nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Is anyone else starting to become a bit excited?

q85dw7osi4lebg

As per title, have we reached the bottom ?

Don't think we'll see the likes of $3200 ever again.

$5150 at time of posting.

Back in the mainstream media once more.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Dohnjoe

Don't want to jinx it, but pretty amazing, the market still holding onto these gains, top 6 coins are all up 30% to 50% on one month ago

26000 Elephants

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Most banks, FMI and stock exchanges are diving at developing the tech because they see it as having immense potential in certain critical aspects of their systems

Much of the industry is still functioning on archaic linear processes that can't fundamentally change or speed up because they are interwoven with and limited by countless linear processes of the involved participants and players. It's like a digital version of the late 60's stocks papercrunch. Years/decades of programmers and data management teams slaving away for incremental gains in efficiency - and certain processes are still slow as hell. Yet they do a test-run (or live-run) on blockchain and distributed ledger tech and the whole thing runs smooth as butter, and has the potential to be much faster and do a lot more (with the same effort) Of course there's interest and a frenzy of development/projects/partnerships. On top of that no one want's a Kodak moment or to be blind-sided by competition that can do the same but with a fifth of the work-force

Fair points, but most of those linear processes are designed that way because they must comply with regulatory, accountancy or liquidity rules. I think most blockchain promoters have far too naive a view of how money moves to see how a "permissionless, immutable consensus" model is not a good fit for these business processes. Just look at how much the R3 Corda platform changed in a short space of time. It works for Bitcoin because thats an entirely novel use case - peer to peer cash. But even that has its limitations: speed and capacity and lately, governance.

We will probably see a lot of the ideas developed in Bitcoin and Ethereum forming the backbone of information systems of the future - they just wont be dependent on coins or tokens, and they will almost certainly have some level of permission baked in.

Blueshoe

JJJJNR wrote: »

Here's a link you might find interesting, also google IBM blockchain.

https://www.coinbase.com/earn/stellar/invite/xvtmz9br

Looks scammy

JJJJNR

Blueshoe wrote: »

IBMs Blockchain requires none of this token nonsense. That's the future.
The market is just an online stock exchange on steroids. An unregulated wild west. .
No future

Here's a link you might find interesting, also google IBM blockchain.

https://www.coinbase.com/earn/stellar/invite/xvtmz9br

Dohnjoe

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. Even CEO's of business. 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?") is a typical example of the kind of vague, fuzzy ideas about blockchain being put out there. Nothing concrete, nothing of substance, becuase 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.

Most banks, FMI and stock exchanges are diving at developing the tech because they see it as having immense potential in certain critical aspects of their systems

Much of the industry is still functioning on archaic linear processes that can't fundamentally change or speed up because they are interwoven with and limited by countless linear processes of the involved participants and players. It's like a digital version of the late 60's stocks papercrunch. Years/decades of programmers and data management teams slaving away for incremental gains in efficiency - and certain processes are still slow as hell. Yet they do a test-run (or live-run) on blockchain and distributed ledger tech and the whole thing runs smooth as butter, and has the potential to be much faster and do a lot more (with the same effort) Of course there's interest and a frenzy of development/projects/partnerships. On top of that no one want's a Kodak moment or to be blind-sided by competition that can do the same but with a fifth of the work-force

q85dw7osi4lebg

Borrowed this.

The last time Bitcoin broke $8,000:

Microsoft wasn't building on it.

Congress wasn't fighting it.

Bakkt wasn't launching with it.

Square wasn't selling it.

Fidelity wasn't storing it.

TD Ameritrade wasn't trading it.

Whole Foods wasn't accepting it.

Blueshoe

IBMs Blockchain requires none of this token nonsense. That's the future.
The market is just an online stock exchange on steroids. An unregulated wild west. .
No future

q85dw7osi4lebg

Snooze

26000 Elephants

grindle wrote: »

so arguing against me as if I am one is brainless.

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

Uhm... Ethereum is a Virtual Machine. Data entry actions can be programmed into a contract which results in the automation of previously human tasks. Try to get a copy of Mastering Ethereum or read it on Andreas' github, the first third of the book will give a good overview of everything.

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. Even CEO's of business. 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?") is a typical example of the kind of vague, fuzzy ideas about blockchain being put out there. Nothing concrete, nothing of substance, becuase 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.

