Is anyone else starting to become a bit excited?

stockshares

Truckermal wrote: »

Tough call it bottomed at 234 Sats and currently at 240.

Do you reckon it will rise again.

I've never got in on a recently launched Coin. They seem to have a pattern of Initial Pump+ Dump and then take off again. Previous coins Launched on Binance did well so am considering this one.

Blueshoe

Vechain about to run.

Not based on info or ta

rapul

Just be very careful, the usual only put in what you can afford to loose, if could sway up and down wildly, but could be worth a punt if your just trying to make some mula

stockshares

rapul wrote: »

Just be very careful, the usual only put in what you can afford to loose, if could sway up and down wildly, but could be worth a punt if your just trying to make some mula

The Coins I'm interested in have been at a standstill for Months. Don't want to put anymore into them until they start showing some life. Just thought Harmony might be an opportunity to make a profit and then Invest that

Truckermal

stockshares wrote: »

The Coins I'm interested in have been at a standstill for Months. Don't want to put anymore into them until they start showing some life. Just thought Harmony might be an opportunity to make a profit and then Invest that

Impossible to say it could dump even further or a big announcement could send it to 500 sats!

I'm only investing previous profits so I can afford to take a gamble.

stockshares

Truckermal wrote: »

Impossible to say it could dump even further or a big announcement could send it to 500 sats!

I'm only investing previous profits so I can afford to take a gamble.

I was thinking of taking BNB profits and put those into Harmony but I'm Hesitant. I could ruin a good thing

rapul

Takes money to make money!

Dohnjoe

stockshares wrote: »

The Coins I'm interested in have been at a standstill for Months. Don't want to put anymore into them until they start showing some life. Just thought Harmony might be an opportunity to make a profit and then Invest that

The top 6 or 7 have been moving well, led by BTC. Most alts haven't moved much yet (I literally check all the movers every 30 odd mins, and have been sadistically doing so for years now)

When the alts start to move, they really move. Patience is king. It could all plunge back down of course, only then would I start buying (haven't been buying since March)

stockshares

Screenshots of Current chart and 24hr stats of Harmony from CoinmarketCap mobile app.

The Volume has dropped off quite a bit.

stockshares

I've asked on Binance Telegram what's a good price to buy Harmony and they reckon when it drops to around 70-80 satoshis.

The equivalent price for ONE/BNB is when it drops to around 0.000209 BNB

grindle

stockshares wrote: »

I've asked on Binance Telegram what's a good price to buy Harmony and they reckon when it drops to around 70-80 satoshis.
B

That's ~70% drop from current price and would have the cap at $20-$25m? Seems like a steep drop if they're expecting it flatten to just 2x ICO price.
Maybe if there's another 2018-style gutting of the market.

stockshares

grindle wrote: »

That's ~70% drop from current price and would have the cap at $20-$25m? Seems like a steep drop if they're expecting it flatten to just 2x ICO price.
Maybe if there's another 2018-style gutting of the market.

I don't have the knowledge or experience with Crypto to Assess it. I set a Buy order at that price just in case it does drop to that but it would be a very steep drop alright.

I didn't pay attention to the Matic launch so I don't know exactly what happened before it took off. I presume these launches follow the pattern of a pump and dump at first but I'm only assuming

Dades

JJJJNR wrote: »

The fact your referring to a working product as a buzz word imo means your here just to troll.

Well that's just rude. I asked why a certain type of enterprise solution is better addressed with blockchain, and you mention "smart contracts and decentralisation". I understand these are the lynchpins of blockchain but mentioning them doesn't explain what benefit a blockchain is to something that has never needed smart contracts or decentralisation.

JJJJNR wrote: »

Do your own research if your in that area. DBs will soon be known as legacy within the next 5 to 10 years.

Do my own research but don't ask anyone here or be accused of being a troll? Right.

Nevermind.

Truckermal

Dades wrote: »

Well that's just rude. I asked why a certain type of enterprise solution is better addressed with blockchain, and you mention "smart contracts and decentralisation". I understand these are the lynchpins of blockchain but mentioning them doesn't explain what benefit a blockchain is to something that has never needed smart contracts or decentralisation.

