Freicoin Price, Chart, Market Cap, FRC Coin Essentials ...

Jobs that pay in cryptocurrency

A place to find odd jobs that pay in cryptocurrency.

Constructing an Opt-In alternative reward for securing the blockchain

Since a keyboard with a monero logo got upvoted to the top I realized I should post various thoughts I have and generate some discussion. I hope others do the same.
Monero is currently secured by a dwindling block reward. There is a chance that the tail emission reward + transaction fees to secure the blockchain could become insufficient and allow for a scenario where it is profitable for someone to execute a 51% attack.
To understand this issue better, read this:
In Game Theory, Tragedy of the Commons is a market failure scenario where a common good is produced in lower quantities than the public desires, or consumed in greater quantities than desired. One example is pollution - it is in the public's best interest not to pollute, but every individual has incentive to pollute (e.g. because burning fossil fuel is cheap, and individually each consumer doesn't affect the environment much). The relevance to Bitcoin is a hypothetical market failure that might happen in the far future when the block reward from mining drops near zero. In the current Bitcoin design, the only fees miners earn at this time are Transaction fees. Miners will accept transactions with any fees (because the marginal cost of including them is minimal) and users will pay lower and lower fees (in the order of satoshis). It is possible that the honest miners will be under-incentivized, and that too few miners will mine, resulting in lower difficulty than what the public desires. This might mean various 51% attacks will happen frequently, and the Bitcoin will not function correctly. The Bitcoin protocol can be altered to combat this problem - one proposed solution is Dominant Assurance Contracts. Another more radical proposal (in the sense that the required change won't be accepted by most bitcoiners) is to have a perpetual reward that is constant in proportion to the monetary base. That can be achieved in two ways. An ever increasing reward (inflatacoin/expocoin) or a constant reward plus a demurrage fee in all funds that caps the monetary base (freicoin). This scenario was discussed on several threads: - Tragedy of the Commons - Disturbingly low future difficulty equilibrium - Stack Exchange Currently there is no consensus whether this problem is real, and if so, what is the best solution. 

I suspect that least contentious solution to it is not to change code, emission or artificially increase fees (which would actually undermine the tail emission and lead to other problems, I believe: but rather use a Dominant Assurance Contract that makes it rational for those who benefit from Monero to contribute to the block reward.

Dominant assurance contracts
Dominant assurance contracts, created by Alex Tabarrok, involve an extra component, an entrepreneur who profits when the quorum is reached and pays the signors extra if it is not. If the quorum is not formed, the signors do not pay their share and indeed actively profit from having participated since they keep the money the entrepreneur paid them. Conversely, if the quorum succeeds, the entrepreneur is compensated for taking the risk of the quorum failing. Thus, a player will benefit whether or not the quorum succeeds; if it fails he reaps a monetary return, and if it succeeds, he pays only a small amount more than under an assurance contract, and the public good will be provided.
Tabarrok asserts that this creates a dominant strategy) of participation for all players. Because all players will calculate that it is in their best interests to participate, the contract will succeed, and the entrepreneur will be rewarded. In a meta-game, this reward is an incentive for other entrepreneurs to enter the DAC market, driving down the cost disadvantage of dominant assurance contract versus regular assurance contracts.
Monero doesn't have a lot of scripting options to work with currently so it is very hard for me to understand how one might go about creating a Dominant Assurance Contract using Monero, especially in regards to paying out to a miner address.
This is how it could work in Bitcoin:
This scheme is an attempt at Mike Hearn's exercise for the reader: an implementation of dominant assurance contracts. The scheme requires the use of multisignature transactions, nLockTime and transaction replacement which means it won't work until these features are available on the Bitcoin network.
A vendor agrees to produce a good if X BTC are raised by date D and to pay Y BTC to each of n contributors if X BTC are not raised by date D, or to pay nY BTC if X BTC are raised and the vendor fails to produce the good to the satisfaction of 2 of 3 independent arbitrators picked through a fair process
The arbitrators specify a 2-of-3 multisignature script to use as an output for the fundraiser with a public key from each arbitrator, which will allow them to judge the performance on actually producing the good
For each contributor:
The vendor and the contributor exchange public keys
They create a 2-of-2 multisignature output from those public keys
With no change, they create but do not sign a transaction with an input of X/n BTC from the contributor and an input of Y BTC from the vendor, with X/n+Y going to the output created in 3.2
The contributor creates a transaction where the output is X+nY to the address created in step 2 and the input is the output of the transaction in 3.3, signs it using SIGHASH_ALL | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY, with version = UINT_MAX and gives it to the vendor
The vendor creates a transaction of the entire balance of the transaction in 3.3 to the contributor with nLockTime of D and version < UINT_MAX, signs it and gives it to the contributor
The vendor and contributor then both sign the transaction in 3.3 and broadcast it to the network, making the transaction in 3.4 valid when enough contributors participate and the transaction in 3.5 valid when nLockTime expires
As date D nears, nLockTime comes close to expiration.
If enough (n) people contribute, all of the inputs from 3.4 can combine to make the output valid when signed by the vendor, creating a valid transaction sending that money to the arbitrators, which only agree to release the funds when the vendor produces a satisfactory output
If not enough people ( Note that there is a limit at which it can be more profitable for the vendor to make the remaining contributions when D approaches
Now the arbitrators have control of X (the payment from the contributors) + nY (the performance bond from the vendor) BTC and pay the vendor only when the vendor performs satisfactorily
Such contracts can be used for crowdfunding. Notable examples from Mike Hearn include:
Funding Internet radio stations which don't want to play ads: donations are the only viable revenue source as pay-for-streaming models allow undercutting by subscribers who relay the stream to their own subscribers
Automatically contributing to the human translation of web pages

Monero has these features:
  1. Multisig
  2. LockTime (but it is much different then BTCs)
  3. A possibility to do MoJoin (CoinJoin) like transactions, even if less then optimally private. There is hope that the MoJoin Schemes will allow for better privacy in the future:
I have a draft writeup for a merged-input system called MoJoin that allows multiple parties to generate a single transaction. The goal is to complete the transaction merging with no trust in any party, but this introduces significant complexity and may not be possible with the known Bulletproofs multiparty computation scheme. My current version of MoJoin assumes partial trust in a dealer, who learns the mappings between input rings and outputs (but not true spends or Pedersen commitment data).