Case in point: A medical records project where a blockchain was going to be used to enforce a 2-of-3 signature where a patient, doctor and health care provider shared access keys to the patients records. On the surface it seemed a fabulous solution: decentralised, trustless verification of each participants key to access the records - no one party could steal data or deny access to another. However, early in the design process it became apparent that off the shelf security protocols could offer the exact same protection, without having to use any public (or private) blockchains. The inescapable fact was that participants in the relationship WANTED to trust one another - and would not work without it. Its hard to describe it unless you have been there, but once you see the shortcomings, you will never 'unsee' them.

False! This really shows you haven't bothered reading up on Ethereum or anything else that's happened in the last 5 years. This is BTC's only enterprise use, as a notary or timestamp for programmable sidechains.

maybe. 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.

Of course they're going to test with private and consortium chains first.

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.

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

A blockchain is a kind of database but a database can be easily edited without mass consensus.

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

A blockchain being edited will require a majority of participants to approve, it's an improvement for catching potential fraud. When companies want to interact with other companies it would make more sense to be a part of the same network which is fraudproof vs trusting some private database or a private chain or a consortium chain which may have aggressive competitors attached who could refuse to sign your transactions.

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"

I don't know why you keep talking about Bitcoin. I'm not a fan of their current "roadmap".
If a company/organisation sees a need to use an public blockchain and it's used enough, that token/coin will be in demand. Routine data entry positions will become cheaper and faster - certain ones already have, else AXA wouldn't be be using fizzy live on mainnet. Look at that, previously human tasks being automated by a large company and they've decided to buy ETH to fuel it. And it's working. Live. Functioning. Serving customers with flight insurance and automatically paying out should the flight be cancelled, serving AXA with less human inefficiency and errors.

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.

Oh right, so bugs make ideas worthless. Using an Intel cpu at any point since 2011? Turns out it's totally worthless because it has attack vectors.
Sheesh, Intel. Anything but smart. Try to be more like 26k here, he knows the things.

Intel fixed the bug.

makeorbrake

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I have a very, very, very serious thinly spread alt buying problem, I have a lot of them

Altcoin anonymous? If yer going to 'talk to joe' - let me know in advance so I can stock up on the popcorn.

Dohnjoe

Whelo79 wrote: »

Bakkt parent company ICE and the 58 cryptos they plan to list and track

https://www.investinblockchain.com/ice-parent-company-bakkt-58-crypto-list/amp/?fbclid=IwAR2up3FxCC0XY3g74nrlvjBTz3tlQHKBeq5zXfmYiuXud0cSJlx4UjmRQv0

I have a very, very, very serious thinly spread alt buying problem, I have a lot of them

Whelo79

Bakkt parent company ICE and the 58 cryptos they plan to list and track

https://www.investinblockchain.com/ice-parent-company-bakkt-58-crypto-list/amp/?fbclid=IwAR2up3FxCC0XY3g74nrlvjBTz3tlQHKBeq5zXfmYiuXud0cSJlx4UjmRQv0

Truckermal

rapul wrote: »

Haven't used it but did you see coinbase added DAi?

Just shows how insignificant Coinbase is now their was no budge in the price.

rapul

Addison Fancy Macrame wrote: »

Nevermind..

Haven't used it but did you see coinbase added DAi?

q85dw7osi4lebg

Addison Fancy Macrame wrote: »

Anyone having issues buying on Coinbase today?

Nevermind..

q85dw7osi4lebg

Anyone having issues buying on Coinbase today?

rapul

Go litecoin absolutely delighted!

rapul

Payday today hmm what do indulge in, the ever constant stockpiling of ethereum or perhaps something different who knows! Enjoy the sun folks it's a lovely day

q85dw7osi4lebg

Ladies and gents, is the excited thread, can we keep the negative / nonsense / bearish posts to the worried thread please.

BTC bouncing off 8k again, not long til we fly through it at this stage and hold, that's 5 or 6 attempts now is it?

Arrival

rapul wrote: »

If you have no idea how ethereum works then don't comment on it or maybe read up and them comment? What's wrong with folks, jumping on the negative band wagon before even understanding what they are talking about.

Stupid *****, simple as that. People who feel it's necessary to have and share an opinion even if they don't know anything about what they're trying to talk about, clearly they don't have the filter which the rest of us do which tells us "you don't know enough about this to discuss it, just admit that and shut up". It's funny how ego and arrogance can make one look embarrassingly ignorant and stupid. I think it's the fact that there's money involved that exacerbates this

grindle

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? :)

That's what it was to idealists, now it's hijacked. Can't scale, won't scale. Not sure why you're bringing BTC up though. I'm not a BTC maximalist so arguing against me as if I am one is brainless.

