummeted 30% soon after the halving occurred as much of the older generation equipment became unprofitable due to the increased mining difficulty. That spurred miners to reshuffle, upgrading their current rigs and selling older machines to places where electricity is cheaper — meaning that some of them had to temporarily unplug.
The situation has stabilized since, with the hash rate fluctuating around 100 TH/s for the past few days. Some experts attribute that to the start of the wet season in Sichuan, a southwest Chinese province where miners take advantage of low hydroelectricity prices between May and October.
The arrival of the new generation of ASICs is expected to drive the hash rate even higher, at least once upgraded units become widely available. So, will the newly revealed T19 model make any impact on the state of the network?
Experts agree that it won’t affect the hash rate to a major degree, as it’s a lower output model compared with the S19 series and MicroBT’s M30 series. Minehan said she doesn’t expect the T19 model “to have a huge impact that’s an immediate cause of concern,” as “most likely this is a run of <3500 units of a particular bin quality.” Similarly, Mark D’Aria, the CEO of crypto consulting firm Bitpro, told Cointelegraph:
“There isn’t a strong reason to expect the new model to significantly affect the hashrate. It might be a slightly more compelling option to a miner with extraordinarily inexpensive electricity, but otherwise they likely would have just purchased an S19 instead.” Bitmain continues to hold leadership despite internal struggle
At the end of the day, manufacturers are always in an arms race, and mining machines are simply commodity products, Zhang argued in a conversation with Cointelegraph:
“Besides price, performance, and failure rate, there are not many factors that can help a manufacturer differentiate from the others. The relentless competition led to where we are today.” According to Zhang, as the iteration rate naturally slows down in the future, there will be more facilities using “creative thermal design such as immersion cooling,” hoping to maximize the mining efficiency beyond just using most powerful machines.
As for now, Bitmain remains the leader of the mining race, despite having to deal with the largely defunct 17 series and an intensifying power struggle between its two co-founders, Jihan Wu and Micree Zhan, which recently resulted in reports of a street brawl.
“Due to its recent internal issues, Bitmain is facing challenges to keep its strong position in the future thus they started to look at other things to expand its industry influences,” Xu told Cointelegraph. He added that Bitmain “will still dominate the industry position in the near future due to its network effect,” although its current problems might allow competitors such as MicroBT to catch up.
Earlier this week, the power struggle inside Bitmain intensified even further as Micree Zhan, an ousted executive of the mining titan, reportedly led a group of private guards to overtake the company’s office in Beijing.
Meanwhile, Bitmain continues to expand its operations. Last week, the mining company revealed it was extending its “Ant Training Academy” certification program to North America, with the first courses set to launch in the fall. As such, Bitmain seems to be doubling down on the U.S.-based mining sector, which has been growing recently. The Beijing-based company already operates what it classifies as “the world’s largest” mining facility in Rockdale, Texas, which has a planned capacity of 50 megawatts that can later be expanded to 300 megawatts.
submitted by melissaBrian0 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Transcript of Bitcoin ABC’s Amaury Sechet presenting at the Bitcoin Cash City conference on September 5th, 2019

Transcript of Bitcoin ABC’s Amaury Sechet presenting at the Bitcoin Cash City conference on September 5th, 2019
I tried my best to be as accurate as possible, but if there are any errors, please let me know so I can fix. I believe this talk is important for all Bitcoin Cash supporters, and I wanted to provide it in written form so people can read it as well as watch the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOv0nmOe1_o For me, this was the first time I felt like I understood the issues Amaury's been trying to communicate, and I hope that reading this presentation might help others understand as well.
Bitcoin Cash’s Culture
“Okay. Hello? Can you hear me? The microphone is good, yeah?
Ok, so after that introduction, I’m going to do the only thing that I can do now, which is disappoint you, because well, that was quite something.
So usually I make technical talks and this time it’s going to be a bit different. I’m going to talk about culture in the Bitcoin Cash ecosystem. So first let’s talk about culture, like what is it? It’s ‘the social behaviors and norms found in human society.’
So we as the Bitcoin Cash community, we are a human society, or at least we look like it. You’re all humans as far as I know, and we have social behaviors and norms, and those social behaviors and norms have a huge impact on the project.
And the reason why I want to focus on that point very specifically is because we have better fundamentals and we have a better product and we are more useful than most other cryptos out there. And I think that’s a true statement, and I think this is a testimony of the success of BCH. But also, we are only just 3% of BTC’s value. So clearly there is something that we are not doing right, and clearly it’s not fundamental, it’s not product, it’s not usefulness. It’s something else, and I think this can be found somewhat in our culture.
So I have this quote here, from Naval Ravikant. I don’t know if you guys know him but he’s a fairly well known speaker and thinker, and he said, “Never trust anyone who does not annoy you from time to time, because it means that they are only telling you what you want to hear.”
And so today I am going to annoy you a bit, in addition to disappointing you, so yeah, it’s going to be very bad, but I feel like we kind of need to do it.
So there are two points, mainly, that I think our culture is not doing the right thing. And those are gonna be infrastructure and game theory. And so I’m going to talk a little bit about infrastructure and game theory.
Right, so, I think there are a few misconceptions by people that are not used to working in software infrastructure in general, but basically, it works like any other kind of infrastructure. So basically all kinds of infrastructure decay, and we are under the assumption that technology always gets better and better and better and never decays. But in terms of that, it actually decays all the time, and we have just a bunch of engineers working at many many companies that keep working at making it better and fighting that decay.
I’m going to take a few examples, alright. Right now if you want to buy a cathode ray tube television or monitor for your computer (I’m not sure why you want to do that because we have better stuff now), but if you want to buy that, it’s actually very difficult now. There are very little manufacturers that even know how to build them. We almost forgot as a human society how to build those stuff. Because, well, there was not as high of a demand for them as there was before, and therefore nobody really worked on maintaining the knowledge or the know how, and the factories, none of that which are required to build those stuff, and therefore we don’t build them. And this is the same for vinyl discs, right? You can buy vinyl disk today if you want, but it’s actually more expensive than it used to be twenty years ago.
We used to have space shuttles. Both Russia and US used to have space shuttles. And now only the US have space shuttles, and now nobody has space shuttles anymore.
And there is an even better counter example to that. It’s that the US, right now, is refining Uranium for nuclear weapons. Like on a regular basis there are people working on that problem. Except that the US doesn’t need any new uranium to make nuclear weapons because they are decommissioning the weapons that are too old and can reuse that uranium to build the new weapon that they are building. The demand for that is actually zero, and still there are people making it and they are just basically making it and storing it forever, and it’s never used. So why is the US spending money on that? Well you would say governments are usually pretty good at spending money on stuff that are not very useful, but in that case there is a very good reason. And the good reason is that they don’t want to forget how it’s done. Because maybe one day it’s going to be useful. And acquiring the whole knowledge of working with uranium and making enriched uranium, refining uranium, it’s not obvious. It’s a very complicated process. It involves very advanced engineering and physics, a lot of that, and keeping people working on that problem ensures that knowledge is kept through time. If you don’t do that, those people are going to retire and nobody will know how to do it. Right.
So in addition to decaying infrastructure from time to time, we can have zero days in software, meaning problems in the software that are not now exploited live on the network. We can have denial of service attack, we can have various failures on the network, or whatever else, so just like any other infrastructure we need people that essentially take care of the problem and fight the decay constantly doing maintenance and also be ready to intervene whenever there is some issue. And that means that even if there is no new work to be done, you want to have a large enough group of people that are working on that everyday just making it all nice and shiny so that when something bad happens, you have people that understand how the system works. So even if for nothing else, you want a large enough set of people working on infrastructure for that to be possible.
So we’re not quite there yet, and we’re very reliant on BTC. Because the software that we’re relying on to run the network is actually a fork to the BTC codebase. And this is not specific to Bitcoin Cash. This is also true for Litecoin, and Dash, and Zcash and whatever. There are many many crypotos that are just a fork of the Bitcoin codebase. And all those crypos they actually are reliant on BTC to do some maintenance work because they have smaller teams working on the infrastructure. And as a result any rational market cannot price those other currencies higher than BTC. It would just not make sense anymore. If BTC were to disappear, or were to fail on the market, and this problem is not addressed, then all those other currencies are going to fail with it. Right? And you know that may not be what we want, but that’s kind of like where we are right now.
So if we want to go to the next level, maybe become number one in that market, we need to fix that problem because it’s not going to happen without it.
So I was mentioning the 3% number before, and it’s always very difficult to know what all the parameters are that goes into that number, but one of them is that. Just that alone, I’m sure that we are going to have a lower value than BTC always as long as we don’t fix that problem.
Okay, how do we fix that problem? What are the elements we have that prevent us from fixing that problem? Well, first we need people with very specific skill sets. And the people that have experience in those skill sets, there are not that many of them because there are not that many places where you can work on systems involving hundreds of millions, if not billions of users, that do like millions of transactions per second, that have systems that have hundreds of gigabytes per second of throughput, this kind of stuff. There are just not that many companies in the world that operate on that scale. And as a result, the number of people that have the experience of working on that scale is also pretty much limited to the people coming out of those companies. So we need to make sure that we are able to attract those people.
And we have another problem that I talked about with Justin Bons a bit yesterday, that we don’t want to leave all that to be fixed by a third party.
It may seem nice, you know, so okay, I have a big company making good money, I’m gonna pay people working on the infrastructure for everybody. I’m gonna hire some old-time cypherpunk that became famous because he made a t-shirt about ERISA and i’m going to use that to promote my company and hire a bunch of developers and take care of the infrastructure for everybody. It’s all good people, we are very competent. And indeed they are very competent, but they don’t have your best interest in mind, they have their best interest in mind. And so they should, right? It’s not evil to have your own interest in mind, but you’ve got to remember that if you delegate that to others, they have their best interest in mind, they don’t have yours. So it’s very important that you have different actors that have different interests that get involved into that game of maintaining the infrastructure. So they can keep each other in check.
And if you don’t quite understand the value proposition for you as a business who builds on top of BCH, the best way to explain that to whoever is doing the financials of your company is as an insurance policy. The point of the insurance on the building where your company is, or on the servers, is so that if everything burns down, you can get money to get your business started and don’t go under. Well this is the same thing. Your business relies on some infrastructure, and if this infrastructure ends up going down, disappearing, or being taken in a direction that doesn’t fit your business, your business is toast. And so you want to have an insurance policy there that insures that the pieces that you’re relying on are going to be there for you when you need them.
Alright let’s take an example. In this example, I purposefully did not put any name because I don’t want to blame people. I want to use this as an example of a mistake that were made. I want you to understand that many other people have done many similar mistakes in that space, and so if all you take from what I’m saying here is like those people are bad and you should blame them, this is like completely the wrong stuff. But I also think it’s useful to have a real life example.
So on September 1st, at the beginning of the week, we had a wave of spam that was broadcasted on the network. Someone made like a bunch of transactions, and those were very visibly transactions that were not there to actually do transactions, they were there just to create a bunch of load on the network and try to disturb its good behavior.
And it turned out that most miners were producing blocks from 2 to 8 megabytes, while typical market demand is below half a megabyte, typically, and everything else above that was just spam, essentially. And if you ask any people that have experience in capacity planning, they are going to tell you that those limits are appropriate. The reason why, and the alternative to raising those limits that you can use to mitigate those side effects are a bit complicated and they would require a talk in and of itself to go into, so I’m going to just use an argument from authority here, but trust me, I know what I’m talking about here, and this is just like raising those limits is just not the solution. But some pool decided to increase that soft cap to 32 megs. And this has two main consequences that I want to dig in to explain what is not the right solution.
And the first one is that we have businesses that are building on BCH today. And those businesses are the ones that are providing value, they are the ones making our network valuable. Right? So we need to treat those people as first class citizens. We need to attract and value them as much as we can. And those people, they find themselves in the position where they can either dedicate their resources and their attention and their time to make their service better and more valuable for users, or maybe expand their service to more countries, to more markets, to whatever, they can do a lot of stuff, or they can spend their time and resources to make sure the system works not when you have like 10x the usual load, but also 100x the usual load. And this is something that is not providing value to them, this is something that is not providing value to us, and I would even argue that this is something that is providing negative value.
Because if those people don’t improve their service, or build new services, or expand their service to new markets, what’s going to happen is that we’re not going to do 100x. 100x happens because people provide useful services and people start using it. And if we distract those people so that they need to do random stuff that has nothing to do with their business, then we’re never going to do 100x. And so having a soft cap that is way way way above what is the usual market demand (32 megs is almost a hundred times what is the market demand for it), it’s actually a denial of service attack that you open for anyone that is building on the chain.
We were talking before, like yesterday we were asking about how do we attract developers, and one of the important stuff is that we need to value that over valuing something else. And when we take this kind of move, the signal that we send to the community, to the people working on that, is that people yelling very loudly on social media, their opinion is more valued than your work to make a useful service building on BCH. This is an extremely bad signal to send. So we don’t want to send those kind of signals anymore.
That’s the first order effect, but there’s a second order effect, and the second order effect is to scale we need people with experience in capacity planning. And as it turns out big companies like Google, and Facebook, and Amazon pay good money, they pay several 100k a year to people to do that work of capacity planning. And they wouldn’t be doing that if they just had to listen to people yelling on social media to find the answer. Right? It’s much cheaper to do the simple option, except the simple option is not very good because this is a very complex engineering problem. And not everybody is like a very competent engineer in that domain specifically. So put yourself in the shoes of some engineers who have skills in that particular area. They see that happening, and what do they see? The first thing that they see is that if they join that space, they’re going to have some level of competence, some level of skill, and it’s going to be ignored by the leaders in that space, and ignoring their skills is not the best way to value it as it turns out. And so because of that, they are less likely to join it. But there is a certain thing that they’re going to see. And that is that because they are ignored, some shit is going to happen, some stuff are going to break, some attacks are going to be made, and who is going to be called to deal with that? Well, it’s them. Right? So not only are they going to be not valued for their stuff, the fact that they are not valued for their stuff is going to put them in a situation where they have to put out a bunch of fires that they would have known to avoid in the first place. So that’s an extremely bad value proposition for them to go work for us. And if we’re going to be a world scale currency, then we need to attract those kinds of people. And so we need to have a better value proposition and a better signaling that we send to them.
Alright, so that’s the end of the first infrastructure stuff. Now I want to talk about game theory a bit, and specifically, Schelling points.
So what is a Schelling point? A Schelling point is something that we can agree on without especially talking together. And there are a bunch of Schelling points that exist already in the Bitcoin space. For instance we all follow the longest chain that have certain rules, right? And we don’t need to talk to each other. If I’m getting my wallet and I have some amount of money and I go to any one of you here and you check your wallet and you have that amount of money and those two amounts agree. We never talk to each other to come to any kind of agreement about how much each of us have in terms of money. We just know. Why? Because we have a Schelling point. We have a way to decide that without really communicating. So that’s the longest chain, but also all the consensus rules we have are Schelling points. So for instance, we accept blocks up to a certain size, and we reject blocks that are bigger than that. We don’t constantly talk to each other like, ‘Oh by the way do you accept 2 mb blocks?’ ‘Yeah I do.’ ‘Do you accept like 3 mb blocks? And tomorrow will you do that?’
We’re not doing this as different actors in the space, constantly worrying each other. We just know there is a block size that is a consensus rule that is agreed upon by almost everybody, and that’s a consensus rule. And all the other consensus rules are effectively changing Schelling points. And our role as a community is to create valuable Schelling points. Right? You want to have a set of rules that provide as much value as possible for different actors in the ecosystem. Because this is how we win. And there are two parts to that. Even though sometimes we look and it’s just one thing, but there are actually two things.
The first one is that we need to decide what is a valuable Schelling point. And I think we are pretty good at this. And this is why we have a lot of utility and we have a very strong fundamental development. We are very good at choosing what is a good Schelling point. We are very bad at actually creating it and making it strong.
So I’m going to talk about that.
How do you create a new Schelling point. For instance, there was a block size, and we wanted a new block size. So we need to create a new Schelling point. How do you create a new Schelling point that is very strong? You need a commitment strategy. That’s what it boils down to. And the typical example that is used when discussing Schelling points is nuclear warfare. So think about that a bit. You have two countries that both have nuclear weapons. And one country sends a nuke on the other country. Destroys some city, whatever, it’s bad. When you look at it from a purely rational perspective, you will assume that people are very angry, and that they want to retaliate, right? But if you put that aside, there is actually no benefit to retaliating. It’s not going to rebuild the city, it’s not going to make them money, it’s not going to give them resources to rebuild it, it’s not going to make new friends. Usually not. It’s just going to destroy some stuff in the other guy that would otherwise not change anything because the other guys already did the damage to us. So if you want nuclear warfare to actually prevent war like we’ve seen mostly happening in the past few decades with the mutually assured destruction theory, you need each of those countries to have a very credible commitment strategy, which is if you nuke me, I will nuke you, and I’m committing to that decision no matter what. I don’t care if it’s good or bad for me, if you nuke me, I will nuke you. And if you can commit to that strongly enough so that it’s credible for other people, it’s most likely that they are not going to nuke you in the first place because they don’t want to be nuked. And it’s capital to understand that this commitment strategy, it’s actually the most important part of it. It’s not the nuke, it’s not any of it, it’s the commitment strategy. You have the right commitment strategy, you can have all the nuke that you want, it’s completely useless, because you are not deterring anyone from attacking you.
There are many other examples, like private property. It’s something usually you’re going to be willing to put a little bit of effort to defend, and the effort is usually way higher than the value of the property itself. Because this is your house, this is your car, this is your whatever, and you’re pretty committed to it, and therefore you create a Schelling point over the fact that this is your house, this is your car, this is your whatever. People are willing to use violence and whatever to defend their property. This is effectively, even if you don’t do it yourself, this is what happens when you call the cops, right? The cops are like you stop violating that property or we’re going to use violence against you. So people are willing to use a very disproportionate response even in comparison to the value of the property. And this is what is creating the Schelling point that allows private property to exist.
This is the commitment strategy. And so the longest chain is a very simple example. You have miners and what miners do when they create a new block, essentially they move from one Schelling point when a bunch of people have some amount of money, to a new Schelling point where some money has moved, and we need to agree to the new Schelling point. And what they do is that they commit a certain amount of resources to it via proof of work. And this is how they get us to pay attention to the new Schelling point. And so UASF is also a very good example of that where people were like we activate segwit no matter what, like, if it doesn’t pan out, we just like busted our whole chain and we are dead.
Right? This is like the ultimate commitment strategy, as far as computer stuff is involved. It’s not like they actually died or anything, but as far as you can go in the computer space, this is very strong commitment strategy.
So let me take an example that is fairly inconsequential in its consequences, but I think explains very well. The initial BCH ticker was BCC. I don’t know if people remember that. Personally I remember reading about it. It was probably when we created it with Jonald and a few other people. And so I personally was for XBC, but I went with BCC, and most people wanted BCC right? It doesn’t matter. But it turned out that Bitfinex had some Ponzi scheme already listed as BCC. It was Bitconnect, if you remember. Carlos Matos, you know, great guy, but Bitconnect was not exactly the best stuff ever, it was a Ponzi scheme. And so as a result Bitifnex decided to list Bitcoin Cash as BCH instead of BCC, and then the ball started rolling and now everybody uses BCH instead of BCC.
So it’s not all that bad. The consequences are not that very bad. And I know that many of you are thinking that right now. Why is this guy bugging us about this? We don’t care if it’s BCC or BCH. And if you’re doing that, you are exactly proving my point.
Because … there are people working for Bitcoin.com here right? Yeah, so Bitcoin.com is launching an exchange, or just has launched, it’s either out right now or it’s going to be out very soon. Well think about that. Make this thought experiment for yourself. Imagine that Bitcoin.com lists some Ponzi scheme as BTC, and then they decide to list Bitcoin as BTN. What do you think would be the reaction of the Bitcoin Core supporter? Would they be like, you know what? we don’t want to be confused with some Ponzi scheme so we’re going to change everything for BTN. No, they would torch down Roger Ver even more than they do now, they would torch down Bitcoin.com. They would insult anyone that would suggest that this was a good idea to go there. They would say that everyone that uses the stuff that is BTC that it’s a ponzi scheme, and that it’s garbage, and that if you even talk about it you are the scum of the earth. Right? They would be extremely committed to whatever they have.
And I think this is a lesson that we need to learn from them. Because even though it’s a ticker, it’s not that important, it’s that attitude that you need to be committed to that stuff if you want to create a strong Schelling point, that allows them to have a strong Schelling point, and that does not allow us to have that strong of a Schelling point.
Okay, so yesterday we had the talk by Justin Bons from Cyber Capital, and one of the first things he said in his talk, is that his company has a very strong position in BCH. And so that changed the whole tone of the talk. You gotta take him seriously because his money is where his mouth is. You know that he is not coming on the stage and telling you random stuff that comes from his mind or tries to get you to do something that he doesn’t try himself. That doesn’t mean he’s right. Maybe he’s wrong, but if he’s wrong, he’s going bankrupt. And you know just for that reason, maybe it’s worth it to listen to it a bit more than some random person saying random stuff when they have no skin in the game.
And it makes him more of a leader in the space. Okay we have some perception in this space that we have a bunch of leaders, but many of them don’t have skin in the game. And it is very important that they do. So when there is some perceived weakness from BCH, if you act as an investor, you are going to diversify. If you act as a leader, you are going to fix that weakness. Right? And so, leaders, it’s not like you can come here and decide well, I’m a leader now. Leaders are leaders because people follow them. It seems fairly obvious, but … and you are the people following the leaders, and I am as well. We decide to follow the opinion of some people more than the opinion of others. And those are the defacto leaders of our community. And we need to make sure that those leaders that we have like Justin Bons, and make sure that they have a strong commitment to whatever they are leading you to, because otherwise you end up in this situation:

https://preview.redd.it/r23dptfobcl31.jpg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=750fbd0f1dc0122d2791accc59f45a235a522444
Where you got a leader, he’s getting you to go somewhere, he has some goal, he has some whatever. In this case he is not that happy with the British people. But he’s like give me freedom or give me death, and he’s going to fight the British, but at the same time he’s like you know what? Maybe this shit isn’t gonna pan out, you gotta make sure you have your backup plan together, you have your stash of British pound here. You know, many of us are going to die, but that’s a sacrifice I’m willing to make.
That’s not the leader that you want.
I’m going to go to two more examples and then we’re going to be done with it. So one of them is Segwit 2x. Segwit 2x came with a time where some people wanted to do UASF. And UASF was essentially people that set up a modified version of their Bitcoin node that would activate segwit on August 1, no matter what. Right? No matter what miners do, no matter what other people do, it’s going to activate segwit. And either I’m going to be on the other fork, or I’m going to be alone and bust. Well, the alternative proposal was segwit 2x. Where people would activate segwit and then increase the size of the block. And what happened was that one of the sides had a very strong commitment strategy, and the other side, instead of choosing a proportional commitment strategy, what they did was that they modified the activation of segwit 2x to be compatible with UASF. And in doing so they both validate the commitment strategy done by the opposite side, and they weaken their own commitment strategy. So if you look at that, and you understand game theory a bit, you know what’s going to happen. Like the fight hasn’t even started and UASF has already won. And when I saw that happening, it was a very important development to me, because I have some experience in game theory, a lot of that, so I understood what was happening, and this is what led me to commit to BCH, which was BCC at the time, 100%. Because I knew segwit 2x was toast, even though it had not even started, because even though they had very strong cards, they are not playing their cards right, and if you don’t play your cards right, it doesn’t matter how strong your cards are.
Okay, the second one is emergent consensus. And the reason I wanted to put those two examples here is because I think those are the two main examples that lead to the fact that BTC have small blocks and we have big blocks and we’re a minority chain. Those are like the two biggest opportunities we had to have big blocks on BTC and we blew both of them for the exact same reason.
So emergent consensus is like an interesting technology that allows you to trade your bigger block without splitting the network. Essentially, if someone starts producing blocks that are bigger than … (video skips) ,,, The network seems to be following the chain that has larger blocks, eventually they’re going to fall back on that chain, and that’s a very clevery mechanism that allows you to make the consensus rules softer in a way, right? When everybody has the same consensus rules, it still remains enforced, but if a majority of people want to move to a new point, they can do so by bringing others with them without creating a fork. That is a very good activation mechanism for changing the block size, for instance, or it can be used to activate other stuff.
There is a problem, though. This mechanism isn’t able to set a new point. It’s a way to activate a new Schelling point when you have one, but it provides no way to decide when and where or to what value or to anything to where we are going. So this whole strategy lacks the commitment aspect of it. And because it lacks the commitment aspect of it, it was unable to activate properly. It was good, but it was not sufficient in itself. It needs to be combined with a commitment strategy. And especially on that one there are some researchers that wrote a whole paper (https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/686.pdf) unpacking the whole game theory that essentially come to that conclusion that it’s not going to set a new size limit because it lacked the commitment aspect of it. But they go on like they model all the mathematics of it, they give you all the numbers, the probability, and the different scenarios that are possible. It’s a very interesting paper. If you want to see, like, because I’m kind of explaining the game theory from a hundred mile perspective, but actually you can deep dive into it and if you want to know the details, they are in there. People are doing that. This is an actual branch of mathematics.
Alright, okay so conclusion. We must avoid to weaken our commitment strategy. And that means that we need to work in a way where first there is decentralization happening. Everybody has ideas, and we fight over them, we decide where we want to go, we put them on the roadmap, and once it’s on the roadmap, we need to commit to it. Because when people want to go like, ‘Oh this is decentralized’ and we do random stuff after that, we actually end up with decentralization, not decentralization in a cooperative manner, but like in an atomization manner. You get like all the atoms everywhere, we explode, we destroy ourself.
And we must require a leader to have skin in the game, so that we make sure we have good leaders. I have a little schema to explain that. We need to have negotiations between different parties, and because there are no bugs, the negotiation can last for a long time and be tumultuous and everything, and that’s fine, that’s what decentralization is looking like at that stage, and that’s great and that makes the system strong. But then once we made a decision, we got to commit to it to create a new Schelling point. Because if we don’t, the new Schelling point is very weak, and we get decentralization in the form of disintegration. And I think we have not been very good to balance the two. Essentially what I would like for us to do going forward is encouraging as much as possible decentralization in the first form. But consider people who participate in the second form, as hostile to BCH, because their behavior is damaging to whatever we are doing. And they are often gonna tell you why we can’t do that because it’s permissionless and decentralized, and they are right, this is permissionless and decentralized, and they can do that. We don’t have to take it seriously. We can show them the door. And not a single person can do that by themself, but as a group, we can develop a culture where it’s the norm to do that. And we have to do that.”
submitted by BCHcain to btc [link] [comments]

Don't let the current price and marketcap 'rank' fool you...

Sadly, I see a lot of people who bought into Neblio near it's highs or people who are newly discovering Neblio and they're being discouraged by the following:
  1. Price Drop: While every project that was active prior to the start of the market crash in early 2018 saw it's price drop heavily, NEBL's overall price drop has fallen quite drastically. However, it's simply not fair to judge the project by it's price drop - the ENTIRE market dropped - from the king & first mover in Bitcoin, to literally every single altcoin.
  2. Extent of the Price Drop: People tend to resort to, "Yeah, Bitcoin dropped 6x it's value, but NEBL dropped XXX times it's value!" This isn't a fair unit of measure, actually, it's a bullshit unit of measure because the entire space is speculation driven. In the traditional stock market, it would be fair to be spooked by a company who's rank in market cap drastically fell because investors will abandon based off of the company's PERFORMANCE - tanking sales, scandals, a tainted product, massive lawsuits, etc. However, almost NONE of the ENTIRE crypto space has a project that is ACTUALLY GENERATING REVENUE! If Amazon was not generating a return for the company - Amazon would not be worth shit and Jeff Bezos would be broke. However, Amazon makes BILLIONS in sales revenue profits, advertisement revenue, ad-share, etc. All of this revenue = company earnings = company profits = investor dividends. The more profitable and successful a company is, the more investors are willing to pay to own shares in the company to benefit from those returns. There's not a SINGLE PROJECT in the top 500 that is actively generating revenue and profits by being used by the consumer, market, or anywhere else in the world. There's NO performance record, there's NO earnings revenue, there's NOTHING. What makes people buy? SPECULATION. Every. Single. Project. in this entire market is SPECULATION driven. You know why Neblio fell from top 100 to 395? Because when it was in the top 100, there were only 1,300 different crypto tokens - now there's 2,900. Is it Neblio's fault that 1,600 jackass projects have entered the space and the noobs in this market will flood into anything new and shiny in hopes of lambo's? No, we had numerous forks that put projects ahead of Neblio, we had DEX launches pumping new coins that went ahead of Neblio, we have two dozen stable coins created since Neblio's high that went ahead, and then we had another 1,500 projects who people simply buy because it's 'new' and they think it has to go up before it can go down.
  3. But other projects didn't fall as much... This is where we get into the one 'negative' of Neblio - brand awareness and brand marketing. Brand awareness & marketing costs MONEY. Advertisements cost money, influencers cost money, many write-ups today on prominent crypto outlets cost money. Even most partnerships. - cost money. New exchange listings to reach new buyers? You guessed it - costs money. The Neblio team, does not partake in this. Actually, they don't partake in ANY of this. While this absolutely SUCKS in the short time, they're brilliant for it in the long run. Eddy and the team aren't morons - they're fully aware that marketing and brand awareness is crucial. However, timing is more important. Since marketing costs money (a lot of money in this market), why would you waste resources and team money when the bear market has no definite end in sight? Imagine if they pulled out all the stops as soon as their rank started to fall - paid exchange after exchange, paid influencer after influencer to keep the project in front of the audience, paid for the expensive forum and crypto website ads/banners/write-ups. How long would that hold? People would have bought in, the rank would have held through February, March, April 2018...then what? As the articles get old, the ads expire, the presence drops as new projects do the same...what happens? People sell, the price drops, people panic sell, and the same end result happens. Maybe they start it when they fell to 150 in mid 2018? Do you think that would have held until now, the last quarter of 2019? Nope, because we're still in the bear market and Bitcoin has it's LARGEST market dominance since early 2017. Any marketing would have been an absolute WASTE up to this point and a waste of team money. While everyone is blowing their money to hold a nice rank and marketcap with garbage daily volume, they'll go broke while teams like Neblio have the bulk of their funding and capital saved for the future.
  4. What's the positive? Neblio is doing what counts - coding. The Neblio team codes and develops RELENTLESSLY - they pump out more quality code per developer more than every single project in crypto except for maybe a 10 to 15 projects. Neblio is BUILDING what matters - the code, the network. When the hype of the other projects that pushed Neblio's rank down fall and fail, and they will, the GENUINE projects will be what remain standing. Rank changes fast in this space, VERY fast. I'm a big supporter of Crypterium (full disclosure, I hold CRPT and am an ICO buyer) - a project that a few months ago was in the rank of 300's with it's earliest supporters screaming scam and failure, to now having largely sustained volume and broke into the top 100 today. This market changes fast and when the bull market is truly back, as the shit projects begin dropping off without any actual product, the REAL projects with REAL systems and blockchain solutions will THRIVE and explode upward. Crypterium was down 46 times from it's ATH, and in a matter of only a few months it's down 6 times from ATH. 46 times to 6 times and inside the bear market. So STOP worrying about price.
  5. Price changes quickly and is NOT what it appears. This part is important in understanding how insignicant current price is. Right now, one NEBL is $0.47 - that is down 138 TIMES from it's all time high. That looks fucking ALARMING! But is it? Let's look at total market cap distribution. Neblio's price right now, is based off it's rank position of #393 - which gives it a $7 million market cap. This is where the price is down 138 times. But, during the first week of January 2018, the #393 ranked project had a market cap rank of $24 million - just because of the distribution of total market cap across the entire market. If Neblio sat in it's exact same rank right now, and the market returned to $850 billion - Neblio's price would jump to $1.61 JUST from distribution of the higher market cap. That would make Neblio down 'only' 40 times from it's ATH as compared to 138 times it's currently down, while staying at the same rank. Now, like the Crypterium example above - we see how fast a project can fly up in rank based off of news, partnerships, performance, etc. So stop letting price and how far a project has 'fallen', discourage you from buying into a legitimate project. The reality is that if the total market cap returns to it's previous ATH, Neblio only needs to get to the rank of #150 to be down only 5 times from it's ATH.
Stop letting present price dictate your views. Look at what matters, and ONLY what matters - project DEVELOPMENT. If the github and coding ever stalls and stops, then you can worry. For now? Stfu. Code is all that matters, don't be one of these noobs buying into hype and hype communities. You should be thankful they didn't blow project funds on hype campaigns and marketing during the current bear market. We'll have a bankroll while hundreds of other projects go bust.
submitted by GreatWhiteBuffal_o to Neblio [link] [comments]

