Is anyone else starting to become a bit worried? mod note in first post

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Quite possibly. Short it if you are confident.

So much money being left on the table by podge n' rodge.

q85dw7osi4lebg

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

Lads. Take the gains you can while the market is artificially inflated. There'll be another correction soon enough I'd say.

Damnit Paddy wish you told us yesterday before the massive drop. :mad:

Gerald Obedient Manicurist wrote: »

Damnit Paddy wish you told us yesterday before the massive drop. :mad:

In fairness them lads tell ye every day regardless of where it's headed. Apparently, there's never a positive development in the space..

JJJJNR

Buy the fu*king dips.

Blueshoe

JJJJNR wrote: »

Buy the fu*king dips.

Invest in bio pharma. That's where humanity itself will be changed.

Crispr therapeutics in particular

grindle

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Wow, this crypto thing has really sucked away all your sense of humour, hasn't it?

Where's the humour?

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Bitcoin was going to be the disruptor, right? "Be Your Own Bank"? Yet you are quoting a fluff piece by the Chief Propagandists of the Evil Banksters to make a point? Jayzis, bitcoin, what has happened to you? :)

Oh right, you smiled at something you said which wasn't funny. Heh. Good one.

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Nothing you have said there makes any sense to anyone who hasnt been sucked into the hopium fueled world of Crypto. Data entry as smart contract? Are you on crack?? Automated????? WHAAAAAAT? Why on earth do I need a smart contract to capture data? Anyway, "data validation", using the canonical meaning of the term, is a task that can be handled procedurally: capturing user data and validating is not something that needs global consesus, outside of a very few rare edge cases. The fact that so many mundane tasks that will never, in a million years, require smart contracts or global consesus to achieve, validate or verify are TOP of that list shows the #1 problem with blockchain: nobody really knows what the hell its about.

aka

26000 Elephants wrote: »

I haven't read up on any of this so it doesn't exist and isn't needed, waahwaahwaah??????W????HHHHAA?????T????

Dear christ, just read up instead of fighting against a concept you're arguing against but in the dark about.
You don't think automation exists? Tell that to the auto industry and call-centre marketers. Smart contracts can interact with eachother. Routine tasks can be programmed to regulatory spec across one or many contracts. Companies are always looking at repetitive tasks that humans are crap at to see if they can whittle the process cost down, and they're obsessed with traceability.
You don't "need" a smart contract to capture data, you use a smart contract or a slew of them if it's more efficient/cheaper than human equivalents.
Stop whinging “But WHYYYYY does it NEEEEEEED it THO?????????!?!?!?!??”
If it simplifies a business process, is cheaper than hiring some flesh imbecile to fumble through the work and it innately increases trust, it will be used.

26000 Elephants wrote: »

That pamphlet you cited (which mentions Bitcoin more often than it mentions Ethereum, so i have know idea why you are bitching about "why u bring up Bitcoin?")

It mentions Bitcoin as it was the birth of a workable consensus mechanism across a massively distributed network focused on value transfer. It mentions blockchain and smart contracts a lot more than it mentions Bitcoin because they’re interested in how their business processes can be refined. Ethereum is by far the leader in that space and if a company wants to work with a mature open protocol with the most dev tools and the most devs, for now it’s going to be Ethereum.

26000 Elephants wrote: »

...in most cases, once you get into requirement gathering and more detailed functional design most of these schemes fall down. The original basis for saying "X, but with Blockchain!" falls apart, when you realise that there was never a need for blockchain in the first place. I have yet to come accross a design involving a blockchain-like component where we didnt design it out after a few weeks.

Oh good, the “You can’t expect EVERYTHING on a blockchain” argument, as if somebody had said everything should be.
Not everything needs a blockchain, well done. Some things will be better handled using blockchain.
Ernst & Young and these guys must be barking up the wrong tree because you’ve done your research say so.

26000 Elephants wrote: »

i havent been that interested in Ethereum to be honest, as i said earlier. Adfter the DAO (LOL!) and the split (ROFL) and Silbert trolling you with Eth Classis for years, it was hard to take seriously. The rollback (CODE IS LAW!) and the moves to PoS, sharding and other stuff - meh. As much a Bitcoin is a madhouse run by lunatics intent on self-immolation, you have to admire the fact that its something you could (at one time anyway) buy stuff with.