Additionally, Non-Interactive Refund Transactions could also be possible in Monero's future.
I can't fully workout how all of these could work together to make a DAC that allows miners to put up and payout a reward if it doesn't succeed, or how we could make it so *any* miner who participated (by putting up a reward) could claim the reward if it succeeded. I think this should really be explored as it could make for a much more secure blockchain, potentially saving us if a "crypto winter" hits where the value of monero and number of transactions are low, making for a blockchain that is hard to trust because it would be so cheap to perform a 51% attack.

I am still skeptical of Dominant Assurance Contracts, despite success in an initial test
it still remains questionable or at least confusing:
submitted by Vespco to Monero [link] [comments]

What is the next thing to be "solved" in Bitcoin?

I keep HODLING my coins since 2012 and I am very happy. What more should be "solved" in Bitcoin? My bitcoins are in deep sleep while they invent problems for it.
submitted by felipelalli to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

JPMorgan suppresses gold & silver prices to prop up the USDollar - via "naked short selling" of GLD & SLV ETFs. Now AXA (which owns $94 million of JPMorgan stock) may be trying to suppress Bitcoin price - via tiny blocks. But AXA will fail - because the market will always "maximize coinholder value"

As a bitcoin user (miner, hodler, investor) you have all the power - simply due to the nature of markets and open-source software. Core/Blockstream, and their owners at AXA, can try to manipulate the market and the software for a while, by paying off devs who prefer tiny blocks, or censoring the news, or conducting endless meetings - but in the end, you know that they have no real control over you, because endless meetings are bullshit, and code and markets are everything.
Bitcoin volume, adoption, blocksize and price have been rising steadily for the past 7 years. And they will continue to do so - with or without the cooperation of Core/Blockstream and the Chinese miners - because just like publicly held corporations always tend to "maximize shareholder value, publicly held cryptocurrencies always tend to "maximize coinholder value".
How much of a position does AXA have in JPMorgan?
AXA currently holds about $94 million in JPMorgan stock.
Admittedly this is not a whole lot, when you consider that the total of JPMorgan's outstanding shares is currently around USD 3.657 billion.
But still it does provide a suggestive indication of how these big financial firms are all in bed with each other. Plus the leaders of these big financial firms also tend to hang out which each other professionally and socially, and are motivated to protect the overall system of "the legacy ledger of fantasy fiat" which allows them to rule the world.
How does JPMorgan use paper GLD and SLV ETFs to suppress the price of physical gold and silver?
As many people know, whistleblower Andrew Maguire exposed the massive criminal scandal where JPMorgan has been fraudulently manipulating gold and silver prices for years.
JPMorgan does this via the SLV and GLD ETFs (Exchange Traded Funds).
The reason they do it is in order to artificially suppress the price of gold and silver using "naked short-selling":
How exactly does JPMorgan manage to commit this kind of massive fraud?
It's easy!
There's actually about 100x more "phantom" or fake silver and gold in existence (in the form of "paper" certificates - SLV and GLD ETFs) - versus actual "physical" gold and silver that you can take delivery on and hold in your hand.
That means that if everyone holding fake/paper SLV & GLD ETF certificates were to suddenly demand "physical delivery" at the same moment, then only 1% of those people would receive actual physical silver and gold - and the rest would get the "equivalent" in dollars. This is all well-known, and clearly spelled out in the fine print of the GLD and SLV ETF contracts.
(This is similar to "fractional reserve" where almost no banks have enough actual money to cover all deposits. This means that if everyone showed up at the bank on the same day and demanded their money, the bank would go bankrupt.)
So, in order to fraudulently suppress the price of gold and silver (and, in turn, prevent the USDollar from crashing), JPMorgan functions as a kind of "bear whale", dumping "phantom" gold and silver on the market in the form of worthless "paper" SLV and GLD ETF certificates, "whenever the need arises" - ie, whenever the US Dollar price starts to drop "too much", and/or whenever the gold and silver prices start to rise "too much".
(This is similar to the "plunge protection team" liquidity providers, who are well-known for preventing stock market crashes, by throwing around their endlessly printed supply of "fantasy fiat", buying up stocks to artificially prevent their prices from crashing. This endless money-printing and market manipulation actually destroys one of the main purposes of capitalism - which is to facilitate "price discovery" in order to reward successful companies and punish unsuccessful ones, to make sure that they actually deliver the goods and services that people need in the real world.)
Is there an ELI5 example of how "naked short selling" works in the real world?
Yes there is!
The following example was originally developed by Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne - who, as many people know, is very passionate about using Bitcoin not only as cash, but also to settle stock trades - because his company Overstock got burned when Wall Street illegally attacked it using naked short selling:
Here's how naked short-selling works: Imagine you travel to a small foreign island on vacation. Instead of going to an exchange office in your hotel to turn your dollars into Island Rubles, the country instead gives you a small printing press and makes you a deal: Print as many Island Rubles as you like, then on the way out of the country you can settle your account. So you take your printing press, print out gigantic quantities of Rubles and start buying goods and services. Before long, the cash you’ve churned out floods the market, and the currency's value plummets. Do this long enough and you'll crack the currency entirely; the loaf of bread that cost the equivalent of one American dollar the day you arrived now costs less than a cent.
With prices completely depressed, you keep printing money and buy everything of value - homes, cars, priceless works of art. You then load it all into a cargo ship and head home. On the way out of the country, you have to settle your account with the currency office. But the Island Rubles you printed are now worthless, so it takes just a handful of U.S. dollars to settle your debt. Arriving home with your cargo ship, you sell all the island riches you bought at a discount and make a fortune.