26000 Elephants wrote: »

All joking aside, there is absolutely nothing concrete in that pamphlet. Vague statements attached to isolated stats. 90% of respondents think blockchain will help with "data validation"??? HOW?

Uhm... Ethereum is a Virtual Machine. Data entry actions can be programmed into a contract which results in the automation of previously human tasks. Try to get a copy of Mastering Ethereum or read it on Andreas' github, the first third of the book will give a good overview of everything.

26000 Elephants wrote: »

And the only use 'blockchain' actually has - Time Stamping - attracts one of the lowest responses. I'd take Deloittes own advice at the end of that piece - Dont base any business decisions on this.

False! This really shows you haven't bothered reading up on Ethereum or anything else that's happened in the last 5 years. This is BTC's only enterprise use, as a notary or timestamp for programmable sidechains.

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Other gems: Majority feel "private" blockchains are the future. Correct me if im wrong, but isnt a "private blockchain" a..... database?

Of course they're going to test with private and consortium chains first. A blockchain is a kind of database but a database can be easily edited without mass consensus. A blockchain being edited will require a majority of participants to approve, it's an improvement for catching potential fraud. When companies want to interact with other companies it would make more sense to be a part of the same network which is fraudproof vs trusting some private database or a private chain or a consortium chain which may have aggressive competitors attached who could refuse to sign your transactions.

26000 Elephants wrote: »

And what has anything in that report got to do with tokens or even bitcoin for that matter? How are you jumping the yawning gap between investing in your tokens and capitalising on all this "mass adoption of blockchain tech"? They seem pretty disjointed.

I don't know why you keep talking about Bitcoin. I'm not a fan of their current "roadmap".
If a company/organisation sees a need to use an public blockchain and it's used enough, that token/coin will be in demand. Routine data entry positions will become cheaper and faster - certain ones already have, else AXA wouldn't be be using fizzy live on mainnet. Look at that, previously human tasks being automated by a large company and they've decided to buy ETH to fuel it. And it's working. Live. Functioning. Serving customers with flight insurance and automatically paying out should the flight be cancelled, serving AXA with less human inefficiency and errors.

26000 Elephants wrote: »

grindle wrote: »

Fine to be wary, but 26kElephants is implying people who do read up on these things are stupid

Thats not correct

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Same goes for ETH: the ICO boom literally became its unique selling point. As long as token schemes can come up with plausible wheezes for the unwary, there will be demand for it. But a real world use case? Come on. Dont be stupid.

Mmhmm.

26000 Elephants wrote: »

I can honestly say, hand on heart, that I have no ideal how Ethereum works, or what its supposed to do beyond some vague, fuzzy notion that it involves burning "gas" and "smart contracts" which have proved to be anything but smart in practice.

Oh right, so bugs make ideas worthless. Using an Intel cpu at any point since 2011? Turns out it's totally worthless because it has attack vectors.
Sheesh, Intel. Anything but smart. Try to be more like 26k here, he knows the things.

manu2009

rapul wrote: »

If you have no idea how ethereum works then don't comment on it or maybe read up and them comment? What's wrong with folks, jumping on the negative band wagon before even understanding what they are talking about.

Exactly, even though their was a bear market last year it was probably one of the best years in terms of ETH development.

Theirs now over $500m worth of ETH locked up in Dapps for lending, dex's, derivatives and payment services platforms, see https://defipulse.com.

Some examples, you can lend or borrow your crypto using Compound.finance, in most cases earning much more interest than traditional banks, you can do margin trading using Nuo.network and you can pool yours funds to earn trading fees on Uniswap all in a decentralised nature.

The DEFI movement is a game changer and only getting stronger.

rapul

If you have no idea how ethereum works then don't comment on it or maybe read up and them comment? What's wrong with folks, jumping on the negative band wagon before even understanding what they are talking about.

26000 Elephants

grindle wrote: »

Fine to be wary, but 26kElephants is implying people who do read up on these things are stupid,

Thats not correct

likely (seemingly anyway) without knowing anything about what Ethereum is or what it aims to do.

Absolutely correct. Im in Bitcoin since 2014, and I can honestly say, hand on heart, that I have no ideal how Ethereum works, or what its supposed to do beyond some vague, fuzzy notion that it involves burning "gas" and "smart contracts" which have proved to be anything but smart in practice.

He seems to believe it's as complex as BinanceChain, just a protocol to launch ICOs, nothing more.

No argument there either, you have summarised it pretty well.

q85dw7osi4lebg

Bouncing nicely between 7500-8100

Buying most of the dips.