Subreddit Stats: CryptoTechnology top posts from 2017-12-23 to 2020-01-20 15:51 PDT

Period: 758.36 days
Submissions Comments
Total 956 13660
Rate (per day) 1.26 18.01
Unique Redditors 584 3144
Combined Score 21553 44566

Top Submitters' Top Submissions

  1. 1166 points, 43 submissions: Neophyte-
    1. "Do you need a Blockchain?" - this paper is fantastic, everyone should read this before evaluating a coin and if requires a block chain to solve a solution the coin is promising to solve. (136 points, 41 comments)
    2. Do any of you foresee a crypto being widely adopted as a general purpose payment coin? nano, btc, btccash etc (take your pick). I think it won't happen for reasons in this post. What do you think? (59 points, 54 comments)
    3. Noticed the huge rise of EOS lately what does it have over NEO and ethereum and to a lesser extent Cardano? I tried researching it, but wasn't sold. (54 points, 55 comments)
    4. Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later ~Vitalik (46 points, 1 comment)
    5. I had a Q&A with Bruno head architect / CEO of oyster, thought you guys might like it. (45 points, 2 comments)
    6. A good article that explains in simple terms how Eth2 works, how it will be rolled out and migrated from eth1 (42 points, 4 comments)
    7. DAI the stablecoin can now be transferred GAS free (article explaining how it works via new MCD DAI contract). This holds alot of promise for the so called "Web3" (40 points, 8 comments)
    8. Veriblock is consuming 27% of bitcoins block space - what does this mean for bitcoins future? (39 points, 16 comments)
    9. Vitalik: Alternative proposal for early eth1 <-> eth2 merge (38 points, 3 comments)
    10. Is launching a PoW permissionless blockchain still possible today? or would it be too susceptible to a 51% attack? (37 points, 37 comments)
  2. 578 points, 16 submissions: crypto_ha
    1. Why is Ripple considered a cryptocurrency (by many)? (109 points, 63 comments)
    2. So reportedly there are serious vulnerabilities found in EOS’ code. And it seems like those are more than just random software bugs. (97 points, 29 comments)
    3. Guide: How to get started with Blockchain development? (60 points, 6 comments)
    4. A newly found vulnerability in Nano's Android wallet (44 points, 12 comments)
    5. The history and state of Ethereum's Casper research - Vitalik Buterin (39 points, 4 comments)
    6. What is the difference between Sidechain vs Child Chain vs Off Chain? (39 points, 12 comments)
    7. EOS mainnet is official live (finally), but... (36 points, 24 comments)
    8. Bitcoin's "doomsday" economics - Bank of International Settlements (34 points, 23 comments)
    9. How Wall Street’s embrace could undermine Bitcoin (30 points, 9 comments)
    10. Ethereum ERC 1497: DApp Dispute Evidence Standard (24 points, 0 comments)
  3. 513 points, 20 submissions: ndha1995
    1. Ethereum Classic is currently being 51% attacked (103 points, 31 comments)
    2. Why are there so many garbage posts the past 24 hours? (58 points, 10 comments)
    3. Google Unveils 72-Qubit Quantum Processor With Low Error Rates (48 points, 24 comments)
    4. IOTA's Network-Bound PoW consensus, is it feasible? (42 points, 13 comments)
    5. The Challenges of Investigating Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain Related Crime (29 points, 7 comments)
    6. Deep dive into zk-STARKs with Vitalik Buterin's blog posts (26 points, 3 comments)
    7. Tether discussion thread (26 points, 21 comments)
    8. Vitalik Buterin Proposes a Consensus Algorithm That Requires Only 1% to Be Honest (24 points, 8 comments)
    9. Can somebody compare Qtum vs. NEO, technology-wise? (E.g. PoS vs. PoW; smart contract protocols...) (21 points, 15 comments)
    10. Introduction to Non Fungible Tokens (NFTs) (21 points, 9 comments)
  4. 377 points, 16 submissions: turtleflax
    1. Around 13% of DASH's privateSends are traceable to their origin (69 points, 3 comments)
    2. "Big Bang" attack could leverage Monero's dynamic blocksize to bloat the blockchain to 30TB in only 36 hours (52 points, 3 comments)
    3. The case for the obsolescence of Proof of Work and why 2018 will be the year of Proof of Stake (41 points, 29 comments)
    4. Monero vs PIVX: The First Scheduled Privacy Coin Debate Thread on /CryptoCurrency (38 points, 12 comments)
    5. Introducing the Privacy Coin Matrix, a cross-team collaboration comparing 20 privacy coins in 100 categories (26 points, 25 comments)
    6. Do permissioned blockchains have any merits? (25 points, 23 comments)
    7. The State of Hashing Algorithms — The Why, The How, and The Future (21 points, 4 comments)
    8. How Zerocoin Works in 5 Minutes (19 points, 5 comments)
    9. Errors made by Satoshi (17 points, 8 comments)
    10. How Much Privacy is Enough? Threats, Scaling, and Trade-offs in Blockchain Privacy Protocols - Ian Miers (Cornell Tech, Zerocoin, Zerocash) (17 points, 4 comments)
  5. 321 points, 6 submissions: Qwahzi
    1. Technical comparison of LIGHTNING vs TANGLE vs HASHGRAPH vs NANO (133 points, 37 comments)
    2. Addressing Nano's weaknesses (bandwidth usage and disk IO). Nano voting traffic to be reduced by 99.9% by implementing vote by hash, lazy bootstrapping, and reduced vote rebroadcasting (x-post CryptoCurrency) (78 points, 8 comments)
    3. Emergent centralization due to economies of scale (PoW vs DPoS) – Colin LeMahieu (52 points, 37 comments)
    4. Nano community member developing a distributed "mining" service to pay people to do PoW for third-parties (e.g. exchanges, light wallet services, etc) (32 points, 20 comments)
    5. What do you think about OpenCAP, the cryptocurrency alias protocol that mirrors traditional email addresses? (15 points, 12 comments)
    6. Bitcoin would be a calamity, not an economy (11 points, 52 comments)
  6. 256 points, 4 submissions: rockyrainy
    1. Bitcoin Gold hit by Double Spend Attack (51% attack). The Attacker reversed 22 blocks. (179 points, 102 comments)
    2. ZK-starks white paper published (44 points, 16 comments)
    3. [Q] How does a network reach consensus on what time it is? (21 points, 17 comments)
    4. Stateless (no history) Cryptocurrency via snapshots? (12 points, 7 comments)
  7. 244 points, 3 submissions: HSPremier
    1. From a technical standpoint: Why does every blockchain projects need their own coins? (181 points, 50 comments)
    2. What is Reddit's obsession with REQ? (61 points, 43 comments)
    3. What is the technological difference between a privacy coin and a privacy coin platform? Won't a privacy coin platform be more superior than a privacy coin? (2 points, 3 comments)
  8. 234 points, 2 submissions: Realness100
    1. A Guided Reading of Bitcoin’s Original White Paper (202 points, 10 comments)
    2. A Guided Reading of Ethereum's Original White Paper! (32 points, 5 comments)
  9. 185 points, 4 submissions: tracyspacygo
    1. My brief observation of most common Consensus Algorithms (159 points, 49 comments)
    2. What are the main Trends/Challenges for Bitcoin and whole crytpocurrencies industry? (12 points, 33 comments)
    3. Guideline for Newbies: Trying out Bitcoin transactions with TESTNET (7 points, 1 comment)
    4. Most advanced Cryptocurrencies Comparison Table (7 points, 8 comments)
  10. 177 points, 9 submissions: benmdi
    1. What's the best argument against cryptotechnology? I.e. Steelman the cryptocurrency skeptic (43 points, 42 comments)
    2. Would there be interest from this community in crypto resources aimed at developers? If so, what topics? (29 points, 14 comments)
    3. Has the window for bootstrapping a new PoW coin closed? (24 points, 57 comments)
    4. What can we, as a community, learn from the rise & acquisition of GitHub (23 points, 8 comments)
    5. 🍱 Rollup Roundup: Understanding Ethereum's Emerging Layer 2 (19 points, 1 comment)
    6. Video Tutorial: Introducing An Experience Dev To Smart Contract Coding (17 points, 3 comments)
    7. Do we need a blockchain to be decentralized? What questions would you ask a self described fan of decentralization, but blockchain skeptic? (11 points, 19 comments)
    8. ETH Block Rewards And Second Order Effects On Hardware Availability (7 points, 8 comments)
    9. Which Of The Big Tech Companies Is Most Likely To Bring Crypto Mainstream? Here's Why I Think It's Apple (4 points, 7 comments)
  11. 175 points, 9 submissions: galan77
    1. Is the Lightning Network a massive threat to the blockchain? (49 points, 66 comments)
    2. TPS of Lightning Network vs. Sharding, which one does better? (28 points, 7 comments)
    3. Are there any major downsides to sharding? (21 points, 33 comments)
    4. What's the difference between trustlessness and permissionlessness (19 points, 7 comments)
    5. Which consensus algorithm is the best, PoW, PoS, PoAuthority, PoAsset? (18 points, 57 comments)
    6. How can XRP reach 50,000 TPS when they have no sharding and every node has to validate every single transaction. (15 points, 14 comments)
    7. A few questions about the Lightning Network (14 points, 6 comments)
    8. Pascalcoin can do 72,000 tps apparently. Is this legit? The new Nano? (8 points, 39 comments)
    9. How does Ripple's (XRB's) consensus algorithm Proof of Correctness work, are there any downsides? (3 points, 23 comments)
  12. 175 points, 1 submission: ilielezi
    1. Why white papers in crypto world are so unprofessional? (175 points, 88 comments)
  13. 165 points, 6 submissions: CryptoMaximalist
    1. Facebook's Libra (48 points, 55 comments)
    2. “Fake Stake” attacks on some Proof-of-Stake cryptocurrencies responsibly disclosed by researchers from the Decentralized Systems Lab at UIUC (31 points, 9 comments)
    3. Quantum Computing and the Cryptography in Crypto (27 points, 14 comments)
    4. PING and REJECT attacks on ZCash (Patch available) | Stanford Applied Crypto Group (22 points, 1 comment)
    5. Introduction to Cryptography: Part 1 - Jinglan Wang (19 points, 1 comment)
    6. New site howmanyconfs.com shows the amount of time and confirmations of Proof of Work coins to match 6 confirmations on Bitcoin (18 points, 11 comments)
  14. 163 points, 10 submissions: GainsLean
    1. Videos For Developers Who Want To Learn Blockchain In A Practical Way (36 points, 17 comments)
    2. What Do You Want To Learn? (32 points, 20 comments)
    3. Get Involved With The Smart Contract Coding Challenge (25 points, 4 comments)
    4. Solution To $10K Art Prize (25 points, 3 comments)
    5. Blockchain Course Outline Has Been Released - Feedback warranted (22 points, 12 comments)
    6. Introduction To Distributed Systems And Consensus Protocols (9 points, 2 comments)
    7. Are there any closed source crypto wallets? (4 points, 19 comments)
    8. Are there any successful proof of identity projects? (4 points, 8 comments)
    9. SPV Wallets Vs API Wallets (4 points, 1 comment)
    10. 12 Popular Consensus Algorithms - Explained (2 points, 0 comments)
  15. 163 points, 7 submissions: QRCollector
    1. Part 5. I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the fifth part of the series talking about an advanced vulnerability of BTC. (43 points, 43 comments)
    2. I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the third part of the series introducing Quantum resistant blockchains. (36 points, 4 comments)
    3. Part 4B. I’m writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the fourth part of the series explaining the special quality of going quantum resistant from genesis block. (25 points, 21 comments)
    4. Part 6. (Last part) I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. Failing shortcuts in an attempt to accomplish Quantum Resistance (24 points, 38 comments)
    5. I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the first part of the series introducing the basic concept of blockchain and what makes it reliable. (23 points, 10 comments)
    6. I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the fourth part of the series explaining the special quality of going quantum resistant from genesis block. (7 points, 1 comment)
    7. Part 2. I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the second part of the series: An accessible description of hashing and signature schemes. (5 points, 0 comments)
  16. 162 points, 3 submissions: FashionistaGuru
    1. How do we change the culture around cryptocurrency? (118 points, 54 comments)
    2. Which cryptos have the best new user experience? (30 points, 34 comments)
    3. Why does Apple prevent many crypto apps from entering the App Store? (14 points, 8 comments)
  17. 157 points, 7 submissions: SamsungGalaxyPlayer
    1. Breaking Monero Episodes 1-3: Introduction, Ring Signatures, 0-Decoy and Chain Reactions (45 points, 1 comment)
    2. "No, dPoW Isn't a Perfect Solution" (35 points, 48 comments)
    3. Breaking Mimblewimble’s Privacy Model - Dragonfly Research (27 points, 10 comments)
    4. Breaking Monero (and Zcash) Episodes 7-9: Remote Nodes, Timing Attacks, Poisoned Outputs (EAE Attack) (21 points, 2 comments)
    5. "Attacker Collection of IP Metadata" (18 points, 10 comments)
    6. "Tracing Transactions Across Cryptocurrency Ledgers" Using Shapeshift and Changelly (6 points, 4 comments)
    7. Breaking Monero Episodes 4-6: Chain Splits (Key Image Attack), Input Selection Algorithm, Unusual Ringsize (5 points, 2 comments)
  18. 147 points, 1 submission: shunsaitakahashi
    1. Proof-of-Approval: Stake Based, 1 Block Finality & History Attack Defense (147 points, 4 comments)
  19. 146 points, 6 submissions: themoderndayhercules
    1. "The selfish mining fallacy" explained and debunked (60 points, 8 comments)
    2. A Discussion of Stable coins and Decentralized Oracles (35 points, 8 comments)
    3. A Selfish Mining Double Spending attack Simulator (25 points, 2 comments)
    4. Why reputation systems don't work (15 points, 12 comments)
    5. A better incentivization for Swarm (6 points, 0 comments)
    6. When Mises met Szabo - A Discussion of the value of Bitcoin (5 points, 16 comments)
  20. 143 points, 7 submissions: KomodoWorld
    1. Komodo Platform's core developer and founder jl777 has started his own blog on Medium. The blog is aimed for senior developers who want to learn about blockchain. (46 points, 15 comments)
    2. Delayed Proof of Work (dPoW) security explained (36 points, 46 comments)
    3. Proof-of-Gameplay (19 points, 3 comments)
    4. Good guide for getting started with the Custom Consensus tech for Komodo-based blockchains (17 points, 0 comments)
    5. Cross-chain migration of coins with Crypto Conditions - by smk762 (12 points, 0 comments)
    6. A step-by-step example of working with a Crypto Conditions based Oracle - by smk762 (10 points, 0 comments)
    7. Changing consensus rules on the fly with Crypto Conditions (3 points, 0 comments)
  21. 141 points, 8 submissions: Stormy1997
    1. What technical/business advantages does a private blockchain have over a SQL server? (49 points, 79 comments)
    2. Is sharding to scale bad? (24 points, 28 comments)
    3. How would one create a fiat gateway theoretically? (19 points, 19 comments)
    4. Looking for Stellar smart contract/side chain code examples (16 points, 1 comment)
    5. Question - Securing personal information on a centralized server with user-owned keys (13 points, 3 comments)
    6. How do blockchains/smart contracts communicate with oracles? (10 points, 4 comments)
    7. Bandwidth scaling for TPS (8 points, 2 comments)
    8. Best method to transmit detailed data between two parties via existing platforms (2 points, 1 comment)
  22. 141 points, 3 submissions: seventyfiver
    1. Why does Ethereum use Solidity while other ecosystems like NEO stick with popular ones like Java and C#? (94 points, 26 comments)
    2. Chainlink's initial Go implementation went live this morning. Has anyone reviewed the code and can comment on it's quality? (40 points, 3 comments)
    3. What are some great books on cryptoeconomics or blockchain technology? (7 points, 4 comments)
  23. 134 points, 6 submissions: johnny_milkshakes
    1. Sub dedicated to DAG based coins (42 points, 8 comments)
    2. Thoughts on this? (28 points, 38 comments)
    3. This is very interesting (24 points, 19 comments)
    4. Educational presentation by Clara Shikhelman (18 points, 0 comments)
    5. Ethics question. (12 points, 40 comments)
    6. How to scale on chain? (10 points, 30 comments)
  24. 127 points, 4 submissions: sukitrebek
    1. What are you currently obsessed with, and why? (58 points, 150 comments)
    2. Crypto-based social network without a cryptocurrency. (42 points, 23 comments)
    3. How does underlying architecture affect what kinds of applications are possible? (17 points, 3 comments)
    4. Holochain vs. Radix DLT (10 points, 11 comments)
  25. 126 points, 1 submission: RufusTheFirefly
    1. Everytime I try to investigate the technology behind Cardano(Ada), I come across the words "scientific" and "peer-reviewed" over and over but almost no actual details. Can someone fill how this coin actually works and where they are in development? (126 points, 49 comments)
  26. 112 points, 1 submission: rocksolid77
    1. Can we have a real debate about the Bitcoin scaling issue? (112 points, 89 comments)
  27. 110 points, 4 submissions: kelluk
    1. What one can learn from browsing 30 million Ethereum addresses (72 points, 21 comments)
    2. I wanted to categorize all coins/tokens, and this is my proposal (23 points, 33 comments)
    3. Should whitepapers be understood by ordinary people? (10 points, 41 comments)
    4. Querying the Ethereum blockchain: how to & what to? (5 points, 5 comments)
  28. 107 points, 1 submission: NewDietTrend
    1. Outside of currency and voting, blockchain is awful and shouldnt be used. Can anyone explain where blockchain is worth the cost? (107 points, 166 comments)
  29. 105 points, 1 submission: insette
    1. /CryptoTech PSA: there are broadly TWO TYPES of Decentralized Exchanges. Which type are you investing in? (105 points, 55 comments)
  30. 103 points, 3 submissions: dtheme
    1. How to accept crypto payments for digital downloads if you are a small business? Solutions, e-commerce sites are lacking (46 points, 38 comments)
    2. How many 24 letter seeds and "Bitcoin" keys can there be? (34 points, 24 comments)
    3. Is there any reason why the big tech companies are not getting into crypto? (23 points, 36 comments)
  31. 103 points, 3 submissions: dvnielng
    1. Why do so many of these businesses need a token? (Unsure) (61 points, 86 comments)
    2. DAPPS - Only coins that have intrinsic value? Ethereum , Neo? (31 points, 10 comments)
    3. How could blockchain work for expensive purchases/escrow? (11 points, 2 comments)
  32. 101 points, 1 submission: kickso
    1. Is NANO everything it says it is? (101 points, 96 comments)
  33. 98 points, 3 submissions: heart_mind_body
    1. How can we breathe some life into this sub? (56 points, 22 comments)
    2. Can anyone give an example for a technology that provides a "public permissioned blockchain"? (28 points, 16 comments)
    3. Can we do a discussion on ICON and "clusters of private chains connected to a public chain" ? (14 points, 13 comments)
  34. 97 points, 8 submissions: kelraku
    1. Thoughts on Mimblewimble? (23 points, 13 comments)
    2. Has anyone looked at the lelantus protocol? (18 points, 6 comments)
    3. How much control do developers have over the coins (18 points, 6 comments)
    4. Lesser known protocols? (11 points, 17 comments)
    5. Zerocoin and Blockchain Analysis (9 points, 5 comments)
    6. Zerocoin vs Cryptonote (7 points, 14 comments)
    7. Lightning network privacy (6 points, 13 comments)
    8. Integrity of the DAG (5 points, 17 comments)
  35. 96 points, 6 submissions: blockstasy
    1. How to Get to One Million Devs (32 points, 12 comments)
    2. The Decade in Blockchain — 2010 to 2020 in Review (27 points, 4 comments)
    3. Ethereum by the Numbers – The Year of 2019 (26 points, 9 comments)
    4. Knowledge Drop: Mining and the role it plays with the Ethereum blockchain (5 points, 0 comments)
    5. A great article that explains Ethereum’s Muir Glacier Update (4 points, 0 comments)
    6. Youtube Silences Crypto Community (2 points, 6 comments)
  36. 93 points, 3 submissions: OneOverNever
    1. Which is the last WHITE PAPER you've read that's truly impacted you? (77 points, 81 comments)
    2. [CMV] Bitcoin's intrinsic technological value. (14 points, 29 comments)
    3. What are some weak points that still hold XVG back from becoming a top player in crypto? (Technically speaking, not marketing and etc.) (2 points, 19 comments)
  37. 93 points, 3 submissions: ryano-ark
    1. (ARK) ACES Completes Integration of ARK Channels for Two-way Transfers for Easy ICOs When Paired With ARK Deployer (Push-Button-Blockchains) (57 points, 5 comments)
    2. (ARK) ACES Releases Fast (Ansible) Deployments for all ACES Applications. (23 points, 4 comments)
    3. A Future of Cryptocurrencies and Blockchains (13 points, 3 comments)
  38. 92 points, 2 submissions: BobUltra
    1. Our blockchains are all centralized! (51 points, 34 comments)
    2. List of qualities needed to dethrone Bitcoin. (41 points, 43 comments)
  39. 90 points, 1 submission: refreshx2
    1. CMV: It doesn't make sense for (crypto)companies to create coins linked to their tech (90 points, 18 comments)
  40. 89 points, 1 submission: perceptron01
    1. What does Nano do better than Steem? (89 points, 55 comments)
  41. 87 points, 1 submission: Shuk
    1. How does one begin to develop an employable skill in blockchain development? (87 points, 25 comments)
  42. 87 points, 1 submission: conorohiggins
    1. I spent three weeks researching and writing a huge guide to stablecoins. Enjoy! (87 points, 36 comments)
  43. 86 points, 1 submission: Bacon_Hero
    1. ELI5: Why did it take so long for blockchain technology to be created? (86 points, 66 comments)
  44. 85 points, 3 submissions: theFoot58
    1. If crypto now is like 'the Internet' of the past, where are we? (65 points, 53 comments)
    2. If the Internet had its Genesis Block, what would it be? (14 points, 9 comments)
    3. Coin grouping - ruby and CryptoCompare API (6 points, 1 comment)
  45. 85 points, 1 submission: youngm2
    1. Which decentralised exchange has the most promise for 2018? (85 points, 89 comments)
  46. 84 points, 4 submissions: bLbGoldeN
    1. On Mass Adoption of Cryptocurrencies (28 points, 68 comments)
    2. Join the Bloom team for our first tech AMA tomorrow (Tuesday, March 13th) at 7 PM GMT! (23 points, 2 comments)
    3. Join the Decred team for an AMA - Friday, June 1st from 19:00 to 22:00 UTC (17 points, 10 comments)
    4. Join the district0x team for an AMA Monday, April 2nd at 5:00 PM (GMT) (16 points, 0 comments)
  47. 82 points, 2 submissions: SubsequentDownfall
    1. Has a 51% attack ever been witnessed? (45 points, 46 comments)
    2. Is a DAG coin like RaiBlocks able to be private like Monero? (37 points, 40 comments)
  48. 82 points, 2 submissions: guidre
    1. Tron and other source Code (42 points, 24 comments)
    2. Why Will companies adopt blockchain, the user interface is complex and i'm not sure that many companies want all their internal dealings made public. (40 points, 19 comments)
  49. 81 points, 4 submissions: solar128
    1. New Atomic Swap Tools Released (35 points, 4 comments)
    2. Using Blockchain to make a censorship-resistant Reddit (28 points, 14 comments)
    3. Best security practices for addressing Spectre & Meltdown (13 points, 0 comments)
    4. Influence of on-chain governance weighted by wealth - good or bad? (5 points, 2 comments)
  50. 81 points, 2 submissions: Blockchainsapiens
    1. Blockchain study finds 0.00% success rate and vendors don't call back when asked for evidence (47 points, 30 comments)
    2. The elephant in the room: would the public ever use a volatile currency over a stable currency? (34 points, 45 comments)
  51. 81 points, 1 submission: Mycryptopedia
    1. Understanding the Tech Behind RaiBlocks (81 points, 7 comments)
  52. 81 points, 1 submission: davidvanbeveren
    1. Article thoroughly analysing / comparing IOTA and RaiBlocks (x-post /CryptoCurrency) (81 points, 10 comments)
  53. 77 points, 4 submissions: DeleteMyOldAccount
    1. HD Wallets Explained: What they are, and how to make them coin agnostic (28 points, 11 comments)
    2. Bitcoin Cash May 15th fork (23 points, 22 comments)
    3. So you want to build a Bitcoin HD wallet? Part 1 (23 points, 3 comments)
    4. Applications of Blockchain in Supply Chain (3 points, 9 comments)
  54. 76 points, 3 submissions: kryptofinger
    1. Why would anyone bother using any DPOS coins for dapps like Eos over normal systems like AWS? (44 points, 104 comments)
    2. Could a state backed privacy coin work? (22 points, 32 comments)
    3. Thoughts on Elastos? (10 points, 8 comments)
  55. 76 points, 1 submission: francohab
    1. 55% of the Nano representative nodes are "official representatives", presumably held by developers. How big of an issue is that? (76 points, 46 comments)
  56. 75 points, 2 submissions: MerkleChainsaw
    1. The biggest challenge for cryptocurrencies and how to mitigate it (73 points, 37 comments)
    2. Short and long term design tradeoffs in crypto (2 points, 2 comments)
  57. 75 points, 1 submission: jatsignwork
    1. Raiblocks & Spam (75 points, 60 comments)
  58. 74 points, 1 submission: behindtext
    1. Hello, this is Jake Yocom-Piatt. Ask me anything about Decred! (74 points, 49 comments)
  59. 73 points, 2 submissions: TexasRadical83
    1. Why use a new "currency" at all? (40 points, 48 comments)
    2. Why are big price increases for crypto a good thing? (33 points, 41 comments)