Do my own research but don't ask anyone here or be accused of being a troll? Right.

Nevermind.

Can you not post this waffle in some other thread?

Truckermal

stockshares wrote: »

I've asked on Binance Telegram what's a good price to buy Harmony and they reckon when it drops to around 70-80 satoshis.

The equivalent price for ONE/BNB is when it drops to around 0.000209 BNB

I doubt it will tank that much but who's to know!

Dades

Truckermal wrote: »

Can you not post this waffle in some other thread?

FFS, I work in financial compliance I have designed processes for one of the biggest crypto exchanges around who are now a client - I asked an honest question.

I guess this is the Kool aid thread. I made a few quid out of Matic while following it, but Jesus the insecurity here is palpable.

JohnnyFlash

JJJJNR wrote: »

Do your own research if your in that area. DBs will soon be known as legacy within the next 5 to 10 years.

lol

Tango One

https://www.investinblockchain.com/new-evidence-suggests-satoshi-nakamoto-is-paul-solotshi-the-creator-of-encryption-software-e4m-and-truecrypt/

Interesting article sounds like a good plot for a movie.

grindle

Dades wrote: »

That's just buzzwords. Why use blockchain in this scenario instead of a traditional DB when compliance regulatory bodies continue to embrace DBs as an accepted method of storing and maintaining data?

We'd all need to know what processes they're trying to automate away but quotes from the involved imply that costs will be cut - at first it likely won't be from storing the data on the blockchain unless somebody wants to price computation and storage lower than AWS does, but more the maintenance side of things. If you're clued in on who or what accesses or processes the data in that kind of situation maybe you can give an insight into what they're trying to do?

We're bound to be more clueless than you in this regard if you're working in compliance - what aspects of the job which are mind-numbingly tedious and potentially have to have more than one person look over and sign off on it would be better off automated based on sets of conditions in a contract?
If there's a repititious task or a set of them that can made cheaper by programming conditions into a contract (or a set of them) that traditionally a human or a few humans would have to oversee, that's where they'll save money.

It's less about databases dying or a need to swap databases for a blockchain, more a business-want to automate people (---> slowness, tardiness, laziness, fault or fraud) out of the equation.

We'd like to know just as much as you about what exactly they're doing, where exactly they aim to save money, but they're saying that they will. It's not our fault we don't know what they're aiming to automate, you've got more insight there.
Think of the most tedious tasks that a set of smart contract templates could automate, think about the €20-€60 an hour it traditionally costs each person involved to maintain those tasks (poring over documents looking for holes or mistakes, researching for themselves if they have a hole in their own knowledge or if they're slightly unsure of anything, making sure that whatever condition or sets of conditions are met which could be a yay or nay for whatever decision it is) and consider whether or not they could be programmed, results batched then verified for an easier eventual audit from a blockchain. That's what Deloitte and EY are pushing.
The reason companies like that are so bullish on it is because they can see it will redefine how much of their own work is done. As accountants the writing was on the wall for their businesses before all others so they saw the benefit in taking advantage first. They'll either get to downsize staff with greater profits or reappropriate funds towards better service/s - which seems very unlikely, but maybe. Sometimes companies don't act like leeching scum. Chances are slim.

JJJJNR

Dades wrote: »

Well that's just rude. I asked why a certain type of enterprise solution is better addressed with blockchain, and you mention "smart contracts and decentralisation". I understand these are the lynchpins of blockchain but mentioning them doesn't explain what benefit a blockchain is to something that has never needed smart contracts or decentralisation.

Do my own research but don't ask anyone here or be accused of being a troll? Right.

Nevermind.

You never made a specific reference to enterprise on your post. So in general smart contracts and decentralisation are two reasons to use blockchain. As said database data in the past has been manipulated, a blockchain is a database essentially, but without data structures information in stored in blocks with cryptographic encryption so essentially cannot be manipulated or changed to suit the instructions from above.