So, the DAO (a bug in a contract) and a state change which neutralised the DAO attack and siphoned funds back to the rightful owners (not a rollback, unlike the actual rollback Bitcoin had. CODE IS LAW! - erm, when it suits them) are reason enough to ignore the project. But you're "in" Bitcoin since 2014... Hypocritical and myopic, but okay. You’re as bad as Shillbert tbh, you can’t be bothered reading about what you’re arguing about.

26000 Elephants wrote: »

No. The article mentioned nothing about "testing". If you are going to pick and choose what you want to believe in that advertising flyer then we are wasting our time. Those guys were asked a question, and the majority said they were deploying private and permissioned blockchains. No need for tokens, coins, exchanges, etc.

45% said they were working on public chains. Need for tokens, coins, exchanges, etc.
A wise man once said “If you are going to pick and choose what you want to believe in that advertising flyer then we are wasting our time.”

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Also, testnets tend to reflect the ultimate Mainnets, so you dont test a public blockchain with a private version, do you?

No. A database is as secure and immutable as you need it to be.

They’re testing (and using in production within the confines of their own businesses) for their own purposes and on private chains so that they can make the mistakes they’re going to make and it won’t be publicly broadcasted. If they have a view to moving onto mainnet they can swap to testnet if they want some outside auditors to attack the contract for a bounty, that’s sensible.

Companies, organisations and governments the world over can see the benefit of a blockchain over a database. But you’re correct, of course... I suppose you think ID2020 isn’t happening as well.
Let me guess - “But WHHYYYYyyyyYYY do they NEEEeeDDD IiiiitTTT THOOO?????”

26000 Elephants wrote: »

There are very few business use cases where the overriding requirement is "If the majority in the deal want to randomly reverse or change a record for no reason, then they can" I seriously cannot think of any. Its one of the main reasons why, after 10 years of knocking around, the only large scale use cases are as a currency ledger (bitcoin) and some script-enabled state machine (Ethereum), where in both cases the overwhelming utility is "waiting until we are rich"

It’s ten years in and we’re only just on the cusp of scaling properly, security and building out dev tools comes first for obvious reasons. The aim isn’t to WANT to 51% attack the network, it’s a fraud prevention technology. It's security against a fraud because the person who may think of committing it will know that everybody on the network will know of it. Fair point on Bitcoin being “wait until we are rich”, it’s a pointless & redundant speculative nest egg for now at least.

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Fizzy is a good example, Lurent did well with it. But in reality, he does nothing more than my code does 150,000 times a day: takes bets, pays out on a win. Satoshi dice was doing this years ago. I heard Laurent speak once where he addmitted that the regulatory hurdles with offering insurance in this way meant that Fizzy had to be broken into 3 parts: Business works out your odds (risk), finance creates an invoice (price) and finally the web api creates the event. But the key thing is that the payment is not directly triggered by the contract. Its handled the exact same way as before (but quicker). So not quite the trustless, "code is law" thing you might think it is. Still interesting, though. But seems strangelly redundant: I can see a world in the near future where insurance companies will be allowed to operate purely in this manner, without regulation. So, its pretty moot.

The contract may currently rely on a “push” from AXA for the flight delay time but it will eventually use a multi-source oracle which confirms whether to pay or not. How can it be redundant if it’s automating away actions which humans previously had a part in? Your mindset is a bit like the criminals JF and PPL, you expect everything now instead of in time. So why are you "in Bitcoin since 2014"?

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Intel fixed the bug.

So bugs are allowed to be fixed and it’s not the end of the world? Madness. Well, there are more exploits to be found, right now. It doesn’t mean Intel’s tech is worthless. Just the same as a contract bug doesn’t mean Ethereum is worthless.

JJJJNR

https://www.theblockcrypto.com/tiny/coinbase-exec-says-the-firm-is-thinking-of-supporting-margin-trading/

Bad idea imo.

maninasia

Yes I'm worried i didn't invest enough in the near market.

But my bags are packed. ðŸ˜Ž

q85dw7osi4lebg

BTC right back where it was before the brief pump them drop. Lot of buyers out there.

nuac

GOLD?
I note that gold has increased in price each day over last eight days- Now at $1,333 an ounce.
Such movements usually are harbingers of currency or economic turmoil.
Has Trump's silken diplomacy spooked some people to seek a refuge in gold?
Thoughts?