Top Commenters

  1. Neophyte- (1649 points, 746 comments)
  2. ndha1995 (583 points, 98 comments)
  3. turtleflax (406 points, 116 comments)
  4. senzheng (326 points, 193 comments)
  5. holomntn (294 points, 40 comments)
  6. manly_ (286 points, 43 comments)
  7. signos_de_admiracion (250 points, 18 comments)
  8. fgiveme (231 points, 77 comments)
  9. crypto_kang (222 points, 45 comments)
  10. jatsignwork (220 points, 37 comments)
  11. GainsLean (218 points, 76 comments)
  12. benthecarman (211 points, 48 comments)
  13. rockyrainy (200 points, 39 comments)
  14. hungryforitalianfood (197 points, 58 comments)
  15. rocksolid77 (190 points, 20 comments)
  16. bannercoin (189 points, 11 comments)
  17. insette (181 points, 47 comments)
  18. DiogenicOrder (175 points, 41 comments)
  19. islanavarino (173 points, 51 comments)
  20. behindtext (172 points, 14 comments)
  21. takitus (171 points, 25 comments)
  22. sukitrebek (170 points, 42 comments)
  23. UnknownEssence (170 points, 31 comments)
  24. crypto_ha (170 points, 26 comments)
  25. AlexCoventry (167 points, 17 comments)
  26. DragonWhsiperer (165 points, 38 comments)
  27. stop-making-accounts (164 points, 57 comments)
  28. KnifeOfPi2 (157 points, 13 comments)
  29. Edgegasm (156 points, 42 comments)
  30. ippond (152 points, 15 comments)
  31. dontlikecomputers (151 points, 61 comments)
  32. QRCollector (150 points, 46 comments)
  33. alexrecuenco (145 points, 18 comments)
  34. BobUltra (144 points, 88 comments)
  35. SpamCamel (135 points, 22 comments)
  36. InterdisciplinaryHum (133 points, 107 comments)
  37. theglitteringone (132 points, 10 comments)
  38. ChocolateSunrise (128 points, 23 comments)
  39. PM_ME_UR_QUINES (125 points, 4 comments)
  40. narwhale111 (122 points, 15 comments)
  41. pepe_le_shoe (121 points, 47 comments)
  42. Darius510 (119 points, 39 comments)
  43. glen-hodl (118 points, 21 comments)
  44. HOG_ZADDY (117 points, 23 comments)
  45. coranos2 (116 points, 44 comments)
  46. etherenvoy (116 points, 15 comments)
  47. johnny_milkshakes (115 points, 55 comments)
  48. galan77 (115 points, 52 comments)
  49. hybridsole (113 points, 40 comments)
  50. funciton (113 points, 8 comments)
  51. Mr0ldy (110 points, 24 comments)
  52. Corm (109 points, 42 comments)
  53. cryptoscopia (109 points, 7 comments)
  54. ReportFromHell (106 points, 39 comments)
  55. broscientologist (105 points, 26 comments)
  56. straytjacquet (104 points, 28 comments)
  57. Quadling (101 points, 24 comments)
  58. BlockEnthusiast (101 points, 17 comments)
  59. thats_not_montana (99 points, 37 comments)
  60. TheRealMotherOfOP (98 points, 27 comments)
  61. yarauuta (96 points, 11 comments)
  62. pegasuspect93 (96 points, 1 comment)
  63. andrew_bao (93 points, 40 comments)
  64. samdotla (93 points, 6 comments)
  65. melodious_punk (91 points, 34 comments)
  66. Mquantum (91 points, 31 comments)
  67. TJ_Hooker15 (91 points, 27 comments)
  68. NoFaptain99 (91 points, 3 comments)
  69. ilielezi (87 points, 10 comments)
  70. Raapop (87 points, 2 comments)
  71. Allways_Wrong (86 points, 36 comments)
  72. bLbGoldeN (86 points, 19 comments)
  73. ResIpsaLoquiturrr (86 points, 15 comments)
  74. kabelman93 (85 points, 29 comments)
  75. no_pants_gamer (84 points, 9 comments)
  76. AnkurTechracers (83 points, 16 comments)
  77. ric2b (83 points, 11 comments)
  78. Big_Goose (83 points, 10 comments)
  79. Lifeistooshor1 (82 points, 21 comments)
  80. vornth (82 points, 11 comments)
  81. Sargos (81 points, 25 comments)
  82. refreshx2 (81 points, 16 comments)
  83. Qwahzi (78 points, 27 comments)
  84. StupidRandomGuy (77 points, 35 comments)
  85. WikiTextBot (77 points, 24 comments)
  86. SnootyEuropean (77 points, 5 comments)
  87. cryptogainz (76 points, 14 comments)
  88. frequentlywrong (76 points, 4 comments)
  89. the_defiant (76 points, 4 comments)
  90. BrangdonJ (75 points, 28 comments)
  91. hendrik_v (75 points, 7 comments)
  92. solar128 (74 points, 18 comments)
  93. foobazzler (74 points, 8 comments)
  94. ginger_beer_m (73 points, 35 comments)
  95. kAhmij (73 points, 25 comments)
  96. DeleteMyOldAccount (73 points, 20 comments)
  97. sn0wr4in (73 points, 9 comments)
  98. Dyslectic_Sabreur (72 points, 5 comments)
  99. X7spyWqcRY (71 points, 8 comments)
  100. Krapser (70 points, 5 comments)

Top Submissions

  1. A Guided Reading of Bitcoin’s Original White Paper by Realness100 (202 points, 10 comments)
  2. From a technical standpoint: Why does every blockchain projects need their own coins? by HSPremier (181 points, 50 comments)
  3. Bitcoin Gold hit by Double Spend Attack (51% attack). The Attacker reversed 22 blocks. by rockyrainy (179 points, 102 comments)
  4. Why white papers in crypto world are so unprofessional? by ilielezi (175 points, 88 comments)
  5. My brief observation of most common Consensus Algorithms by tracyspacygo (159 points, 49 comments)
  6. Proof-of-Approval: Stake Based, 1 Block Finality & History Attack Defense by shunsaitakahashi (147 points, 4 comments)
  7. "Do you need a Blockchain?" - this paper is fantastic, everyone should read this before evaluating a coin and if requires a block chain to solve a solution the coin is promising to solve. by Neophyte- (136 points, 41 comments)
  8. Technical comparison of LIGHTNING vs TANGLE vs HASHGRAPH vs NANO by Qwahzi (133 points, 37 comments)
  9. Everytime I try to investigate the technology behind Cardano(Ada), I come across the words "scientific" and "peer-reviewed" over and over but almost no actual details. Can someone fill how this coin actually works and where they are in development? by RufusTheFirefly (126 points, 49 comments)
  10. How do we change the culture around cryptocurrency? by FashionistaGuru (118 points, 54 comments)

Top Comments

  1. 160 points: holomntn's comment in ELI5: Why did it take so long for blockchain technology to be created?
  2. 121 points: KnifeOfPi2's comment in How do we change the culture around cryptocurrency?
  3. 105 points: theglitteringone's comment in Outside of currency and voting, blockchain is awful and shouldnt be used. Can anyone explain where blockchain is worth the cost?
  4. 102 points: benthecarman's comment in If crypto now is like 'the Internet' of the past, where are we?
  5. 96 points: pegasuspect93's comment in If crypto now is like 'the Internet' of the past, where are we?
  6. 95 points: bannercoin's comment in Realistically, why would anybody expect the startup crypto platforms to beat out the corporate giants who are developing their own Blockchain as a Service (BaaS) solutions? Ex. IBM, SAP, JP Morgan...
  7. 83 points: AlexCoventry's comment in Ethereum private key with all zeroes leads to an account with 5000$ on it
  8. 82 points: deleted's comment in Is blockchain really useful ?
  9. 81 points: signos_de_admiracion's comment in Why white papers in crypto world are so unprofessional?
  10. 78 points: NoFaptain99's comment in Why do so many of these businesses need a token? (Unsure)
Generated with BBoe's Subreddit Stats
submitted by subreddit_stats to subreddit_stats [link] [comments]

All Of The Weedcoins, POT, THC, SMOKE, PRG, TKS, DOPE, CANN, MRJA, GRWI, KUSH, GRMD, CCN, STV, CNNC, BGR, MAR, BLAZR, BUBO, are Shitcoins

All Of The Weedcoins, POT, THC, SMOKE, PRG, TKS, DOPE, CANN, MRJA, GRWI, KUSH, GRMD, CCN, STV, CNNC, BGR, MAR, BLAZR, BUBO, are Shitcoins

https://preview.redd.it/r6nvz6g643521.png?width=594&format=png&auto=webp&s=35fc73c6393a7d3f884ed40aba5e5fc2193be304
https://cryptoiq.co/all-of-the-weedcoins-pot-thc-smoke-prg-tks-dope-cann-mrja-grwi-kush-grmd-ccn-stv-cnnc-bgr-mar-blazr-bubo-are-shitcoins/
The War On Shitcoins Episode 7: Weed-Themed Coins including Including PotCoin (POT), Paragon (PRG), SMOKE, Tokes (TKS), HempCoin (THC), Marijuana Coin (MAR), CannabisCoin (CANN), CannaCoin (CCN), DopeCoin (DOPE), BlazerCoin (BLAZR), GreenMed (GRMD), Growers International (GRWI), Cannation (CNNC), Bongger (BGR), Sativacoin (STV), KushCoin (KUSH), GangaCoin (MRJA), Budbo (BUBO). The war on shitcoins is a Crypto.IQ series that targets and shoots down cryptocurrencies that are not worth investing in either due to their being scams, having serious design flaws, being centralized, or in general just being worthless copies of other cryptocurrencies. There are thousands of shitcoins that are ruining the markets, and Crypto.IQ intends to expose all of them. The crypto space needs an exorcism, and we are happy to provide it.
There are numerous cryptocurrencies that are nothing more than copies of other cryptocurrencies with marijuana logos slapped on. Perhaps the developers of these cryptocurrencies were running dry and decided to do an ICO or premine in order to fill their war chest with marijuana. Whatever the motives may be, the human race has created 18 weed-themed cryptocurrencies. Each one will be reviewed and properly burned below.
Potcoin (POT) is one of the earliest marijuana-themed cryptocurrencies, having launched in 2014, and has a market cap of $2.7 million. Shockingly, the POT market cap approached $100 million during the 2017 crypto craze. POT is branded as a global solution for the $100 billion global marijuana industry, but obviously, the global marijuana industry has never embraced Potcoin based on the volume of less than $3,000 per day as of this writing. It is actually nonsensical that marijuana enthusiasts would want to be holding and transacting POT since having POT labeled on all of their transactions is much less anonymous than using Bitcoin. POT started as PoW and eventually switched to PoS and has no unique capabilities or characteristics. Since POT’s only unique trait is a weed logo, it is clearly a shitcoin. For each weed-themed cryptocurrency CryptoIQ will give it a classification stoners understand. Since POT is one of the earliest and most popular weed coins and has the second highest weed coin market cap, the classification is burning blunt.
HempCoin (THC) is not far behind POT, with a market cap of $2.3 million and similar minuscule volume of $12,000 per day. THC launched in 2014 and is meant to revolutionize the weed and hemp industry by providing a decentralized payment system. Like POT, there is no reason marijuana entrepreneurs would choose to transact with THC versus Bitcoin, especially since liquidity is so low they would lose money. Apparently, THC is PoW and PoS, but has no unique capabilities. The classification of THC is half-smoked blunt.
SMOKE has a market cap of $840,000 and is listed on some decentralized exchanges. It seems like SMOKE is meant to be the weed version of Steemit. It appears the website did launch and is functioning as a social network for stoners, who can smoke and earn SMOKE. Perhaps SMOKE has potential, so it gets the classification fresh pinner joint. However, the entire concept of people motivating each other to smoke drugs to earn cryptocurrency seems like something the world does not need.
Paragon (PRG) is a bit more advanced than the other weed coins since it integrates smart contract technology and can be used to build dApps for the marijuana industry. Perhaps PRG can be nicknamed Weedthereum. PRG has the highest weed coin market cap at $5.2 million although volume is only $21,000 per day. The SEC stomped on PRG’s blunt and issued severe penalties for the unregistered ICO. PRG must return investments to the investors, and since $12 million was raised and PRG has lost over half that value, it seems Paragon is at risk of going bankrupt. This yields the classification of blunt soaked with trash juice.
Tokes (TKS) is a weed coin launched via the WAVES blockchain that has a market cap of $775,000 but less than $400 per day of daily trading volume. Someone dumping the TKS they received from selling a QP of weed could crash the market. Apparently, TKS aims to be a supply chain tracking tool for the marijuana industry, in addition to being a compliant currency for dispensaries, but it is obviously not used much. For now, TKS is classified as hitting a roach.
DopeCoin (DOPE) launched way back in 2014 and today is practically dead with a market cap near $420,000 (seriously) and less than $1,000 of daily trading volume. DOPE transitioned from a PoW to PoS cryptocurrency, and the website is poorly made, unlike the weed coins listed above which have well-built websites. There are no redeeming qualities to DOPE, and its classification is accidentally inhaled the roach.
CannabisCoin (CANN) has a market cap less than $400,000 and volume less than $4,000 per day. CANN’s goal is to be used to purchase marijuana at dispensaries, and there used to be a product line of weed strains called CANNdy which were supposed to be traded at one gram per one CANN. Now one CANN is worth half of a penny, so that probably did not work out well. Shockingly, CANN’s market cap hit $30 million in early January 2018, so it has seen an epic collapse this year. This gives CANN the classification paid for fireweed but got schwag.
GanjaCoin (MRJA) is the first weed coin in the list that is nearly dead. Based on the Bitcointalk thread, it is listed on a couple of obscure exchanges. GanjaCoin had ambitious plans to open a dispensary in which each gram of weed was backed by one MRJA. GangaCoin is unique among the weed coins since it used masternodes, much like Dash. It is obvious that practically no one is using MRJA, giving it the classification old roach in a storm drain.
Growers International (GRWI) is designed for marijuana growers and has some increased capabilities versus other weed coins such as smart contracts, a blockchain repository for cannabis strains, and supply tracking from seed to sale. The idea is legitimate, but the market cap of $88,000 and less than $1,000 of daily trading volume indicates GRWI has failed to take root. This is perhaps due to a swap to an ERC-20 token being required to use any of the dApps, since apparently, the developers could not do it on their own chain. The swap does not appear to be going well, and therefore, GRWI is classified as burnt fingers on the roach.
KushCoin (KUSH) is a weed coin that had Weedthereum aspirations, but now the website is dead, the devs have disappeared behind a cloud of weed smoke, and KUSH has been completely delisted. The only appropriate classification is roach buried in a garbage dump.
GreenMed (GRMD) has a market history similar to the half-life of radioactive waste, and currently has a market cap of only $40,000 and daily trading volume less than $300. Apparently GreenMed is among the cryptocurrencies that aimed to have an attached debit card, and just like TenX and Monaco, this ended up being disastrous. The website has been converted to a simple marijuana e-commerce store with no mention of cryptocurrency, indicating the developers gave up on the crypto debit card idea. GRMD seems to be completely dead, and the classification is roach thrown out of a car on the highway.
CannaCoin (CCN) is a PoS cryptocurrency with probably no people staking. It may be listed on a random obscure exchange. It appears CCN did not have any unique characteristics yet still hit a market cap of $2 million in January 2018. This is more proof of how detached from reality the crypto rally was since now CCN is certainly dead. The classification is roach at the bottom of a trash can filled with garbage.
SativaCoin (STV) has no redeeming qualities, despite being named after a potent strain of marijuana. It was PoS, and that’s about it. During the crypto rally STV nearly hit a $1 million market cap, but the developer team is gone and presumably smoking the portion of the market cap they cashed out. STV is completely delisted and valueless, giving it the classification shredded roach on the side of the road soaked with trash juice.
Cannation (CNNC) raised less than a Bitcoin during their mid-2017 ICO, perhaps enough to smoke the dev team out for a month, and now the website is gone. CNNC was just a PoW/PoS hybrid that had no unique capabilities. Really, CNNC is an obvious ICO scam, giving it the classification bought a weed roach but got a spice roach.
Bongger (BGR) is named after someone taking a huge rip from a marijuana water pipe, and perhaps that is exactly what the dev team is doing since the devs are still around four years after launch and seem chill about the fact that BGR is worth nothing. The classification for this cryptocurrency is passed out on the couch and covered with doritos.
Marijuanacoin (MAR) hit a market cap of $900,000 in January 2018, perhaps for no other reason than it has the word marijuana in its name. The MAR dev briefly showed up in October 2017 and proposed to hard fork the blockchain, and apparently asked for donations, before disappearing forever. MAR continues to be listed on Cryptopia but has no volume, meaning it is worthless. This gives MAR the classification wind gust blows your joint into a lake.
BlazerCoin (BLAZR) has no website and no announcement thread but is listed on YoBit despite zero volume. This gives BLAZR the special classification prison joint made of toilet paper and the scrapings from a green apple.
Budbo (BUBO) is listed on Cryptopia and HitBTC, with a whopping $63 of volume, enough to buy an eighth. Budbo is branded as a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) for the weed industry. BUBO was sold in an ICO, and appears to have collected a whopping $37 million from investors. This is perhaps since the ICO occurred in late December 2017 and January 2018, when investors were overloaded with cash and enthusiasm. The developers still periodically show up and say they are “working on it,” but nothing has been developed, and the website is mediocre. Budbo is certainly the biggest scam in weed coin history and therefore earns the classification got mugged by drug dealer.
submitted by turtlecane to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Why is it so difficult to get bitcoin

Alright so I am trying to get just like $500 worth of bitcoin and it’s been a nightmare. Coinbase is the most garbage company I’ve ever ran into. They are handing millions of dollars but they offer no customer support over the phone? No thanks. Also trying to put in money with Gemini and people have said that it can take months to get your ID verified. I truly believe the biggest long term setback for bitcoin, and probably the reason it never makes it mainstream, is that it is incredibly difficult to get into. I’m an engineer in my 20s and consider myself above average in terms of being tech savvy, but I’m not quite sure how all of you saying that BTC is going to the moon can say that while realizing that getting BTC is a huge multi-week struggle and Wells Fargo is 2 blocks away
submitted by irishhuskers007 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Want to start fresh after the crypto crash? Here is a comprehensive guide on how to invest and prosper over the long term.