26000 Elephants

grindle wrote: »

Why are Deloitte and E&Y so bullish on it then? Why are a majority of senior executives for companies with tens and hundreds of millions in revenue so bullish on the tech?

Why has the E&Y blockchain lead said that private transactions would be cheaper on the Ethereum mainnet vs their traditional process by Christmas?

Why has the CEO of TUI Group said their entire business process would revolve around Ethereum mainnet in the future?

How do you - a man who has no notion what he's on about - know better than captains of industry? What is it that you know that they aren't grasping?

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?

:)

All joking aside, there is absolutely nothing concrete in that pamphlet. Vague statements attached to isolated stats. 90% of respondents think blockchain will help with "data validation"??? HOW? And the only use 'blockchain' actually has - Time Stamping - attracts one of the lowest responses. I'd take Deloittes own advice at the end of that piece - Dont base any business decisions on this.

Other gems: Majority feel "private" blockchains are the future. Correct me if im wrong, but isnt a "private blockchain" a..... database?

And what has anything in that report got to do with tokens or even bitcoin for that matter? How are you jumping the yawning gap between investing in your tokens and capitalising on all this "mass adoption of blockchain tech"? They seem pretty disjointed.

Dohnjoe

Deub wrote: »

To be honest, I am wary of what these captains of industry say. They say what benefit them. Before the 2008 crash, the vast majority (if not all) said everything was fine when they knew otherwise. So I read what they say but don't assume it is the truth.

These people don't take decisions lightly. Experimental new issues (bonds via blockchain settlement) have been done via Ethereum. JPM's banking network development (involving 200 banks) is done on a fork of Ethereum. Australia's largest bank has been developing a trade/shipping/tracking platform with Eth, Soc Gen issued a "security token-like" bond with Eth ($112 mm worth) - there are many financial and industry players using Eth either in development, testing, internal or external partnerships

Just because a wave of crappy crypto start-ups have used it doesn't mean there's anything fundamentally wrong with the platform - that's just a guilt by association fallacy

Blueshoe

grindle wrote: »

Fine to be wary, but 26kElephants is implying people who do read up on these things are stupid, likely (seemingly anyway) without knowing anything about what Ethereum is or what it aims to do. He seems to believe it's as complex as BinanceChain, just a protocol to launch ICOs, nothing more.

Anybody with their eyes open knew 2008 would happen, we just didn't know when. 2006 on seemed like a turnpoint to my mind, things were obscene, everybody was so "Yaw yaw yaw" arrogant and everybody would get to flip their house for a healthy profit (hmm, greater fool...something sounds familiar here).
The timebomb was always going to blow, we were never going to be capable of earning enough to pay the ever-growing mountain back without some horrific collapse. Which wasn't horrific enough btw, being kept afloat by US and EU fiat(-Tether) printing.

Markets are cyclical. Bust always follows boom. Like death it's inevitable

grindle

Deub wrote: »

To be honest, I am wary of what these captains of industry say. They say what benefit them. Before the 2008 crash, the vast majority (if not all) said everything was fine when they knew otherwise. So I read what they say but don't assume it is the truth.

Fine to be wary, but 26kElephants is implying people who do read up on these things are stupid, likely (seemingly anyway) without knowing anything about what Ethereum is or what it aims to do. He seems to believe it's as complex as BinanceChain, just a protocol to launch ICOs, nothing more.

Anybody with their eyes open knew 2008 would happen, we just didn't know when. 2006 on seemed like a turnpoint to my mind, things were obscene, everybody was so "Yaw yaw yaw" arrogant and everybody would get to flip their house for a healthy profit (hmm, greater fool...something sounds familiar here).
The timebomb was always going to blow, we were never going to be capable of earning enough to pay the ever-growing mountain back without some horrific collapse. Which wasn't horrific enough btw, being kept afloat by US and EU fiat(-Tether) printing.

Deub

grindle wrote: »

Why are Deloitte and E&Y so bullish on it then? Why are a majority of senior executives for companies with tens and hundreds of millions in revenue so bullish on the tech?

Why has the E&Y blockchain lead said that private transactions would be cheaper on the Ethereum mainnet vs their traditional process by Christmas?

Why has the CEO of TUI Group said their entire business process would revolve around Ethereum mainnet in the future?

How do you - a man who has no notion what he's on about - know better than captains of industry? What is it that you know that they aren't grasping?

To be honest, I am wary of what these captains of industry say. They say what benefit them. Before the 2008 crash, the vast majority (if not all) said everything was fine when they knew otherwise. So I read what they say but don't assume it is the truth.