JJJJNR

Dades wrote: »

FFS, I work in financial compliance I have designed processes for one of the biggest crypto exchanges around who are now a client - I asked an honest question.

I guess this is the Kool aid thread. I made a few quid out of Matic while following it, but Jesus the insecurity here is palpable.

I'm a solutions architect and can talk this all day no kool aid required.

JJJJNR

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

lol

You still using punch card's Johnny

grindle

JJJJNR wrote: »

You still using punch card's Johnny

He's still using the Johnny instead of seashells. Shame really, seashells would let him savour the scent of his own shít for longer and he could verifiy the contents of his shít.

JohnnyFlash

JJJJNR wrote: »

You still using punch card's Johnny

You’re the ‘solutions architect’ who thinks databases will be legacy technology in 5 years time. Someone better tell Oracle, Microsoft, Amazon, as well as the hundreds of academics still carrying out computer science research into database theory.

One can only hope that the extent of your ‘architecture’ goes about as far as resetting a password when someone calls you. Or maybe changing the toner in a network printer.

JJJJNR

Hate to break it to you but 75% of new academy repos are based in blockchain big J.. spend some time reading up.

Back in the helpdesk days I wrote some PowerShell scripts that enabled users to reset their own passwords..

Your obviously a bit of legend in your own lunchtime.

q85dw7osi4lebg

Can we stop measuring our Mickey's and get back to business pls.

We are currently green on almost all major BTC time frame charts.

q85dw7osi4lebg

I really don't know why anyone would want to spend their weekend telling strangers on the internet that a new technology is muck. It's a nice day, go to the beach or something.

Grumpypants

Addison Fancy Macrame wrote: »

I really don't know why anyone would want to spend their weekend telling strangers on the internet that a new technology is muck. It's a nice day, go to the beach or something.

It's pissing here

Blueshoe

Not great news here.

https://amp-ft-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.ft.com/content/fe5b17e1-4040-3249-b473-f3c998c67de9?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQA#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcontent%2Ffe5b17e1-4040-3249-b473-f3c998c67de9

worded

Blueshoe wrote: »

Not great news here.

https://amp-ft-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.ft.com/content/fe5b17e1-4040-3249-b473-f3c998c67de9?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQA#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcontent%2Ffe5b17e1-4040-3249-b473-f3c998c67de9

That’s behind a pay wall

Paste the article ?

Blueshoe

worded wrote: »

That’s behind a pay wall

Paste the article ?

Just clicked it now again. You are correct about the paywall. I could read it earlier though. Damn

grindle

worded wrote: »

That’s behind a pay wall

Paste the article ?

Here
And references this one too
Here

Blueshoe wrote: »

Not great news here.

https://amp-ft-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.ft.com/content/fe5b17e1-4040-3249-b473-f3c998c67de9?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQA#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcontent%2Ffe5b17e1-4040-3249-b473-f3c998c67de9

Is it "news"? Have you read it? She uses herself as a source multiple times in the same article.

grindle wrote:

I think ice-cream is overrated

Oh well, I guess ice-cream is overrated cos I said so.
E&Y have already said that they've managed to make their ZKSnarks implementation 90-95% cheaper within a year of development and hope for a further 90-95% drop from current cost by EOY, her "study" and the reveal that Bundesbank experienced inefficiency from 2016-2018 while scalability is still an issue - before everything is built out - doesn't make any difference.

If Bundesbank wanted to know if a network capable of only 5-15tx/s would be efficient for large volumes of productivity in the 2016-2018 timeframe I could have told them without them spending any budget. Sad times when I'd be a good consultant on scalability, they should have asked literally any single ETH dev or ConsenSys if it would be manageable.
This quote (the first where she quotes herself):

For one, we’re not convinced blockchain can ever be successfully delinked from a coupon or token pay-off component without compromising the security of the system.

Is actually a positive for public blockchains. A negative against private blockchains. It's saying:

For one, we’re not convinced blockchain can ever be successfully delinked from [with] a coupon or token pay-off component without compromising [to provide] the security of the system.

Gosh, journalism is easy. She's a professional? An editor at FT? Christ.