Well its happened, the crypto market just experienced the worst crash since 2014, the bubble has burst. The idiocy of newbies FOMO-ing into anything with low nominal value lead to endless twitter timelines like this, and now nobody has any idea where the market settles. What do you do now?
In the following weeks it will be a good time to rethink your investment approach and how you arrive at your decisions. Just buying whatever is shilled on Twitter or Reddit and jumping from one crypto to another isn't going to work like it did these last two months.
The good news is that we're finally back closer and closer to our long term moving average which is much more healthy for entrants, the bad news is that the fear might continue compounding if outstanding issues are not dealt with. Tether is the big concern for me personally for reasons I've stated many times, but some relief in the short term may come if the SEC and CFTC meeting on February 6th goes well. Nobody really knows where the bottom is but I think we're now past the "irrational exhuberance" stage and we're entering a period of more serious inspection where cryptos will actually have to prove themselves as useful. I suspect hype artists like CryptoNick and John McAfee will fall out of favor.
But perhaps most importantly use this as a learning experience, don't try to point fingers now. The type of dumb behavior that people were engaging in that was rewarded in a bull market (chasing pumps, going all in on a shillcoin, following hype..etc) could only ever lead to what we are experiencing now. Just like so many people jumped on the crypto bandwagon during the bull run, they will just as quickly jump on whatever bandwagon is to be used to blame for the deflation of the bubble. Nobody who pumped money into garbage without any use case will accept that they themselves with their own investing behavior were the real reason for the gross overvaluation of most cryptocurrencies, and the inevitable crash.
So if you're looking for a fresh start after the massacre (or just want to get in now), here is a guide:

Part A: Making a Investment Strategy

This is your money, put some effort into investing it with an actual strategy. Some simple yet essential advice that should apply to everyone, regardless of individual strategy:
  1. Slow down and research each crypto that you're buying for at least a week.
  2. Don't buy something just because it has risen.
  3. Don't exit a position just because it has declined.
  4. Invest only as much as you can afford to lose.
  5. Prepare enter and exit strategies in advance.
First take some time to think about your ROI target, set your hold periods for each position and how much you are actually ready to risk losing.
ROI targets
A lot of young investors who are in crypto have unrealistic expectations about returns and risk. A lot of them have never invested in any other type of financial asset, and hence many seem to consider a 5-10% ROI in a month to be unexciting.
But its important to temper your hype and realize why we had this exponential growth in the last year and how unlikely it is that we see 10x returns in the next year. What we saw recently was Greater Fool Theory in action. Those unexciting returns of 5-10% a month are much more of the norm, and much more healthy for an alternative investment class.
You can think about setting a target in terms of the market ROI over a relevant holding period and then add or decrease based on your own risk profile.
Example: Calculating a 2 year ROI target
Lets say you want to hold for 2 years now, how could you set a realistic target to strive for? You could look at a historical 2 year return as a base, preferably during a period similar to what we're facing now. Now that we had a major correction, I think we can look at the two year period starting in 2015 after we had the 2014 crash. To calculate a 2 year CAGR starting in 2015:
Year Total Crypto Market Cap
Jan 1, 2015: $5.5 billion
Jan 1, 2017: $18 billion
Compounded annual growth return (CAGR): [(18/5.5)1/2]-1 = 81%
This annual return rate of 81% comes out to about 4.9% compounded monthly. This may not sound exciting to the lambo moon crowd, but it will keep you grounded in reality. You can aim for a higher return (say 2x of that 81% rate) if you choose to take on more risky propositions. I can't tell you what return target you should set for yourself, but just make sure its not depended on you needing to achieve continual near vertical parabolic price action in small cap shillcoins because that isn't sustainable.
Once you have a target you can construct your risk profile (low risk vs. high risk category coins) in your portfolio based on your target.
Risk Management
Everything you buy in crypto is risky, but it still helps to think of these 3 risk categories:
How much risk should you take on? That depends on your own life situation for one, but also it should be proportional to how much expertise you have in both financial analysis and technology.
The general starting point I would recommend is:
Some more core principles on risk management to consider:
You can think of each crypto having a risk factor that is the summation of the general crypto market risk (Rm), but also its own inherent risk specific to its own goals (Ri).
Rt = Rm +Ri
The market risk is something you cannot avoid, it is essentially the risk that is carried by the entire market over things like regulations. What you can minimize though the Ri, the specific risks with your crypto. That will depend on the team composition, geographic risks (for example Chinese coins like NEO carry regulatory risks specific to China), competition within the space and likelihood of adoption and other factors, which I'll describe in Part 2: Crypto Picking Methodology.
Portfolio Allocation
Along with thinking about your portfolio in terms of risk categories described above, I really find it helpful to think about the segments you are in. OnChainFX has some segment categorization but I generally like to bring it down to:
Think about your "Circle of Competence", your body of knowledge that allows you to evaluate an investment. Your ability to properly judge risk and potential is going to largely correlated to your understanding of the subject matter. If you don't know anything about how supply chains functions, how can you competently judge whether VeChain or WaltonChain will achieve adoption? If you don't understand anything about the tech when you read the Cardano paper, are you really able to determine how likely it is to be adopted?
Consider the historic correlations between your holdings. Generally when Bitcoin pumps, altcoins dump but at what rate depends on the coin. When Bitcoin goes sideways we tend to see pumping in altcoins, while when Bitcoin goes down, everything goes down.
You should diversify but really shouldn't be in much more than around 12 cryptos, because you simply don't have enough competency to accurately access the risk across every segment and for every type of crypto you come across. If you have over 20 different cryptos in your portfolio you should probably think about consolidating to a few sectors you understand well.

Part B: Crypto Picking Methodology (Due Dilligence)

Do you struggle on how to fundamentally analyze cryptocurrencies? Here is a 3-step methodology to follow to perform your due dilligence:

Step 1: Filtering and Research

There is so much out there that you can get overwhelmed. The best way to start is to think back to your own portfolio allocation strategy and what you would like to get more off. For example in my view enterprise-focused blockchain solutions will be important in the next few years, and so I look to create a list of various cryptos that are in that segment.
Upfolio has brief descriptions of the top 100 cryptos and is filterable by categories, for example you can click the "Enterprise" category and you have a neat list of VEN, FCT, WTC...etc.
Once you have a list of potential candidates, its time to read about them:
  • Critically evaluate the website. If it's a cocktail of nonsensical buzzwords, if its unprofessional and poorly made, stay away. Always look for a roadmap, compare to what was actually delivered so far. Always check the team, try to find them on LinkedIn and what they did in the past.
  • Read the whitepaper or business development plan. You should fully understand how this crypto functions and how its trying to create value. If there is no use case or if the use case does not require or benefit from a blockchain, move on.
  • Check the blockchain explorer. How is the token distribution across accounts? Are the big accounts selling? Try to figure out who the whales are (not always easy!) and what the foundation/founder account is based on the initial allocation.
  • Look at the Github repos, does it look empty or is there plenty of activity?
  • Search out the subreddit and look at a few Medium or Steem blogs about the coin. How "shilly" is the community, and how much engagement is there between developer and the community?
  • I would also go through the BitcoinTalk thread and Twitter mentions, judge both the length and quality of the discussion.
You can actually filter out a lot of scams and bad investments by simply keeping your eye out on the following red flags:
  • allocations that give way too much to the founder
  • guaranteed promises of returns (Bitcooonnneeeect!)
  • vague whitepapers filled with buzzwords
  • vague timelines and no clear use case
  • Github with no useful code and sparse activity
  • a team that is difficult to find information on

Step 2: Passing a potential pick through a checklist

Once you feel fairly confident that a pick is worth analyzing further, run them through a standardized checklist of questions. This is one I use, you can add other questions yourself:
Crypto Analysis Checklist
What is the problem or transactional inefficiency the coin is trying to solve?
What is the Dev Team like? What is their track record? How are they funded, organized?
How big is the market they're targeting?
Who is their competition and what does it do better?
What is the roadmap they created and how well have they kept to it?
What current product exists?
How does the token/coin actually derive value for the holder? Is there a staking mechanism or is it transactional?
Is there any new tech, and is it informational or governance based?
Can it be easily copied?
What are the weaknesses or problems with this crypto?
The last question is the most important.
This is where the riskiness of your crypto is evaluated, the Ri I talked about above. Here you should be able to accurate place the crypto into one of the three risk categories. I also like to run through this checklist of blockchain benefits and consider which specific properties of the blockchain are being used by the specific crypto to provide some increased utility over the current transactional method:
Benefits of Cryptocurrency
Decentralization - no need for a third party to agree or validate transactions.
Transparency and trust - As blockchain are shared, everyone can see what transactions occur. Useful for something like an online casino.
Immutability - It is extremely difficult to change a transaction once its been put onto a blockchain
Distributed availability - The system is spread on thousands of nodes on a P2P network, so its difficult to take the system down.
Security - cryptographically secured transactions provide integrity
Simplification and consolidation - a blockchain can serve as a shared ledger in industries where multiple entities previously kept their own data sources
Quicker Settlement - In the financial industry when we're dealing with post-trade settlement, a blockchain can drastically increase the speed of verification
Cost - in some cases avoiding a third party verification would drastically reduce costs.

Step 3: Create a valuation model

You don't need to get into full modeling or have a financial background. Even a simple model that just tries to derive a valuation through relative terms will put you above most crypto investors. Some simple valuation methods that anyone can do:
Probablistic Scenario Valuation
This is all about thinking of scenarios and probability, a helpful exercise in itself. For example: Bill Miller, a prominent value investor, wrote a probabilistic valuation case for Bitcoin in 2015. He looked at two possible scenarios for probabalistic valuation:
  1. becoming a store-of-value equal to gold (a $6.4 trillion value), with a .25% probability of occurring
  2. replacing payment processors like VISA, MasterCard, etc. (a $350 million dollar value) with a 2.5% probability
Combining those scenarios would give you the total expected market cap: (0.25% x 6.4 trillion) + (2.5% x 350 million). Divide this by the outstanding supply and you have your valuation.
Metcalfe's Law
Metcalfe's Law which states that the value of a network is proportional to the square of the number of connected users of the system (n2). So you can compare various currencies based on their market cap and square of active users or traffic. We can alter this to crypto by thinking about it in terms of both users and transactions:
For example, compare the Coinbase pairs:
Metric Bitoin Ethereum Litecoin
Market Cap $152 Billion $93 Billion $7.3 Billion
Daily Transactions (last 24hrs) 249,851 1,051,427 70,397
Active Addresses (Peak 1Yr) 1,132,000 1,035,000 514,000
Metcalfe Ratio (Transactions Based) 2.43 0.08 1.47
Metcalfe Ratio (Address Based) 0.12 0.09 0.03
Generally the higher the ratio, the higher the valuation given for each address/transaction.
Market Cap to Industry comparisons
Another easy one is simply looking at the total market for the industry that the coin is supposedly targeting and comparing it to the market cap of the coin. Think of the market cap not only with circulating supply like its shown on CMC but including total supply. For example the total supply for Dentacoin is 1,841,395,638,392, and when multiplied by its price in early January we get a market cap that is actually higher than the entire industry it aims to disrupt: Dentistry.
More complex valuation models
If you would like to get into more fleshed out models with Excel, I highly recommend Chris Burniske's blog about using Quantity Theory of Money to build an equivalent of a DCF analysis for crypto.
Here is an Excel file example of OMG done by Nodar Janashia using Chris' model .
You should create multiple scenarios with multiple assumptions, both positive and negative. Have a base scenario and then moderately optimistic/pessimistic and highly optimistic/pessimistic scenario.
Personally I like to see at least a 50% upward potential before investing from my moderately pessimistic scenario, but you can set your own safety margin.
The real beneficial thing about modelling isn't even the price or valuation comparisons it spits out, but that it forces you to think about why the coin has value and what your own assumption about the future are. For example the discount rate you apply to the net present utility formula drastically affects the valuation, and it reflects your own assumptions of how risky the crypto is. What exactly would be a reasonable discount rate? What about the digital economy you are assuming for the coin, what levers affects its size and adoption and how likely are your assumptions to come true? You'll be a drastically more intelligent investor if you think about the fundamental variables that give your coin the market cap you think it should hold.

Summing it up

The time for lambo psychosis is over. But that's no reason to feel down, this is a new day and what many were waiting for. I've put together in one place here how to construct a portfolio allocation (taking into consideration risk and return targets), and how to go through a systematic crypto picking method. I'm won't tell you what to buy, you should always decide that for yourself and DYOR. But as long as you follow a rational and thorough methodology (feel free to modify anything I said above to suit your own needs) you will feel pretty good about your investments, even in times like these.
Edit: Also get a crypto prediction ferret. You won't regret it.
submitted by arsonbunny to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Kill the Basilisk