Why isn't anybody stopping JPMorgan from using "naked short selling" to fraudulently suppress gold and silver prices?
Because "certain people" benefit!
Of course, this "naked short selling" (selling a "phantom" asset which doesn't actually exist in order to suppress the price of the "real" asset) is actually illegal - but JPMorgan is allowed to get away with it, because suppressing the gold and silver price helps prop up the United States and world's major "fantasy fiat" financial institutions - which would be bankrupt without this kind of "artificial life support."
How does suppressing the gold and silver price help governments and banks?
If gold and silver (and Bitcoin!) rose to their actual "fair market value", then the US dollar (and most other national "fiat" currencies) would crash - and many major financial institutions would be exposed as bankrupt. Also, many "derivatives contracts" would default - and only a tiny percentage of defaults would destroy most major financial companies' balance sheets. (For example, see Deutsche Bank - which is may become "the next Lehman", due to having around around $80 trillion in dangerous derivatives exposure.)
So, major financial firms like JPMorgan are highly motivated to prevent a "real" (honest) market from existing for "counterparty-free" assets such as physical gold and silver (and Bitcoin!)
So, JPMorgan fraudulently manipulate the precious-metals market, by flooding it with 100x more "phantom" "silver" and "gold" in the form of worthless GLD and SLV ETF certificates.
Basically, JPMorgan is doing the "dirty work" to keep the US government and its "too-big-to-fail" banks and other financial institutions afloat, on "artificial life support".
Otherwise, without this GLD & SLV ETF "naked short selling" involving market manipulation and fraud, the US government - and most major US financial institutions, as well as many major overseas financial institutions, and most central banks - would all be exposed as bankrupt, once traders and investors discovered the real price of gold and silver.
So, what does this have to do with AXA and Bitcoin?
Just like JPMorgan wants to suppress the price of gold and silver to prop up the USDollar, it is reasonable to assume that AXA and other major financial players probably also want to suppress the price of Bitcoin for the same reasons - in order to postpone the inevitable day when the so-called "assets" on their balance sheets (denominated in US Dollars and other "fantasy fiat" currencies, as well as derivatives) are exposed as being worthless.
Actually, only the motives are the same, while the means would be quite different - ie, certain governments or banks might want to suppress the Bitcoin price - but they wouldn't be able to use "naked short selling" to do it.
As we know, this is because with Bitcoin, people can now simply demand "cryptographic proof" of how many bitcoins are really out there - instead of just "trusting" some auditor claiming there is so much gold and silver in a vault - or "trusting" that a gold bar isn't actually filled with worthless tungsten (which happens to have about the same "molecular weight" as gold, so these kinds of counterfeit gold bars have been a serious problem).
(And, by the way: hopefully it should also be impossible to do "fractional reserve" using "level 2" sidechains such as the Lightning Network - although that still remains to be seen. =)
So, even though it should not be possible to flood the market with "phantom" Bitcoins (since people can always demand "cryptographic proof of reserves"), AXA could instead use a totally different tactic to suppress the price: by suppressing Bitcoin trading volume - explained further below.
Does AXA does actually have the motives to be suppressing the Bitcoin price - right now?
Yes, they do!
As described above, the only thing which gives giant banking and finance companies like JPMorgan and AXA the appearance of solvency is massive accounting fraud and market manipulation.
They use the "legacy ledger of fantasy fiat" (ie, debt-backed "currency", endlessly printed out of thin air) - and the never-ending carrousel of the worldwide derivatives casino, currently worth around 1.2 quadrillion dollars - to "paper over" their losses, and to prevent anyone from discovering that most major insurance firms like AXA - and most major banks - would already be considered bankrupt, if you counted only their real assets. (This is known as "mark-to-market" - which they hate to do. They much prefer to do "mark-to-model" which some people call "mark-to-fantasy" - ie, fraudulent accounting based on "phantom" assets" and rampant market manipulation.)
So, it is public knowledge that nearly all "too-big-to-fail" financial companies like AXA (and JPMorgan) would be considered bankrupt if their fraudulent accounting practices were exposed - which rely on the "legacy ledger of fantasy fiat" and the "never-ending carrousel of the derivatives casino" to maintain the façade of solvency:
If Bitcoin becomes a major currency, then tens of trillions of dollars on the "legacy ledger of fantasy fiat" will evaporate, destroying AXA, whose CEO is head of the Bilderbergers. This is the real reason why AXA bought Blockstream: to artificially suppress Bitcoin volume and price with 1MB blocks.
Does AXA actually have the means to to be suppressing the Bitcoin price... right now?
Yes, they do!
For example, AXA could decide to support economically ignorant devs like Greg Maxwell (CTO of Blockstream), Adam Back (CEO of Blockstream), and the other Core devs who support Blockstream's "roadmap" based on tiny blocks.
Wait - isn't AXA already doing precisely that?
Yes, they are!
As we all know, AXA has invested tens of millions of dollars in Blockstream, and Blockstream is indeed fighting tooth and nail against bigger blocks for Bitcoin.
Blockstream is now controlled by the Bilderberg Group - seriously! AXA Strategic Ventures, co-lead investor for Blockstream's $55 million financing round, is the investment arm of French insurance giant AXA Group - whose CEO Henri de Castries has been chairman of the Bilderberg Group since 2012.
So, how would artificially tiny blocks artificially suppress the Bitcoin price?
This is pretty much based on common sense - plus it's also been formalized and roughly quantified in concepts involving networking and economics, such as "Metcalfe's Law".
Metcalfe's Law says pretty much what you'd expect it to say - ie: the more people that use a system, the more valuable that system is.
More precisely: the value of a system is proportional to the square of the number of users in that system - which also makes sense, since when there are N users in a system, the number of connections between them is N*(N - 1)2 which is "on the order of" N squared.
In fact, Metcalfe's Law has been shown to hold for various types of networks and markets - including faxes, internet, national currencies, etc.
Does Metcalfe's Law apply to Bitcoin?