Blueshoe

grindle wrote: »

Here
And references this one too
Here

Is it "news"? Have you read it? She uses herself as a source multiple times in the same article.

Oh well, I guess ice-cream is overrated cos I said so.
E&Y have already said that they've managed to make their ZKSnarks implementation 90-95% cheaper within a year of development and hope for a further 90-95% drop from current cost by EOY, her "study" and the reveal that Bundesbank experienced inefficiency from 2016-2018 while scalability is still an issue - before everything is built out - doesn't make any difference.

If Bundesbank wanted to know if a network capable of only 5-15tx/s would be efficient for large volumes of productivity in the 2016-2018 timeframe I could have told them without them spending any budget. Sad times when I'd be a good consultant on scalability, they should have asked literally any single ETH dev or ConsenSys if it would be manageable.
This quote (the first where she quotes herself):

Is actually a positive for public blockchains. A negative against private blockchains. It's saying:

Gosh, journalism is easy. She's a professional? An editor at FT? Christ.

Disregard everything and everyone else. Personally attack them.

(Echo chamber forming)

grindle

Blueshoe wrote: »

Disregard everything and everyone else. Personally attack them.

(Echo chamber forming)

Where did I attack you? Her points are based on a company utilising the network in early days but pretending like it'll always be that way.
If she's unaware that software gets updated and improved upon, I feel sorry for her.

Blueshoe

grindle wrote: »

Where did I attack you? Her points are based on a company utilising the network in early days but pretending like it'll always be that way.
If she's unaware that software gets updated and improved upon, I feel sorry for her.

Maybe it will improve but she was speaking about here and now.
You didn't personally attack me.

grindle

Blueshoe wrote: »

Maybe it will improve but she was speaking about here and now.

Here and now but presented as a peek into the future. Disingenuous maybe?
She's literally in her own echo chamber, presenting her own previous posts and pontifications as relevant news.
But I get accused of forming an echo chamber.
K.

Blueshoe

grindle wrote: »

Here and now but presented as a peek into the future. Disingenuous maybe?
She's literally in her own echo chamber, presenting her own previous posts and pontifications as relevant news.
But I get accused of forming an echo chamber.
K.

Right ok. No point in going down the usual rabbit hole of arguing and taking sides which just derails the thread. The article is posted and you disagree. I have no real opinion on it so that's all

makeorbrake

Blueshoe wrote: »

Disregard everything and everyone else. Personally attack them.

(Echo chamber forming)

I don't see the personal attack and echo chamber scenario in this instance.

Everything has to be taken in context. Someone from a central bank saying blockchain tech is rubbish? - well, turkeys don't vote for Christmas. Run a google search on comments made by various central bank officials internationally in relation to cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. Do the same for Agustin Carstens - head of the central bank of central banks - the Bank for International Settlements (BIS).

This technology is not in their interests.

stockshares

Lads this arguing is tiresome. It's becoming like the Maria Bailey thread here

Blueshoe

makeorbrake wrote: »

I don't see the personal attack and echo chamber scenario in this instance.

Everything has to be taken in context. Someone from a central bank saying blockchain tech is rubbish? - well, turkeys don't vote for Christmas. Run a google search on comments made by various central bank officials internationally in relation to cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. Do the same for Agustin Carstens - head of the central bank of central banks - the Bank for International Settlements (BIS).

This technology is not in their interests.

If it turns out to be a faster,more secure and cheaper system the technology is definitely in their interest!
That's why they were testing it.

Banking is one of the biggest supposed use cases for Blockchain.

If you don't agree that's perfectly fine but don't just knowingly lie

makeorbrake

Blueshoe wrote: »

If it turns out to be a faster,more secure and cheaper system the technology is definitely in their interest!
That's why they were testing it.

Banking is one of the biggest supposed use cases for Blockchain.

If you don't agree that's perfectly fine but don't just knowingly lie

You have a set of balls on you - calling me a liar!


If a technology could put you out of business or take control away from you (central banks are ALL about control), then the technology on a macro level is NOT in their interests.

Blueshoe

makeorbrake wrote: »

You have a set of balls on you - calling me a liar!