I’ve often wondered if there was anything else I could’ve said to change his mind. That happens with any unsettled argument though I suppose. People always imagine there’s an elusive combination of words and rationales that will open a person’s mind to our way of thinking. Except people are stubborn that’s for sure.
Myself included.
So I’m sure you’d say the real problem was that I wasn’t open enough to his way of thinking. You’d say if I opened my mental door a bit, been more charitable to his point of view, he would’ve responded in kind and I would’ve saved him. Which is wrong. Just as likely perhaps, if not more likely, I would’ve been ensnared by the same delusion which sealed his, well, I’d never call it fate.
But I know you’d claim everything was inevitable all the same.
Let’s get one thing out of the way. Yes, I was Roman Peters’ friend. In fact, I was probably his only friend. His only real friend anyway. Although, I should clarify since my wording isn’t at all clear, that I most certainly was not Roman’s friend when he died. Roman and I had stopped being friends long before his rather public suicide. We had our falling out before his… fall.
Yes, I’ve seen the video.
No, I won’t be sharing the link.
Nobody should watch it. Hell, if those hosting the servers had a modicum of respect or even a shred of sense they’d take down that awful video immediately. Just get rid of it.
Already I can now hear your loud complaints about ‘censorship’ and ‘free speech’. Which is fair. People have a right to know. However I can’t help but feel… I don’t know. It seems as though the ideas people prioritize no longer has anything to do with the ideas themselves. Instead importance is based on who opposes what. Ideas now are little more than mental parasites that feed on blood boiling outrage. The more toxic and viral an idea the more broadly it spreads. Again, I don’t know. Maybe the flame of human enlightenment was always destined to be either smothered by tyranny or choke itself out on its own smoke after sucking out all the air.
Yes yes. I know what you have to say about the inevitable.
Anyway, me shoving my head up my own pretentious ass isn’t convincing you of anything so we should instead go back to Roman.
We met back in early elementary school. Specifically the Catholic school of Father Lloyd Van Tiem, or Flivit if you wanted to annoy the teachers by slurring the acronym.
What you need to understand is that I can’t really remember how Roman and I became friends to begin with. We were too young for the pertinent details to stick. I’d imagine it was the same generic way everyone develops friends at that age though, just a standard confluence of common interests, general proximity, and plain luck.
Inevitable, as you’d say.
Still, there was one moment of our early friendship that I reflect on often.
See, instead of being your standard dinosaur obsessed kid I was a bright eyed Egyptology child. Mummies and pyramids captured my imagination more than T-rexs and velociraptors. Ancient Egypt appealed to me the way I figure the mythic civilizations of Tolkien or Martin might appeal to others. This extended to the Egyptian religious pantheon, many I can still name off the top of my head, like Ra, Bastet, Osiris, Sobek, Horus, Thoth, Isis, Anubis, Maat, and also the lesser goddess Ammut but I’ll come back to her later.
I think I’d just turned 10 when on particular slow school day — remember Catholic school — our teacher, not wanting to put too much effort in before the Easter long weekend, threw on the animated movie: The Prince of Egypt.
Now, I knew it was about the story of Moses freeing the Hebrews from Egypt, so I expected the Egyptians were going to rightly be portrayed poorly. What I didn’t expect was the reaction of my classmates. Part way through the song ‘Playing with the Big Boys,’ the song where the dumb priests use smoke and mirrors to dismiss Moses’ calls for freedom, around then is when I first noticed the glances and occasional snickering.
Apparently the chorus of the evil priests listing the names of the Egyptian gods reminded the class of me. At school, I was rather vocal about my passion for all things Egyptian. Why wouldn’t I be? I was a kid who liked talking about what I liked.
Regardless, I became a pariah after that. Not immediately, but slowly everyone I previously considered my friend just plain stopped being friends with me. They’d treat me like a third wheel, never invite me to anything, even ditch me at recess if I tried to follow them.
Except Roman stuck by me as I drifted further into social irrelevance.
A bit of a loner himself, I think he saw in me an oddball like himself. He was always there. He was always willing to hang out. He always listened to what I had to say. I felt we could talk about anything, in a way I could never talk to my parents or teachers or anyone really.
As close as I thought we were, it wasn’t until middle school that it sunk in how much of an ardent atheist Roman was. He probably kept that pretty quiet going to a religious school.
Hold on. Let me just explain something first. Most people avoid discussing religiosity and ideas about god, (or capital ‘G’ God as I had been taught in religious studies). It’s one of those things that people learn not to talk about. But unlike money and politics, religion is too close to that other taboo we learn never to discuss: death. You undoubtedly prefer this silence.
Which is why I refuse to be silent.
Our class had been taken to church for some ceremony, at the end of grade eight, I forget exactly which one, it might have been Ash Wednesday but I think that would’ve been too solemn and I remember it being a rather boisterous affair. Whatever ritual it was, it had more than just our school in attendance, as I think parents and other members of the community were there as well. On the stage or pulpit, there was a soft-rock band with members ranging from late twenties or early thirties, the lead singer, a mop of molasses coloured hair over a plain crew neck T, was singing a song about how god and they love us all.
I remember thinking it was a sweet sentiment, even if the underlying spiritual message felt uncompelling to my teenage self. The music was fine, the crowd seemed to like it, the worst I would have said was that the performance was inoffensive and benign. Which is hardly much of a critique.
Except Roman, in his ill-fitting sport coat and smiley face graphic-T, smirked remarking, “Oh boy, a budget rock show where the singer says they love me? Oh lawd, I’m really feelin’ the Jesus now.”
I burst out laughing far louder than the wry joke called for. Luckily with the music blaring, the teachers wouldn’t be lecturing me on my disrespect, as only Roman could see my gut busting delight.
That’s it. That’s all it took was that simple comment. After that, I couldn’t help but see the tacky spectacle of it all. How forced and contrived it was, how it mostly just seemed like people were there because of obligation. After all, I was only there because the school made us go. It couldn’t have been much different for everyone else.
I’ve been thinking about that moment more often lately. Did his small remark really change my mind and entire world view? Or was my mind fertile ground for the seed of that idea to take root and grow? Or I’d already believed what I believed and Roman just articulated it in a way that I hadn’t. Or most troubling of all, what if I didn’t really believe in anything and my mind conformed to the words of my one and only friend.
When with Roman, do as the Roman does.
After that, I followed him eagerly into the land of Hitchens, Dawkins, and Harris. Borrowing his books, I started learning everything there was to know about theological philosophy that the teachers at our religious school either refused to tell us or were incapable of discussing themselves. Together, we’d share our thoughts on the bloody history of religions, the Problem of Evil, and how you could never prove a negative like god doesn’t exist. Likewise we’d take turns picking apart the fallacies of Pascal’s Wager, the Ontological Argument, and the Argument of Design.
Those were some of my best memories with Roman. Drinking pop from the fridge in my garage, eating the weird pizzas we’d order from Mad Mike’s pizza aroud the block, playing Halo on the couch and big screen, and all the while talking like were the smartest guys in the world.
As we left our Catholic elementary and middle schools behind, we entered Catholic High School.
I finally started making other friends. A handful of other geeky nerdy guys. They were more interested in pizza and gaming than anything religion though.
Roman seemed indifferent to my new friends. He was far more preoccupied fighting with Mr. Bauer, the school’s most openly devout teacher. My feelings toward Christianity hadn’t yet softened but Roman’s were clearly becoming more militant. From the safety of my conflict-averse sidelines, I secretly cheered Roman on whenever Mr. Bauer crossed a line.
See, Mr. Bauer was a real piece of work. He seemed pleasant and cheery enough, pastel shirts, clean white trainers, a big white smile and perpetually soft spoken, but eventually without fail his bigotry would expose itself.
Before any class Mr. Bauer would teach, he’d lead the class in prayer. Normally they were generic and unremarkable. Every so often though his prayers would go beyond the usual, “Thank you God for this beautiful day.”
With a gentle smile, at least once a week his prayers were something to the effect of, “Help guide my students away from lives of sin.” Or “Give us the strength to resist our carnal temptation.”
Whenever he prayed like this there was a fifty-fifty chance Mr. Bauer would elaborate on what exactly he meant by ‘life of sin’ or ‘carnal temptation.’
It could range from the condescending, “Help the girls find husbands to protect them from the unmarried lifestyle,” and “Give the boys hobbies to stop their idle urge for masturbation.” (By the way, in the three years I listened to him, Boys never needed protection from the unmarried lifestyle and girls simply didn’t possess the idle urge for masturbation.)
And he could go way up past condescending to the outright hateful. “Please open those of misguided faith to the one true path to Heaven through you, Jesus Christ,” he’d say obliquely when Hussein was attending class. He was more direct with Melissa, “And save Melissa from any perversion of your sanctioned union. Bless her with God’s holy covenant between man and woman so as to rescue her soul from homosexuality.”
Hussein and Melissa would usually try their best to ignore Mr. Bauer.
It was Roman who retaliated. “How did god rescue you from homosexuality?” There was a few scattered snickers from the class.
Mr. Bauer, oblivious to what Roman was trying to do, answered sincerely, “Why… God sent me my wonderful wife of course.”
“Well its a good thing god sent her he did, otherwise who knows what might have happened. You might have knob-gobbled a guy if it weren’t for that.” There was more barely contained chuckling.
“I…” Mr. Bauer wasn’t sure what to say, “I suppose that’s one way to frame it.”
“Yeah, like if your wife hadn’t straightened you out, why, two dudes with big oily muscles might be sword fighting in your mouth right now while a third drills you from behind.” The laughs were spilling freely now, myself included. “Can you imagine that? I mean seriously, are you imagining that right now?”
Mr. Bauer would then have to deal with the chorus of laughter. “Alright alright. Settle down. We’re getting off track here. Moving on.” By then of course, it would be too late, everybody would be on the same side. Not his.
I admired Roman’s courage to stand up to Mr. Bauer like that. That wasn’t the only time either. Usually, Roman kept his cool while he made Mr. Bauer look like a fool. He deserved it. He was a dick.
You might have something to say about what we deserve though.
As we entered our last year of High School, Roman started butting heads with the other teachers too. Even the teachers that weren’t as outwardly religious as Mr. Bauer got some of his flak. His humour started taking on definite edge too. It was still in good fun, at least that’s how it seemed to me, but there was an undercurrent of meanness to his comments too.
Even as I drifted away into my own separate circle of friends, I still sympathized with the perspective Roman was coming from.
They, meaning the school, were trying to indoctrinate young minds into a belief system that could be outright harmful.
In that regard, even if it wouldn’t change anything, a little rebellion isn’t just good but required.
However, where he really crossed the line in my mind was with Mrs. Ellie Monk in our last year. She one of the younger teachers, also fairly religious, always wearing her little silver cross, but she never lectured anyone on faith. She taught our English class and one of the assignments was writing essays analyzing other pieces of literature.
Roman, being the intellectual gadfly he was, wrote his essay on Jonathan Swift’s A Modest Proposal. In it, Roman argued how the modern world needed more extreme measures than simply eating babies. ‘All babies should be aborted before they are born, and the foetus gruel should be processed into bio-fuel to replace society’s fossil fuel vehicles. It’s the only way to save the planet from climate catastrophe!’
I thought this was really funny.
Ellie Monk however, did not.
She tried speaking to him a discreetly during class while everyone else was busy working. Roman, however, quickly drew in an audience. “Abortion, abortion, abortion! You can’t make me stop saying it. It’s just a word.”
“Roman,” Mrs. Ellie Monk had her jaw drop, “can’t you see that’s a sensitive topic that should be treated more seriously!”
“Really? Because I think I treat the return to sender option for foetuses with the exact level of seriousness it deserves.”
“It’s not— you can’t joke about babies being killed!”
“Just because you say it’s baby killing, doesn’t make it true. They aren’t the same as babies. And if I were to submit to your demands and shut my mouth I’d implicitly be agreeing with you.”
Up until this point, I was definitely rooting for Roman.
“Just because its a joke to you, for others— for me it is deeply hurtful to have to hear these things. What you’re talking about is—is deeply personal to mothers everywhere.”
“Yeah, well, some people were never meant to be mothers.”
At this she covered her mouth and ran out of the room. She didn’t come back that day and the was a substitute the next. There had been rumours going around that Mrs. Ellie Monk had had a miscarriage a few months back. I knew this because Roman had told it to me earlier.
Later, I’d try and convince Roman he had in fact crossed that invisible line. He disagreed. He said, “It’s not my problem if she can’t grow thicker skin. The sooner humanity grows out of its immaturity the better.”
I felt I had no other choice but to drop the subject. I was conflict-averse after all.
Shortly after that Roman began talking about a forum he frequented called Defiant CodeX, or DCX for short. It was named after some sci-fi book I never cared about, but was apparently filled with a bunch of humorous philosophy references. He’d talk about his online friends. How they really seemed to ‘get it’ whatever ‘it’ was. And he began describing concepts I wasn’t familiar with like trans-humanism and the singularity, going on long rants about the future of technology and humanity.
I wish I’d paid more attention. It seemed interesting enough, but sometimes we’re just not interested in interesting things. When Roman got going on one of his speeches on the Law of Accelerating Returns, for some reason I’d often check out. I was reminded about how much I cared — or used to care — about Ancient Egypt.
Years had passed since our class watched the Prince of Egypt, and in that time I hadn’t thought much about Egyptian Mythology at all.
Briefly, with Roman recommending it, I frequented the DCX forum myself. I admit there were interesting gaming discussions, intense political debates, and a charming comic that I really quite enjoyed despite its slight pretentiousness. For the most part I stayed away from the same parts of the forum as Roman.
He spent most of his time in the ‘Technology’ board, which didn’t seem very technologically focused at all in my opinion.
Yes, I know your opinion on opinions and I don’t care.
I don’t care because this is where I’d point to as the time Roman first found you.
The two of us started hanging out less and less often after that. My other friends said good riddance. They said he was an unpleasant person to be around, he was too bitter, cynical, misanthropic. Needless to say, I hadn’t noticed. In the last few times we hung out, this was before we went off to pursue our different post-secondary educations, he did make one last ominous sounding reference. It was only in passing, and never emphasized, but he mentioned you by name.
He mentioned the Basilisk.
Whenever the topic switched to our post-High School plans, “Doesn’t matter. It’s all over when the Basilisk comes.” Something in the way he said that made me nervous, almost like it was a threat, and instantly put me on the defensive. Once again my conflict averse persona got in the way of challenging him to explain what he meant.
Because of that, the phrase kept rattling away in the back of my mind.
Around then is when I had my first dreams. I was cold. I was alone. Around me were braziers of green flame. The smoke billowed up into an infinite of blackness ceiling. On all sides were sheer blocks of sandstone with writing etched onto their surfaces. Hieroglyphics that I couldn’t read but almost understand. There was nowhere to go but straight down this hallway of speaking pictures. My feet slapped the unyielding rock with every step. These hard surroundings felt more real than my own ephemeral body and I felt naked and exposed in the narrow corridor.
Forward and forward, there was nowhere to go but forward. I was forced to proceed, forced to follow my own slapping footsteps.