Yes, it does!
The past 7 years of data also indicates - as predicted - that Metcalfe's Law also does indeed apply to Bitcoin as well.
Graphs show that during the 5 years before Blockstream got involved with trying to artificially suppress the Bitcoin price via their policy of artificially tiny blocks, Bitcoin prices were roughly in proportion to the square of the (actual) Bitcoin blocksizes.
Bitcoin has its own E = mc2 law: Market capitalization is proportional to the square of the number of transactions. But, since the number of transactions is proportional to the (actual) blocksize, then Blockstream's artificial blocksize limit is creating an artificial market capitalization limit!
During all those years, actual blocksizes were still low enough to not bump into the artificial "ceiling" of the artificial 1 MB "max blocksize" limit - which, remember, was only there as a temporary anti-spam measure, so it was deliberately set to be much higher than any actual blocksize, and everyone knew that this limit would be removed well before actual blocksizes started getting close to that 1 MB "max blocksize" limit.
But now that Bitcoin volume can't go up due to hitting the artificial "max blocksize" 1 MB limit (unless perhaps some people do bigger-value transactions), Bitcoin price also can't go up either:
Bitcoin's market price is trying to rally, but it is currently constrained by Core/Blockstream's artificial blocksize limit. Chinese miners can only win big by following the market - not by following Core/Blockstream. The market will always win - either with or without the Chinese miners.
So what does this all have to do with that meeting in Silicon Valley this weekend, between Core/Blockstream and the Chinese miners?
This latest episode in the never-ending saga of the "Bitcoin blocksize debates" is yet another centralized, non-transparent, invite-only stalling non-scaling, no-industry-invited, no-solutions-allowed, "friendly" meeting being held this weekend - at the very last moment when Blockstream/Core failed to comply with the expiration date for their previous stalling non-scaling non-agreement:
The Fed/FOMC holds meetings to decide on money supply. Core/Blockstream & Chinese miners now hold meetings to decide on money velocity. Both are centralized decision-making. Both are the wrong approach.
So, on the expiration date of the HK stalling / non-scaling non-agreement, Viacoin scammer u/btcdrak calls a meeting with no customer-facing businesses invited (just Chinese miners & Core/Blockstream), and no solutions/agreements allowed, and no transparency (just a transcript from u/kanzure). WTF!?
This disastrous, desperate meeting is the latest example of how Bitcoin's so-called "governance" is being hijacked by some anonymous scammer named u/btcdrak who created a shitcoin called Viacoin and who's a subcontractor for Blockstream - calling yet another last-minute stalling / non-scaling meeting on the expiration date of Core/Blockstream's previous last-minute stalling / non-scaling non-agreement - and this non-scaling meeting is invite-only for Chinese miners and Core/Blockstream (with no actual Bitcoin businesses invited) - and economic idiot u/maaku7 who also brought us yet another shitcoin called Freicoin is now telling us that no actual solutions will be provided because no actual agreements will be allowed - and this invite-only no-industry no-solutions / no-agreements non-event will be manually transcribed by some guy named u/kanzure who hates u/Peter__R (note: u/Peter__R gave us actual solutions like Bitcoin Unlimited and massive on-chain scaling via XThin) - and as usual this invite-only non-scaling no-solutions / no-agreements no-industry invite-only non-event is being paid for by some fantasy fiat finance firm AXA whose CEO is head of the Bilderberg Group which will go bankrupt if Bitcoin succeeds.**
What is the purpose of this meeting?
The "organizers" and other people involved - u/btcdrak and u/maaku7 - say that this is just a "friendly" meeting - and it is specifically forbidden for any "agreements" (or scaling solutions) to come out of this meeting.
What good is a meeting if no agreements or solutions can some out of it?
Good question!
A meeting where solutions are explicitly prohibited is actually perfect for Blockstream's goals - because currently the status quo "max blocksize" is 1 MB, and they want to keep it that way.
So, they want to leverage the "inertia" to maintain the status quo - while pretending to do something, and getting friendly with the miners (and possibly making them other "offers" or "inducements").
So this meeting is just another stalling tactic, like all the previous ones.
Only now, after the community has seen this over and over, Blockstream has finally had to publicly admit that it is specifically forbidden for any "agreements" (or scaling solutions) to come out of this meeting - which makes it very obvious to everyone that this whole meeting is just an empty gesture.
So, why is this never-ending shit-show still going on?
Mainly due to inertia on the part of many users, and dishonesty on the part of Core/Blockstream devs.
Currently there is a vocal group of 57 devs and wannabe devs who are associated with Core/Blockstream - who refuse to remove the obsolete, temporary anti-spam measure (or "kludge") which historically restricted Bitcoin throughput to a 1 MB "max blocksize".
Somehow (via a combination of media manipulation, domain squatting, censorship, staged international Bitcoin stalling "scaling" meetings and congresses, fraudulent non-agreements, and other dishonest pressure tactics) they've managed to convince everyone that they can somehow dictate to everyone else how Bitcoin governance should be done.
vampireban wants you to believe that "a lot of people voted" and "there is consensus" for Core's "roadmap". But he really means only 57 people voted. And most of them aren't devs and/or don't understand markets. Satoshi designed Bitcoin for the economic majority to vote - not just 57 people.
Meanwhile, pretty much everyone else in Bitcoin - ie, everyone who's not involved with Blockstream - knows that Bitcoin can and should have bigger blocks by now, to enable increased adoption, volume, and price, as shown by the following points:
(1) Most miners, and investors, and Satoshi himself, all expected Bitcoin to have much bigger blocks by now - but these facts are censored on most of the media controlled by Core/Blockstream-associated devs and their friends:
Satoshi Nakamoto, October 04, 2010, 07:48:40 PM "It can be phased in, like: if (blocknumber > 115000) maxblocksize = largerlimit / It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete."
The moderators of r\bitcoin have now removed a post which was just quotes by Satoshi Nakamoto.
(2) Research has repeatedly shown that 4 MB blocks would work fine with people's existing hardware and bandwidth - such as the Cornell study, plus empirical studies in the field done by jtoomim:
(3) Even leading Bitcoin figures such as Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc and r\bitcoin censor moderator u/theymos have publicly stated that 2 MB blocks would work fine (in their rare moments of honesty, before they somehow became corrupted):
theymos 1/31/2013: "I strongly disagree with the idea that changing the max block size is a violation of the 'Bitcoin currency guarantees'. Satoshi said that the max block size could be increased, and the max block size is never mentioned in any of the standard descriptions of the Bitcoin system"
"Even a year ago I said I though we could probably survive 2MB" - nullc
Greg Maxwell used to have intelligent, nuanced opinions about "max blocksize", until he started getting paid by AXA, whose CEO is head of the Bilderberg Group - the legacy financial elite which Bitcoin aims to disintermediate. Greg always refuses to address this massive conflict of interest. Why?
So... What can we do now to stop giant financial institutions like AXA from artificially suppressing Bitcoin adoption, volume and price?
It's not as hard as it might seem - but it might (initially) be a slow process!
First of all, more and more people can simply avoid using crippled code with an artificially tiny "max blocksize" limit of 1 MB produced by teams of dishonest developers like Core/Blockstream who are getting paid off by AXA.
Other, more powerful Bitcoin code is available - such as Bitcoin Unlimited or Bitcoin Classic:
In addition, proposals for massive on-chain scaling have also been proposed, implemented, and tested - such as Xthin:
Hasn't the market already rejected other solutions like Bitcoin Unlimited or Bitcoin Classic?
Actually, no!
If you only read r\bitcoin, you might not hear about lots of these promising new innovations - or you might hear people proclaiming that they're "dead".
But that forum r\bitcoin is not reliable, because it routinely censors any discussion of on-chain scaling for Bitcoin, eg:
The most upvoted thread right now on r\bitcoin (part 4 of 5 on Xthin), is default-sorted to show the most downvoted comments first. This shows that r\bitcoin is anti-democratic, anti-Reddit - and anti-Bitcoin.
So, due to the combination of inertia (people tend to be lazy and cautious about upgrading their software, until they absolutely have to) and censorship, some people claim or believe that solutions like Bitcoin Unlimited or Bitcoin Classic have "already" been rejected by the community.
But actually, Bitcoin Classic and Bitcoin Unlimited are already running seamlessly on the Bitcoin network - and once they reach a certain predefined safe "activation threshold", the network will simply switch over to use them, upgrading from the artificially restrictive Bitcoin Core code:
Be patient about Classic. It's already a "success" - in the sense that it has been tested, released, and deployed, with 1/6 nodes already accepting 2MB+ blocks. Now it can quietly wait in the wings, ready to be called into action on a moment's notice. And it probably will be - in 2016 (or 2017).
I think the Berlin Wall Principle will end up applying to Blockstream as well: (1) The Berlin Wall took longer than everyone expected to come tumbling down. (2) When it did finally come tumbling down, it happened faster than anyone expected (ie, in a matter of days) - and everyone was shocked.
So what is the actual point of this weekend's meeting between Core/Blockstream and the Chinese Miners?
It's mainly just for show, and ultimately a meaningless distraction - the result of desperation and dishonesty on the part of Core/Blockstream.
As mentioned above, real upgrades to Bitcoin like Bitcoin Classic and Bitcoin Unlimited have already been implemented and tested and are already running on the Bitcoin network - and the overall Bitcoin itself can and probably will switch over to them, regardless of any meaningless "meetings" and delaying tactics.
Is it inevitable for Bitcoin to move to bigger blocks?
Yes, for three reasons:
(1) As mentioned above, studies show that the underlying hardware and bandwidth will already easily support actual blocksizes of 2 MB, and probably 4 MB - and everyone actually agrees on this point, including die-hard supporters of tiny blocks such as Blockstream CTO Gregory Maxwell u/nullc, and r\bitcoin censor moderator u/theymos.
(2) The essential thing about a publicly held company is that it always seeks to maximize shareholder value - and, in a similar fashion, a publicly held cryptocurrency also always seeks to maximize "coinholder" value.
(3) Even if Core/Blockstream continues to refuse to budge, the cat is already out of the bag - they can't put the toothpaste of open-source code back into the tube. Some people might sell their bitcoins for other cryptocurrencies which have better scaling - but a better solution would probably be to wait for a "spinoff" to happen. A "spinoff" is a special kind of "hard fork" where the existing ledger is preserved, so your coins remain spendable on both forks, and you can trade your coins on markets, depending on which fork you prefer.
Further information on "spinoff technology" can be found here:
An excellent discussion of the economic advantages of using a "spinoff" to keep the original ledger (and merely upgrade the ledger-appending software), can be found here:
And today, based on new information learned from Ethereum's recent successful "hardfork split", people are already starting to talk about the specific details involved in implementing a "spinoff" or "hardfork split" for Bitcoin to support bigger blocks - eg, changing the PoW, getting exchanges to support trading on both sides of the fork, upgrading wallets, preventing replay attacks, etc:
We now know the miners aren't going to do anything. We now know that a minority fork can survive. Why are we not forking right now?
So - whether it's via a hardfork upgrade, or a hardfork split or "spinoff" - it is probably inevitable that Bitcoin will eventually move to bigger blocks (within the underlying hardware and bandwidth constraints of course - which would currently support 2-4 MB blocksizes).
Why are bigger blocks inevitable for Bitcoin?
Because that's how markets always have and always will behave - and there's nothing that Blockstream/Core or AXA can do to stop this - no matter how many pointless stalling scaling meetings they conduct, and no matter how many non-agreements they sign and then break.
Endless centralized meetings and dishonest agreements are irrelevant. The only thing that matters is decentralized markets and open-source code. Users and markets decide on what code to install, and what size blocks to accept. Bitcoin adoption, volume - and price - will continue to grow, with or without the cooperation of the dishonest devs from Core/Blockstream, or misguided miners - or banksters at "fantasy fiat" financial firms like JPMorgan or AXA.
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