If a technology could put you out of business or take control away from you (central banks are ALL about control), then the technology on a macro level is NOT in their interests.

Private Blockchain.

They don't have to use any of the ****e bag coins and can create their own. But they have said that Blockchain was slow and expensive.
No use to them.

I shouldn't have called you a liar. You have your beliefs while I'm on the fence so far. We both own crypto though so are on the same side.

makeorbrake

Blueshoe wrote: »

They don't have to use any of the ****e bag coins and can create their own. But they have said that Blockchain was slow and expensive.
No use to them.

The narrative that has been emanating from those quarters has been consistent in sullying both cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. So if you want to believe their utterances, then go right ahead. To me, they're far from credible. They have a vested interest in dismissing the technology. It could make them obsolete - or (in the case where a currency exists outside of their control) very much dilute their powers.

As regards 'private blockchain', that's also known as a database. There may be certain specific scenario's where that middle of the road option still suits but in general terms, the notion defeats the whole purpose of decentralised blockchain technology.

It's no revelation to confirm that blockchain doesn't perform as efficiently as a database. However, it brings other advantages to the table. If - for a particular application - those advantages can't be capitalised (for whatever specific use case), then continue on using centralised databases.

Blueshoe wrote: »

I shouldn't have called you a liar. You have your beliefs while I'm on the fence so far. We both own crypto though so are on the same side.

Glad to see you roll back on that (as I didn't lie). Quite happy to be found wrong and I disagree as regards 'arguing' - I'm all in favour of it as it's otherwise known as discussion. Just not with the snide condescension or nastiness as we've seen from the two resident clowns here - and not from someone who simply won't recognise/acknowledge a single quality in the technology.

stockshares

Lads this argument isn't exciting

makeorbrake

stockshares wrote: »

Lads this argument isn't exciting

If you're referring to me, I don't care if you're not excited. Despite an objection I had with one particular remark Blueshoes made, what you call an 'argument' I call a discussion. If you're not happy and I've broken the rules of engagement, please click on report and bring post (or posts) to the attention of the Mod.

stockshares

makeorbrake wrote: »

If you're referring to me, I don't care if you're not excited. Despite an objection I had with one particular remark Blueshoes made, what you call an 'argument' I call a discussion. If you're not happy and I've broken the rules of engagement, please click on report and bring post (or posts) to the attention of the Mod.

I've no interest in reporting anyone but both of you could argue this in Private. The Discussion is taking the thread off topic

makeorbrake

stockshares wrote: »

I've no interest in reporting anyone but both of you could argue this in Private. The Discussion is taking the thread off topic

These threads tend to be wide ranging (between this one and the last one that covered crypto winter) ...so if I'm 'off topic' then everyone is. You can ask the mod to split this discussion off into a separate thread if you feel that's appropriate.

Dohnjoe

makeorbrake wrote: »

I don't see the personal attack and echo chamber scenario in this instance.

Everything has to be taken in context. Someone from a central bank saying blockchain tech is rubbish? - well, turkeys don't vote for Christmas. Run a google search on comments made by various central bank officials internationally in relation to cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. Do the same for Agustin Carstens - head of the central bank of central banks - the Bank for International Settlements (BIS).

This technology is not in their interests.

It's not about threats or "interests" or any of that, it's simply about their opinions on it. Some in finance think it's the future, other's think it is rubbish

makeorbrake

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It's not about threats or "interests" or any of that, it's simply about their opinions on it. Some in finance think it's the future, other's think it is rubbish

If you're saying that peoples views don't have the potential to be coloured by self interest, then I disagree.

Dohnjoe

makeorbrake wrote: »

If you're saying that peoples views don't have the potential to be coloured by self interest, then I disagree.

Yeah but there's this ridiculous quasi-tinfoil thing that somehow "the banks" see crypto as an existential threat to themselves and are always at pains to hinder/slander it, which is complete nonsense of course

Different financial people see the tech/crypto in different light, Buffet thinks BTC is "rat poison squared", Lagarde praised it and Dimon flipped on it

It's just personal opinions