256
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: April 11, 2016, 01:17:41 pm »Wow BTS takes a dump and no one here even cares anymore.
All ALTS took a dump. Not only BTS. Whales just wanna have fun [emoji12]

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Wow BTS takes a dump and no one here even cares anymore.
All ALTS took a dump. Not only BTS. Whales just wanna have fun [emoji12]
Everything ok with the payouts? According to the website, a few payouts are not showing up in the wallet even though they are indicated on the website.
These seem to be skipped:
BTS brekyrse1f3 1174.62592118 4/6/2016 9:21:35 PM
BTS brekyrse1f3 312.92976694 4/6/2016 6:47:31 AM
BTS brekyrse1f3 289.77028151 2/24/2016 10:37:29 AM
BTS brekyrse1f3 177.43976024 1/10/2016 11:09:19 PM
BTS brekyrse1f3 77.08215620 1/6/2016 4:21:26 PM
BTS brekyrse1f3 118.85506832 1/6/2016 6:16:54 AM
BTS brekyrse1f3 74.32134320 1/4/2016 12:36:19 AM
I need to check the following when I get home, not sure if the "recent history" includes these or not since they are old. They also do not show up on CryptoFresh.
BTS brekyrse1f3 137.41309900 12/23/2015 10:57:38 AM
BTS brekyrse1f3 1064.18212841 12/22/2015 1:04:47 AM
BTS brekyrse1f3 233.54878255 12/20/2015 6:36:02 PM
BTS brekyrse1f3 488.44238237 12/19/2015 1:19:23 AM
BTS brekyrse1f3 765.26706888 12/17/2015 12:41:03 PM
BTS brekyrse1f3 766.43377861 12/16/2015 10:31:40 AM
BTS brekyrse1f3 403.46890751 12/15/2015 12:40:40 AM
But...but...cryptofresh says you only have "4,290 BTS"....
Glad to see you still hanging in there Andre. You're gonna be one mighty whale when we reach ETH cap "this summer".
I still havent claimed my 0.9 BTS in 2.0, so thats probably why it says that. (Also, it is such BS that any time anyone claims and sends their BTS to polo, the whole world knows about it). Didnt seem like much point doing so when the price was so low, I wouldnt want to sell at that price, dont want to convert it to bitassets when I think BTS should outperform them because its undervalue,d and didnt want to trade them because people were getting margin called. Thats changing now I guess though, the internal market has been strengthening.
Also, I felt that if I claimed them, I would probably end up dumping them at some point, and it would be a mistake.
HEEEELP someone.... anyone !!!
Do something!!!
HEEEELP!!!!
Please find or create some good news for ethereum ! This sh!t is falling like a stone!!!!
300M marketcap in 3 months, maybe much much lower!
This would be brilliant bunker. How could you ever prove reserves though? The trend over time would be towards fractional reserves / corruption.
In my hangout with jonnybitcoin the week before I actually gave away some of how it could be done. I don't want to get into it here, but it's possible.
Doing a bit of market research are we? Just where in the world could a business like that store such reserves safely?
Perhaps as you say this poll / thread is all a matter of fun. Regardless, donkeypong has made the best contributions to this thread, and I agree that "No" is the best answer. The failure of Cryptosmith to make even a single sale in the 2 months of operation before Ryan decided to "run with the gold" is another piece of evidence against this idea.
As for Digx I have nothing. I never heard of them myself.
I don't think @Empirical1.2 is comparing the prospects or viability of Digix vs. LISK or AUGUR. I think he was just saying the supposed crowdsale wasn't truly open to the public, that it appears to have been quickly bought up by large investors who were in-the-know and ready with large chunks of funds. He is probably right. Although I think what that mostly says is that Digix was probably beyond the stage of needing to do a crowd sale.
As for LISK, by calling it a "pipe dream" you are not giving it nearly enough credit. Fact is, LISK is much further along than ETH is. It has some real advantages over ETH and is a more complete solution. A lot of people are going to be very surprised by how well LISK does.
My contention is that it's suspicious because given the references of much more popular projects it takes a long time to raise that amount of money from a wide investing audience.