A CryptoCurrency with an expiration date, so wealth is constantly circulating

Hey everyone,
I'm very new to all of this technology, so please be nice. I was just reading and stumbled upon something related to currencies that is very interesting - and possibly groundbreaking.
In Alan Watts' book 'Does it Matter?' - he had an essay called 'Wealth vs. Money', where he touches on the issue of how people hoard wealth, and how that stifles progress and inhibits social well-being.
As one possible solution, he says -
"We may have to adopt some form of German economist Silvio Gessell's suggestion that money not in circulation be made progressively perishable, declining in value from the date of issue."
Now, I didn't know anything about Gessell, but I looked him up and found his interesting idea of 'Demurrage', which this website says -
"Demurrage is essentially a 'tax' on the holding of currency out of circulation, intended to prevent the hoarding of currency and to keep it circulating at a rapid pace."
So then I just searched Bitcoin + Demurrage for the hell of it, and found that someone had already created a CryptoCurrency based on this concept!
It's called Freicoin, created by Mark Friedenbach. As far as I can tell, it hasn't really taken off. I'm not endorsing it, but it's interesting that someone is working on this idea. I'd really like to know everyone's thoughts on this, it seems like there could be some real potential here if more people work on it.
submitted by TeaStainsAndTobacco to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

As a Bitcoin supporter: What's the appeal of the various altcoins?

I'm a huge bitcoin fan, and I'm starting to look at other cryptocurrencies now. I'm trying to figure out what niche they fill.
I can understand the appeal of Litecoin: it's easier to mine and more resistant to ASICs. I also understand the appeal of something like Ripple, which is really like a decentralized currency exchange/trading platform with an (unfortunately pre-mined) cryptocurrency attached to it as a secondary thing.
But what's the appeal of these other altcoins? there are tons and tons and tons of them. Namecoin, Primecoin, Freicoin, Feathercoin, etc... I saw a "Memecoin" while looking today.
What's the idea here, exactly? Why are people into these? Do people think these things will fill some kind of niche that will give them a unique role in the "cryptoeconomy?"
My gut reaction is to throw them all away except Bitcoin, but that was my gut reaction to Bitcoin when I first heard of it too, so I want to give them a fair shot. Plus, it looks like Primecoin is going nuts right now, so people must care about these things for some reason.
submitted by MauledByPorcupines to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

What is your crypto-strategy?

I'm a longtime Bitcoin miner (1.5 Ghash/s, nothing huge) and have been looking into what is most likely to make the most sense for making money in the longterm.
Most often I use the Bitparking merged mining pool to mine BTC, NMC, IXC, and DVC. I believe in the future of BTC and like the diversity of some additional cryptocurrencies.
When I see the profitability of another currency higher than 125% of BTC, sometimes I change my miners to join a different pool - usually LTC or PPC. I use to check profitability of different currencies to see what I should be mining. I also double check the profitability numbers against the chart at I keep a small amount of these other currencies, but mainly trade them for BTC.
Now there is also Freicoin which I think is a very interesting alternate crypto currency (see It's very early in its release so I can mine a high proportion of coins due to the relative low difficulty and relative low total hashrate. I have one GPU mining Freicoin for the potential of it having a reasonable exchange rate once an exchange is available.
What is your strategy for mining various cryptocurrencies?
submitted by cc5alive to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

RFC: Mincome cryptocurrency experiment

I'd like some feedback from the redditors on my latest thoughts on a new cryptocurrency, that I'm calling 'Mincome' (or for details, look at )
Some of the key points: There are at least 2 distinct cryptocurrencies I'm proposing. The first is 'mincome', for which the proof-of-work is live birth of a human, or at least some form of documentation/proof that uniquely identifies a currently alive human person.
The second, which I'm calling mincoin humancoin (HMC) is likely going to be implemented with the latest Bitcoin, except with Freicoin's demurrage code, and Litecoin's Scrypt proof-of-work. Every 'mincome' address then gets part of the demurrage fees from HMC. (So basically every human who bothers to prove to the HMC network the Mincome proof-of-work, or having been born, gets an evenly distributed 'minimum income')
And for the third key point (because Tesla liked 3, and so do I), I need some help figuring out how to integrate a distributed futures exchange into the core mincomed codebase.
What this really all comes down to is I've got a farm in Iowa, and I want to be able to sell corn via a cryptocurrency, and the *coins available now are too volatile, or require I trust some people who like to play with money that run centralized exchanges.
My dad once said "Never have a banker you can't punch in the face". He's got a point. The same goes with people who run exchanges... If I don't know where they live, then I do not trust them to run a credible exchange.
I do however, trust that cryptographers, hackers, and bored college students will find all the holes in my mincome scheme before the bankers do.
Tell me what's wrong. Let's fix it.
submitted by TechnoMagik to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments] only a small list of the 200 alt. currencies online