Blueshoe

nuac wrote: »

GOLD?
I note that gold has increased in price each day over last eight days- Now at $1,333 an ounce.
Such movements usually are harbingers of currency or economic turmoil.
Has Trump's silken diplomacy spooked some people to seek a refuge in gold?
Thoughts?

I don't think so. Trump is going to pump a ton of money into the us economy running up to the next election. It's when he leaves that the sh1t may hit the fan

nuac wrote: »

GOLD?
I note that gold has increased in price each day over last eight days- Now at $1,333 an ounce.
Such movements usually are harbingers of currency or economic turmoil.
Has Trump's silken diplomacy spooked some people to seek a refuge in gold?
Thoughts?

I'm sure there are plenty of followers of the traditional markets that can chime in here. I'm not one of them but that said, the ongoing trade war has been having its affects on the markets. US vs. China, giving Huawei a hard time (as part of that but also because U.S. tech is way behind the curve on 5G ...trying to buy them some time), U.S. vs. Mexico last week (although that seems to have been put to bed for now...and i think the markets recovered a bit on the back of that).

Max Keiser and Charlie Shrem reckon Facebook's GlobalCoin will kill Xrp and all Alt Coins and drive up Bitcoin.

https://ethereumworldnews.com/keiser-facebooks-crypto-kill-xrp-boost-bitcoin-btc/

stockshares wrote: »

Max Keiser and Charlie Shrem reckon Facebook's GlobalCoin will kill Xrp and all Alt Coins and drive up Bitcoin.

https://ethereumworldnews.com/keiser-facebooks-crypto-kill-xrp-boost-bitcoin-btc/

That guy Keiser is a sensationalist idiot who frequents Russia state TV

FB coin will most likely be a stable-coin that people can't speculate on, ironically it could attract a lot of people to crypto for quick profits

Dohnjoe wrote: »

That guy Keiser is a sensationalist idiot who frequents Russia state TV

He's far from conservative in his views but an idiot?...no more or less than the rest of them. You just can't pay heed to ANY predictions (whether it's Max Kaiser or any of the rest of them - on either end of the spectrum). As for Russian TV, meh, there's no such thing as unbiased media.

This is an interesting take on FB coin.

makeorbrake wrote: »

He's far from conservative in his views but an idiot?...no more or less than the rest of them. You just can't pay heed to ANY predictions (whether it's Max Kaiser or any of the rest of them - on either end of the spectrum). As for Russian TV, meh, there's no such thing as unbiased media.

He sells pseudo-economics and doomsday financial stuff to a niche, but lucrative market. The next big crash is always just around the next corner, so buy gold, buy bitcoin (preferably through the ads on his site)

He predicted that in 2018 a major central bank would start buying Bitcoin to hedge against the dollar crashing, as someone who works with central banks, it's painful stuff to read

Here he is predicting a "global fiat crash" in 2012 on Alex Jones, he's also a 911 truther
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CxDvjkz7ds

Dohnjoe wrote: »

He sells pseudo-economics and doomsday financial stuff to a niche, but lucrative market. The next big crash is always just around the next corner, so buy gold, buy bitcoin (preferably through the ads on his site)

He predicted that in 2018 a major central bank would start buying Bitcoin to hedge against the dollar crashing, as someone who works with central banks, it's painful stuff to read

Here he is predicting a "global fiat crash" in 2012 on Alex Jones, he's also a 911 truther
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CxDvjkz7ds

Did you say Alex Jones? God damn...maybe he's much worse than I first thought!...lol. Disregard my comment above.

el diablo

makeorbrake wrote: »

Did you say Alex Jones? God damn...maybe he's much worse than I first thought!...lol. Disregard my comment above.

I'm no Alex Jones fanboy but he is certainly a more trustworthy news source (as are RT) than CNN, MSNBC, BBC etc. Just ignore the crazy rants.

el diablo wrote: »

I'm no Alex Jones fanboy but he is certainly a more trustworthy news source (as are RT) than CNN, MSNBC, BBC etc. Just ignore the crazy rants.

I'm on board completely in terms of recognising that there is no such thing as an unbiased media source - it's an oxymoron. However, Mr. Jones is definitely in the 'special' category....more of the fruit n' nut variety.

el diablo wrote: »

I'm no Alex Jones fanboy but he is certainly a more trustworthy news source (as are RT) than CNN, MSNBC, BBC etc. Just ignore the crazy rants.