Well to help ease your suspicions I will tell you why it did as well as it did vs the others you have mentioned. Simply put, both Augur and Lisk were pure pipe dreams with nothing to show but a pretty page saying they would do something with ethereum that had no connection to regulatory bodies or any kind of registered body that was responsible. Instead you put your money in and hope something comes out of it.
DigiX on the other hand was a 1 year old mature project.. had clear plans based on regulatory requirements on how their operation would work, and already had something to show people. It was very clear who the corporate entity that ran it was involved also. Also look at the nature of what they are looking to do.. bridge physical assets with the blockchain. This is of far more importance application wise, and more easily understandable than other said sandbox experiments.
With all that considered, it easily attracts more institutional investors who are willing to throw more money at it. Perhaps not millions, but if they had ethereum as part of their portfolio putting a quarter million into it would just be a good hedge.
So the lessons that should be learned from this is if you want to see that kind of success.. do the hard work first, aim for things that solve real world problems, and don't make offerings pretending to be some mystical decentralized thingamabob that lives outside any reach of being convicted for breaking laws of any sorts. Then the serious money in the world will be able to start looking at your seriously.
Exactly they're a centralised entity who were clearly able to raise funds within hours from a handful of institutional investors so they didn't need to crowdfund. It comes across as a pre-orchestrated investment event that was either done as a legal workaround or because as a blockchain based service they think they will benefit from the perception of being crowdfunded like BitReserve. They also unlike most put a cap on funds raised.
Their crowdfunding thread is all of 5 pages long and 1/2 those comments are negative & I can't find one thread with lots of interest for this one year old mature amazing project... I think it has potential but as you say it's clearly attracted a handful of institutional investors vs. the decentralised crowd at this stage which is why I don't think it will be recognised as a valid crowdfund by the market and in the records.
(& I do see it has potential. I think I answered no to your poll originally but while not long term I actually could see myself using a gold backed crypto-currency for brief periods depending on how it was done.)
Well, that's crazy. So they already have around 650M MC before launch ?Is the price now on yobit 130x bigger than during the ico
I though I made a mistake, it should be 13x but I can't find it.
My math has to be wrong, right ?
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
No your maths is right
That's way too much.
I guess there is no way to sell some ?
Maybe they reach 1B$. It could be cool ! I missed the ETH train and my heavy load is on the BTS one but it is still in the station.
Guys like tbone have been attempting to arrange something with Ronny/CCEDK to create a market at these prices.
Also if we created a BitLISK SmartCoin on the DEX we could short it. https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,22035.msg289022.html#msg289022
The volume & exposure that could bring to the DEX could be very beneficial too.
My contention is that it's suspicious because given the references of much more popular projects it takes a long time to raise that amount of money from a wide investing audience.
A nuclear bunker full of gold and a 24/7 webcam on it to provide proof of reserves? Call it the Fort Knox Webcam and you'll have plenty of takers.
Me, I prefer to carry gold on my person. They can have it if they can get it off me.
Graphene’s architectural shortcomings
Graphene was set up back in the day where it was thought that everyone would run their own node or download a client on their machine. The codebase still reflects that.
What we need is something that can provide an excellent UX while being scalable to millions.
Graphene’s wallet infrastructure makes it possible to host a mere few dozen wallets per virtual machine. This, of course… is not scalable to our needs.
A good solution to this is to have the wallets web based – browser side wallets.
The issue with THAT is that the JavaScript code for the browser side wallet was converted from C++ by an automatic converter making the code huge! (68 megabytes according to BitSapphire)
Loading such a large JS would be a nightmare for anyone trying to access Troopeers and PeerTracks from any phone/tablet/laptop no matter how fast your Internet connection is. Basically the code is far from optimized for this scenario, but it could be reengineered and be brought down to a more reasonable size (under 2 MG)
This is actually the exact problem BitSapphire is attempting to tackle with Moonstone. They are re-writing the JavaScript to solve this very issue.
Now that my excuses are out of the way...
I'm not sure how they implemented it, but uphold.com also provides gold- (and silver, platinum, and palladium)- backed crypto assets which they claim are 100% backed by physical assets.