Altcoins is a list of Bitcoin alternatives
Find out more about alternate cryptocurrencies, real alternatives to Bitcoin. This site contains useful information about every alt coin such as client download locations, mining guide, exchange info and more. Use this site to get familiar with live bitcoin alternatives. Use alt coins, mine and exchange them. Keep the alternate chains alive. SHA-256 alternate cryptocurrencies
Altcoins using SHA-256, the same hashing algorithm as Bitcoin.
NMC – Namecoin PPC – Peercoin DVC – Devcoin TRC – Terracoin BTE – Bytecoin IXC – Ixcoin I0C – I0coin FRC – Freicoin ASC -AsicCoin DEM – Deutsche eMark PT – Platinum Coin BLC – Blakecoin 
Scrypt alternate cryptocurrencies
Altcoins using scrypt algorithm
LTC – Litecoin NVC – Novacoin FTC – FeatherCoin WDC – WorldCoin ELC – Elacoin DGC – DigitalCoin CGB – Cryptogenic Bullion MNC – MinCoin BBQ – BBQcoin TAG – Tagcoin MMC – Memorycoin 2.0 BTCs/BTC2 – Bitcoin Scrypt KRN – Ekrona PND/PAND/PANDA – PandaCoins 
Alternate cryptocurrencies can be mined using the same hardware as for mining Bitcoins (mostly SHA-256 alt coins). While bitcoin mining is going to use FPGA and ASIC devices, scrypt based alt coins can be mined using GPU cards. Hybrid and CPU alternate cryptocurrencies
Alt coins using other, innovative hashing algorithms
XPM – Primecoin QRK – Quark SRC – Securecoin Nxt – Next YAC – Yacoin SKN – Skeincoin PTS – Protoshares DRK – DarkCoin Curecoin OFF – Offerings to Cthulhu MED – MediterraneanCoin HTC – Huitongbi PGC – Pangucoin 
If you don’t have a GPU or ASIC hardware you can still mine some of the CPU-only altcoins. Recent Posts CGB – Cryptogenic Bullion DGC – Digitalcoin Panda altcoins – PAND – PND – PANDA Pandacoin [PAND] – “The original scrypt Pandacoin” The Panda Coin [PND] – No premine scrypt PoW The Panda Coin [PANDA] – scrypt, 3% premine Elacoin [ELC] – Fair Elastic Scrypt PoW Feathercoin [FTC] Platinum Coin [PT] SHA-256 WorldCoin [WDC] – Coin Of The Future Categories Alternate cryptocurrencies ASC – AsicCoin BLC – Blakecoin BTC2 – Bitcoin Scrypt BTE – Bytecoin CGB – Cryptogenic Bullion CRC – Curecoin DEM – Deutsche eMark DGC – Digitalcoin DRK – DarkCoin DVC – Devcoin ELC – Elacoin FRC – Freicoin FTC – FeatherCoin HTC – Huitongbi I0C – i0coin IXC – Ixcoin KING – Kingcoin KRN – Ekrona MAX – MaxCoin MED – MediterraneanCoin MMC – Memorycoin 2.0 NMC – Namecoin NVC – Novacoin Nxt OFF – Offerings to Cthulhu PAND – Pandacoin PANDA – Pandacoin PGC – Pangu PND – Pandacoin PPC – Peercoin PT – Platinum Coin PTS – Protoshares QRK – Quark SKC – Skeincoin SRC – Securecoin TAG – Tagcoin TRC – Terracoin WDC – WorldCoin XPM – Primecoin YAC – Yacoin 
submitted by coinpay to altcoin [link] [comments]

Seeking: Bitcoin Think-tank to create alt-currency using aspects of Bitcoin to create a community-centered currency via direct-democracy.

In development since October 2012. The basic version of what we're building.
Mission: The Jack of All Trade Universe is an online community marketplace that allows individuals to exchange their goods, services and skills for those of others. Simultaneously, it promotes community centered activities through a participatory decision making model. Community development is strongly encouraged through a communally generated currency: the Jack of All Trade Unit. The communities are enforced through their strong core values of interdependence, mutual aid and communitarianism.
One thing that isn't confirmed is how the units exist. At this point, the very first functional iteration will have a currency generator utilized by the community members to generate currency for community-centered activities (public classes, public gardens, public art displays, product giveaways (e.g. coffeeshop giving away coffee to promote itself)). When I began working on this, I knew about Bitcoin, but not to the extent I currently know Bitcoin.
How currency will be created via JoatU:
1) Idea: I want to plant a vegetable garden for my neighborhood to profit from.
2) Form: I fill out a form on the website that automatically emails everybody in the community about my idea.
3) Voting: The community members decide upon the value of my contribution.
4) Valuation: The votes are tallied and a median average is determined. My contribution is attributed a value.
5) Confirmation: I determine that the value is appropriate for the amount of work I am going to contribute and accept the offer.
6) Action: I plant the garden.
7) Reference: Other community members confirm that my action has taken place through positive references and the value units are generated/transferred into my account.
My question begins, does it warrant building a distributed ledger system for such a system? Is it feasible to create a distributed ledger system without the mining aspect? Is a point system adequate enough for this? I imagine a JoatU wallet in the far future comparable to the Bitcoin wallet.
Just to answer some questions that I know you might ask:
Q: If the community can generate currency, the supply will increase indefinitely undermining the value of the units.
A: That's correct. This is meant as a complementary currency that will promote spending in your local community to keep the economy moving fluidly. This is comparable to freicoin, but instead of a taxation, it will function as inflation*.
Q: Why not just bitcoin?
A: The Internet is to communication as what Bitcoin is to finance as what JoatU is to community. The goals of JoatU include distributed decision-making models, community development from the ground-up and a sense of empowerment given to the people through their own money creation. Also, just making use of your neighbors skills/products increases the value of your neighborhood, helps the local economy, builds community, reduces crime, etc.
Q: I want to help! How?
A: Please? We've had about 50 people helping out in one way or another and have a core team of around 7. Ask me questions in this thread or PM or by email and let's see how we can work together.
*Inflation is not guaranteed but depends on the user-base and their confidence in their communities.
submitted by FutureAvenir to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

1st BTC/Altcoin Mining Guide, Feedback Welcome!