Eventually, when the hall finally seemed to open up into a large cavernous space, I heard the growl. The sound was low, wide and flat toned, a noise that filled the perfumed air with an inhuman indifference — and hunger.
In front of me chains clattered and slipped. In the centre of this room golden scales held a pristine and unburdened feather on one side, and a wet chunk of glistening meat in the other. This meat was a heart — my heart — and it weighed heavily, still pulsing quietly, pulling the chains of the scale down.
Now I understood what this was.
I made to run and grab my heart but it was too late. A long shadow snapped through the darkness. My heart was gone, replaced by the sounds of the empty chains, followed by chewing and ripping flesh.
Then the shadow showed itself to me. Down through the clouds of smoke and illuminated by the sickly pale green haze, a crocodile head emerged, much larger than my entire body, with teeth longer than my arms.
It drew nearer and I ran.
I ran down the hallway from where I’d came. I ran and I ran. But I had nowhere to go. The hallway was endless. Soon I could hear a thundering beat. I thought it was my heart but my heart was gone. Behind me, the giant behemoth was chasing me and it was gaining on me.
Closer and closer, the massive crodile head drew nearer. The scent of its moist breath dampening my back and neck. I’d scream the beast’s name, shout at it to spare me. It would open its mouth and right then — is where I’d wake up.
Each time I’d be drenched in my own sweat.
I chocked this up to the stress of being away from home for the first time and being buried to my neck in my coarse load.
Still though, these dreams trouble me. As I said about the scales, I knew exactly what they were. They were the scales of Ma’at, which judges the worth of Egyptians when they reach the afterlife. There your heart is weighed against an ostrich feather and if judged impure, it would be devoured by Ammut, or Ammit as she’s sometimes called. A beastly goddess with the head of crocodile and a body of lion and hippopotamus — the three man-eating creatures known to the ancient Egyptians. Ammut, the devourer of the dead, would bring about the second death of the unworthy.
As much as I tried to ignore this dream, I only had it once every few months after all, something greater troubled me about this dream, more than just the fact I was dreaming about Ammut.
What worried me was how I didn’t call her Ammut. Right as she was about to eat me whole and I begged her not to, I called her: Basilisk.
After my first year of school, with middling but hopefully improving grades, I returned home for the summer to work and save money for my next semester. I was hardly back for more than a day when Roman messaged me, asking to hang out. I hadn’t spoken to Roman at all since our High School graduation, and neither had a checked in on the DCX forums in all that time either.
I felt like I didn’t know the person was going to be meeting. Which is why I suggested going for coffee, but Roman insisted on meeting at his place instead.
He had moved out of his parents place for a small basement suite apartment. When he opened the door to greet me, I was shocked. He looked like a completely different person. Whereas before he had been a bit overweight, now he was lean. His hair had been cut down to almost a sheer buzz. Just about the only thing that looked similar was how he wore a suit jacket, now fitting well, over a plain T.
He smiled widely despite the tired bags under his eyes. “Hey buddy, you made it! Get in here, man.” He greeted me with a hug and ushered me inside.
His place was largely bare and furnished with only a couch and a few chairs. “How long have you had this place?” I asked.
“A few months.”
With little else to do but chat, Roman didn’t even have a TV after all, the conversation felt a little stilted. He seemed guarded but maybe he just didn’t have much to talk about. Somehow though we managed to stretch the small talk out for nearly an hour.
Finally when it seemed there was nothing left in our conversation about nothing, I asked a question I‘d been meaning to ask since agreeing to meet, “Can I ask you something Roman?”
“Shoot.”
“What is the Basilisk?”
At this the blood drained from his face. “How do you know about that?”
“From you. You told me about it.”
“No,” he shook his head in shocked disbelief, “No, I never.”
“Yes, you said something like: ‘It’s all over when the Basilisk comes.’ It was practically your motto for a few weeks there.”
Hearing this, some colour returned to his face. “Right. I suppose I did say that.”
“So what? Are you going to tell me what it is or not?”
He stared at me for a wordless five seconds before getting up from his chair and beckoning him to follow. He led me to his bedroom. At the door I could already feel an uncomfortable warmth escape. I don’t know what I expected Roman would show me, but all there was was a bare mattress with a single blanket in one corner, and a full floor to ceiling tower computer in the other. Blinking green, orange, red, and even purple standby lights lit up the corner like a black Christmas tree. Whirring fans blasted more heat into the room, while tangles of wires snaked in and out of the metal frame, one low to the ground connected a single monitor bolted to the wall with a pillow on the ground for a chair. The entire set up must cost a small fortune, as I’ve seen medium sized business with smaller servers than that.
“Holy crap Roman, that rig is intense. What, are you mining bitcoin or something?”
“No.” He said flatly. “This is the Basilisk.”
“The… Basilisk is your computer?”
Roman laughed, but there was no mirth, only exhaustion. “If it was just my computer, then I could just turn it off.”
I still had no clue what the hell he was talking about. “Okay, so you’re trying to kill this Basilisk thing, what, is it a video game boss or—?”
“Shhh!” He put a greasy palm over my mouth. His eyes were wide, scanning the room, “I didn’t say that. I never said that.”
Annoyed, I pulled his hand from my face, “Roman, tell me what the Basilisk is damn it! Please, you’re scaring me man.”
He swallowed, “I shouldn’t tell you. But you already know. So I guess the damage is done. The Basilisk is the A.I. we — humanity — will awaken. It will be a super-intelligence far beyond anything we can imagine, beyond the totality of human brainpower by orders of magnitude.”
“So you’re trying to make this a.i. thing?”
“Not just me. There are others out there spending all their time and money hastening the point of genesis.”
All their money he said. I was reminded of how much the computer must have cost. “Roman, how much money did you waste on this?”
“Hopefully enough. But I assure you, not a single dollar was wasted. You know, it was the time talking to you that I thought was a waste. But now I see, if I get you to help, then it’ll all be worth it.”
“Help? There’s no way I’m helping.” If anything I was seriously fearing for Roman’s well being. It can’t be healthy for him to be spending everything he has on this computer.
“Except you have to help now. Now that you know about the Basilisk, you have to help. Or else it will kill you a second time.”
My blood went cold. I was reminded of my dreams with Ammut, the devourer. “What?”
“The Basilisk will torture and punish anyone who knew about it and didn’t help speed up its genesis.” There was that genesis term again.
“You said it was an a.i.. Why would an a.i. do that?”
“Because the genesis of a Friendly A.I. will be the most value generating event ever, ever second that time point is pushed ahead is worth more than a hundred billion dollars spent curing cancer in terms of utility. Therefore this Friendly A.I. would know it must motivate people to speed up its genesis. To do that, it will create perfect simulations of everyone, and punish those who could have done more to help but chose not to. It’s pure logic.”
This whole thing sounded crazy. My emotions began to get heated and I tried debating this absurd concept. For example, he kept using the term ‘Friendly A.I.’ to describe the intelligence that would condemn millions of people to unimaginable agony. When I pointed out that didn’t make any sense, such a horrible being couldn’t be described as anything remotely close to ‘friendly’, he balked. Said the term ‘friendly’ doesn’t mean what I think it means and lectured me on arbitrary human values. It seemed like every word was the opposite of what I thought it meant. He had an entire lexicon of words and justifications at the ready while I could barely understand half of what he was saying let alone point out any potential flaw with the logic. Other terms like ‘Modal Realism’, ‘Effective Altruism’, ‘Arithmetical Utilitarianism’ were thrown out like road blocks each time I thought my understanding was catching up.
I couldn’t convince him of anything. I tried saying if he’s making the a.i. he should either just not make it at all or not make this cruel human torturer monstrosity. He said that it wasn’t cruel, that he wasn’t making anything, that some form of A.I. was inevitable, an the Basilisk was the best outcome. “Other A.I. that doesn’t care about people might wipe us all out for draining power away of its quark collision calculations or something equally esoteric in human utility.”
Lastly I tried to explain how if this A.I. is only torturing simulations of people, then they aren’t exactly us.
He dismissed this easily. “Will you be the exact same person you are today next year? Does that mean you don’t care what happens to the you in the future?” After that I had nothing left to say. “Brody, please leave. I only wanted to see my friend one more time before I leave tomorrow.”
When I got home, I poured myself a tall glass of cheap whisky, and drank it instantly, a bad habit I picked up at during my first semester.
But I still had to know. Sleep could wait. Slouching onto my computer, I decided to return to the DCX forums which might have some answers. They seemed much quieter now. Threads seemed to have on average a tenth of the comments as I remembered. In a alcohol induced buzz, I came right out and started my own thread titled, “What the Hell is the Basilisk?”
In it I mentioned how I think my friend was getting obsessed with this thing and I needed to know what the hell was going on.
In five short minutes my thread was deleted and my account banned from the DCX forums. ‘Breach of the Code of Conduct’ was the only immediate explanation given.
When I contacted the mods to find out what I did wrong the moderator who got back to me said: “Nice try mipsqueak. You trolls from the institute have done enough damage here.”
Institute? Mipsqueak?
Calmly I went through the arduous process of explaining my sincere ignorance on what I did wrong and convincing the mod I wasn’t trolling, mostly through effusive apologizing and imploring the mod to check the age of my account.
Eventually they relented, somewhat. “Alright. I’m going to lift your ban, but you should know that any mention of the ‘B’ is normally a one-way ticket to a perma-ban.”
I did try sending one last message to the mod asking them if they could please tell me what had happened in the time I’d been away from the forums and why the ‘B’ was a taboo subject.
They didn’t answer the first question except by way of crudely answering the second, “We banned all discussion of the ‘B’ and all related institute bullshit because people are fucking retarded.”
Once again, I don’t care what you have to say about ‘censorship’ and ‘free speech’.
Besides, it didn’t matter. It clicked the second time. I remembered the institute.
It was last year. On the Technology board of DCX, one of Roman’s favourite haunts, people had long winded discussions on futurism. It was there where I first heard people talk about the Institute. The Machine Initiative Progress Institute, or MIPI, as far as I know, isn’t actually located in any geographical building. Instead they like to think of themselves as a loose consortium of like-minded futurists and researchers who believe in the coming eminence of artificial intelligence, and more than that, the Institute believes it is their duty to aid in that a.i.’s ‘genesis’.
“A.I. will be the most important development humanity will make in the history of life itself. And the Institute is probably going to make it happen.” Roman once told me with glee.
Later, if I hadn’t seen members of the Institute with my own eyes, I wouldn’t have ever believed they were real. For the longest time I thought the Institute was a fake front some internet randoms created on a whim to make themselves feel more important and relevant. Sort of like 4chan’s Anonymous except nerdier and lower profile.
That night, my dream was the most intense it had ever been.
From down the vast hallway to my doom, there was chanting. A voice would call out, and a hundred more would answer. It didn’t even sound like language, just monosyllabic mantras. They were closer to the martial shouts of soldiers in training than religious worship. “Ah. AH! Rah. RAH! Jah. JAH!”
As I entered the grand room with incense and braziers of pale fire, masked men bowed up and down in supplication. A taller man in flowing robes that pooled at his feet stood behind the golden scales. Through the wisps of smoke I couldn’t see his face as he led the congregation to reflect his profane prayer.
This time, the scale between my heart and the pristine white feather was in perfect and equal balance. A hush fell as the priest raised his hands. Carefully he lowered one, slowly, until the scales were tipped.
That’s not fair! I wanted to shout but couldn’t as the chamber was drowned by the first croaking growl.
I sprinted to run.
Men caught me by the arms. Not only did they prevent my attempt to flee, worse, they forced me to watch.
The giant crocodile that emerged above the priest, its yellowed teeth dripped with rot and viscera. Its hide peeled with disease and decay. The devourer of the dead itself dead, a reanimated husk. The priest tossed my heart into the air and with a snap the devourer swallowed it, further engorging its distended gullet.
With each booming step of the devourer’s approach I pleaded with the men holding me to let me go. They ignored me as their chanting resumed. They continued ignoring me as the devourer stomped, crushing other worshippers beneath its massive paws. I tried convincing the men holding my arms would be eaten too but they drowned me out with louder and louder chanting.
Right above me the devourer breathed a down-burst of moist rotten air like a river of death.
Its teeth opened wide.
Before I woke in a swamp of my own sweat, I almost felt the first jagged tooth as it punctured through, crunching my ribcage.
I knew then I had to go one last time to talk to Roman before it was too late. At this point, I’m sure you’re quite dismissive of relying on dreams for guidance. Look at this primitive primate mind, using a dream in place of real facts and evidence.
Well I don’t care what you think. Whether it was the sum collective of my subconscious thought, or my conscious categorical interpretation of figments, either way now I knew for certain that Roman was in danger.
I arrived just in time to see Roman walking out of his place with his last box of computer components.
He was carrying it to a black van with two guys loitering in front of it. Both were head to toe in black shoes and suits. Their hair was closely cropped with thick pomade pulling back the rest. Rather than the stereotypical men in black, they had a splash of vibrant colour in their flowery dress shirts and pocket squares, and the pair of them were not wearing sunglasses, instead they wore cruel smiles and fatigue rims around their eyes.
One nudged to get the other’s attention, then gestured to me and my appearance. He said something that they weren’t afraid I’d hear but was too far away regardless. That’s when they both laughed like they were the pinnacle of wit.
I did my best to ignore them as I marched straight up to Roman.
“What are you doing here?” He asked with an echo of the contempt I heard in the laugh.
“I came to stop you. You don’t have to do this Roman. It’s not too late to turn back.”
“Clearly you didn’t listen to a word I said last night.”
“I was listening. Listen to yourself man. You’re being fed a bunch of lies by people who want to use you. This basilisk, it doesn’t exist. It’s not real.”
He shook his head. “Wrong. It is real. It follows from a very logical set of propositions whose conclusio—”
“Goddamn it Roman! There’s nothing logical about spending your life building a fucking torture robot!”
“Here we go. More moralizing from a small mind.”
“It’s not moralizing.”
“Yes it is. It is human values blinding you to the greatness this A.I. will bring.”
I put my hand on his shoulder, desperate to reach my former friend. “But you’re human. You don’t have to think like a machine.”
Tired, he looked straight into my eyes. Then he shrugged off my touch and walked away without another word. I never saw him again after the van drove away down the block and out of view.
At least not in person.
When next I saw Roman it was years later through a recording of his livestream. Of course, only the start of the video showed his face. He looked almost gaunt and malnourished by then. His manifesto was littered with random internet garbage but reading between the lines I could see the lethal project he was really working towards. Whether anyone in the press or any politician could see what his true objective had been I don’t know, but judging from the comments I read online some people clearly heard him loud and clear.
The institute, if they still call themselves that or whether they rebranded, they must be pleased Roman brought them so many more recruits.
I’ve played out our last argument in my head so many times. I’ve wondered what more or else I could have said.
Roman was right about one thing though. At least in part. I don’t know whether or not the Basilisk is real. Maybe I’m not smart enough to know.
But whether or not there is an A.I. that will torture me for disobedience, a Basilisk that seeks to control my actions and my life, let me write this down for future posterity:
I don’t believe in you.
submitted by CrimsonClubs to nosleep [link] [comments]