If you aren't actually joking..

Alex Jones is a lunatic conspiracy theorist (or smart guy), who makes serious bank by peddling conspiracy theories and falsehoods to similar online types

That has nothing to do with proper news agencies, like e.g. the BBC, which has a track record in reporting on global events for the best part of a century, and is subject to watchdogs, ombudsmen, impartiality rules and oversight

realitykeeper

Cryptocurrencies are more likely to endure if they are backed by something eg a commodity or if they have a monopoly in trading something eg a crypto equivalent of the petro dollar. That is not to say the dollar will endure, nothing lasts forever and the US dollar had a good run. I would not invest in bitcoin because it is backed by nothing. Trust is also needed, this is why I would avoid Venezuela`s oil backed crypto currency.

realitykeeper wrote: »

Cryptocurrencies are more likely to endure if they are backed by something eg a commodity or if they have a monopoly in trading something eg a crypto equivalent of the petro dollar. That is not to say the dollar will endure, nothing lasts forever and the US dollar had a good run. I would not invest in bitcoin because it is backed by nothing. Trust is also needed, this is why I would avoid Venezuela`s oil backed crypto currency.

I guess the dollar is backed by military force - and that's really all that backs up any FIAT currency. Oh, forgot to mention - the USD is backed by a very busy printing press - which takes money out of your pocket with every note it prints. The same with the euro, yen, etc. FIAT is also open to mismanagement by central bankers. By comparison, Bitcoin is finite.

Gold is the very same as Bitcoin - it's backed by belief - although its a belief built up over a gazillion years comparatively. However, it has value until such time as it doesn't.

That said, an 'investment' in Bitcoin is speculative more than anything else. So you'd be quite right to be cautious. In terms of cryptocurrency being 'backed' by something, well there's a selection of those but they're largely stablecoins. There will be no speculative interest there as by their very nature, they just track FIAT currency.

el diablo

Dohnjoe wrote: »

If you aren't actually joking..

Alex Jones is a lunatic conspiracy theorist (or smart guy), who makes serious bank by peddling conspiracy theories and falsehoods to similar online types

That has nothing to do with proper news agencies, like e.g. the BBC, which has a track record in reporting on global events for the best part of a century, and is subject to watchdogs, ombudsmen, impartiality rules and oversight

Is this dude actually for real?

el diablo wrote: »

Is this dude actually for real?

Yup

You just compared a guy who believes in aliens, with a news agency

Unless you are being sarcastic..

q85dw7osi4lebg

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Yup

You just compared a guy who believes in aliens, with a news agency

Unless you are being sarcastic..

Where's your proof that aliens don't exist ?

Gerald Obedient Manicurist wrote: »

Where's your proof that aliens don't exist ?

I don't need to, it's not my claim

There's no reasonable basis for anyone with half a brain to get their information from an individual like Jones

Dohnjoe wrote: »

He sells pseudo-economics and doomsday financial stuff to a niche, but lucrative market. The next big crash is always just around the next corner, so buy gold, buy bitcoin (preferably through the ads on his site)

He predicted that in 2018 a major central bank would start buying Bitcoin to hedge against the dollar crashing, as someone who works with central banks, it's painful stuff to read

Here he is predicting a "global fiat crash" in 2012 on Alex Jones, he's also a 911 truther
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CxDvjkz7ds

I wasnt aware hes pally with Jones which is a bad sign

I had thought he was a somewhat entertaining eccentric who rants a bit too much but his show on RT does have some good Interviews with people involved in up and coming Crypto Projects which is why I tune in from time to time.

US Users prohibited from using Binance from Septby Binance. Some are saying BinsnceAmerics is going to launch but I'm not sure.

Should people sell their BNB?

Edit:

https://www.coindesk.com/binance-exchange-to-block-crypto-trading-for-u-s-customers?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=coindesk&utm_term&utm_content&utm_campaign=Organic%20&amp&__twitter_impression=true

grindle

stockshares wrote: »

US Users prohibited from using Binance from Septby Binance. Some are saying BinsnceAmerics is going to launch but I'm not sure.

Should people sell their BNB?

VPN subscription?

There are no repercussions for US users for owning it, the pressure (if any) would be put towards Binance as a KYC thing. Use a VPN if you care about putting your money where you want it to be.