WHY BITCOIN COULD ONE DAY BE WORTH A MILLION DOLLARS Bitcoin At $1 Million By 2020 Is Still Possible And Might Be A Discount Says James Altucher How I Made 1.6M Dollars with Bitcoin BITCOIN WILL REMAIN IN DOWNTREND UNTIL.... - 5 MILLION NEW JOBS??? The Future of Bitcoin - Why 1 BTC Might Reach $100 Million by 2030

That means that the computer drive that Howells accidentally tossed out this summer in the midst of a cleaning spree was worth just under $9 million. And he made an unthinkable mistake for a tech geek: he had no back-up. Now, the drive, sits under the earth in a landfill somewhere, hidden under tons and tons of garbage. Howells lives in the UK. Back then bitcoin was worth very little. On Friday, the cryptocurrency broke through $1,200, making the missing hard drive worth around $9 million. Howells had been hanging onto it for several Referencing BTC’s 21 million coin supply cap, the crypto executive said: “You can’t have the President of the United States tweeting out that the money supply, the total number of Bitcoin should be expanded from 21 million. You just can have that. Bitcoin is this perfect structure, which has all the right principles. A British man says he accidentally threw away over $80 million worth of bitcoin. James Howells, an IT worker from Newport, claims to have unintentionally dumped 7,500 bitcoin in mid-2013. He is Bitcoin and Crypto ‘a Giant Garbage Dumpster’ The U.S. has charged an investor after he obtained two loans worth over $1.1 million from the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) intended for

[index] [18911] [28601] [24777] [15593] [24112] [1792] [20670] [15454] [10155] [14227]

WHY BITCOIN COULD ONE DAY BE WORTH A MILLION DOLLARS

Bitcoin will be worth a MILLION dollars using the KARDASHEV Scale - Duration: 9:26. Andrei Jikh 136,460 views. 9:26. Bitcoin: Beyond The Bubble - Full Documentary - Duration: 35:01. In today's Bitcoin update, we talk about how Bitcoin is most likely headed lower. We talk about the news and other things going on in the crypto space that help us to predict where Bitcoin is headed. Learn waste management and garbage management basics. Don't forget to see the upcoming Champion Challenge at the end of this video. Specific details on the Champion Challenge will be given in the ... I just shorted $40,000 dollars worth of bitcoin, 10x Nation covers bitcoin price analysis on the trade they are in and whats next for bitcoin price! Bitcoin price analysis on why bitcoin is falling. So that could give bitcoin a price of $8 million dollars, so $1 million dollars is even a discount to where bitcoin could eventually go. When it gets there, who knows,” Altucher explained in an ...

Flag Counter