When I decided to write this guide, I was throwing cryptocurrencies around like they were nothing. I was foolish in the fact that I disregarded the exchange fees that are attached with the services that those exchanges provided. I'm in by no means a cryptocurrency genius, and I'm still not extremely seasoned at it, but I've learned enough about cryptocurrencies in the past month that I feel confident to pass on the knowledge I have learned and to help those who are overwhelmed on where to start.
So what exactly is a cryptocurrency? According to technopedia (n.d.) a Cryptocurrency is a type of digital currency that is based on cryptography. Cryptocurrency uses cryptography for security, making it difficult to counterfeit. Public and private keys are often used to transfer the currency from one person to another.
When mining cryptocurrencies, one important concept needs to be established, and that's hash rate. Hash rate is simply a unit of measurement of processing power. The more your hash rate is, the more profitable mining becomes.
This guide uses specific sites and software, chosen by myself, as a great springboard into the cryptocurrency world. These sites and software are extremely flexible, easy to use, and integrate very well together. The mining pools I've chosen are multiple currency pools, designed to consolidate a major of the cryptocurrencies together, and instead of using several mining pools, you use three.
These are the things you'll need to get started: MultiMiner
Accounts at Coinotron, The Mining Pool Co., and BitMinter
Accounts at Cryptsy and Coinbase
There are a few different ways to mine for cryptocurrencies, the common of which are using your Central Processing Unit (CPU), Graphics Processing Unit (GPU), and Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC) devices. CPU based mining is not profitable any longer, and will cost you money in the end by increasing electricity costs. GPU based mining is still popular, but losing steam against ASIC based mining. If you choose to use your GPU for mining, AMD/ATI based graphics cards (especially the Radeon HD 79xx series of cards), are the most efficient. If you have an nVidia based graphics card, I'm sorry. You can still mine on nVidia cards, but your hash rates are going to be much slower when compared to their AMD/ATI counterparts. If you chose to use GPU mining, Black Friday or Cyber Monday are you best bets for upgrading your equipment. ASIC based mining is quickly losing value with the changing difficulty on all networks, but it's the most cost effective way to increase your hash rate, and see a positive return on any equipment purchases. If my math is correct, using the methods in this guide, in order for any ASIC device to yield a positive cash flow, you've got to get a device that has at least a 5Gh/s rate (such as the Butterfly Labs Jalapeno).
Now for the fun part, explaining how everything in this well greased machine is going to work. Patience plays a big part in the cryptocurrency world, and when I first started, I had none. I was so eager to see the amount of Bitcoin go up, regardless of how much I was getting penalized in fees from trading. So, that's the first step on your journey. PATIENCE. I CANNOT emphasize this enough. Sometimes, you've just got to hurry up and wait, the effects of waiting things out on the cryptocurrency market WILL PAY OFF.
Step one of this machine is signing up for all three pools (BitMinter, Coinotron, and Mining Pool Co.). This is so that you can actually get server addresses to plug into MultiMiner, after signing up for these services though, you've still got a ways to go.
Step two is sign up for Cryptsy. I chose Cryptsy because of the features they're going to offer at a later time, as well as support for 60 cryptocurrencies (which covers all but one of which we can mine). When your Cryptsy account is setup, you will need to go into the Balances portion of Cryptsy, and find all of the currencies in which you will be mining from the pools. Once Balances are loaded up, you will need to click on the Actions button next to the currency, and click Deposit / Autosell, and then Generate Address. There's a small clipboard near the address it generated, and that will copy the address for pasting in the mining pool websites. You will want to copy, and paste all of them to a text document, along with which currency it belongs to. Not only does this keep you from juggling back and forth trying to figure out things, but it helps for reference and setting up MultiMiner.
Once you have those accounts setup, you'll want to sign up for Coinbase. A WORD OF WARNING FOR THOSE WHO ARE PARANOID... Coinbase will want to link to a bank account, this is mandatory if you want to trade your currencies for cash. If you want to trade currencies, just for the sake of trading, then you can skip Coinbase altogether. You can transfer your Bitcoins from Cryptsy straight into Coinbase, and then sell the Bitcoins from Coinbase, and straight into your designated bank account.
MultiMiner, oh how amazing you are. For every cryptocurrency available in all pools, you will need to add these coins, along with server addresses, log-ins and passwords. To do so, click on the drop down next to the Settings button, and click Coins. From there, click on Add Coin, and choose each coin from a pool. This will list it in the box to the left, and give you the ability to add information on the right. You can add multiple servers as well, in case the current server you're mining on goes down. After all your coins are setup, you'll need to setup your Strategies. Click the drop down next to Settings, and chose Strategies. Check the Enable Strategies check box, choosing Straight Profitability from the drop down, and checking the Strategy every five minutes (that way you're not losing money by mining something that has dropped in price). This aggressive price checking makes it to where you're always on top with whatever you're mining. Also make sure you have Mine the Single Most Profitable Coin selected. Stick with CoinChoose as your price source (under Settings), as CoinWarz charges for there services beyond a certain point. Click Start, and take a vacation.
Reading the charts on Cryptsy can be a little tricky, and scary if you've never saw those types of graphs before. Those graphs are called Candlestick Charts, and are used primarily in the stock market. I won't go in to great detail on this, however, you can find a nice cheat sheet on the subject here.
I hope everyone enjoyed the guide, sorry for being punctual and brief, but there isn't anything too elaborate of complicated about searching for cryptocurrencies. I love mining as a hobby, mining's fun, and if there is any money to be made off of mining from my end, great, if not, I had fun mining.
While compiling a spreadsheet of the minable currencies in this guide, if everything is set up correctly (and assuming servers aren't down), you should be able to mine the following:
And while Mining Pool Co. offers ASICcoin and Unobtainium, ASICcoin isn't supported in MultiMiner, and Unobtanium isn't supported in Cryptsy. I still mine for Unobtanium in hopes that Cryptsy will include it one day.
Cryptocurrency. (n.d.). In technopedia. Retrieved from
submitted by ford0415 to BitcoinMining [link] [comments]

On Cryptopluralism

Any man deserves to enjoy the fruits of his labor when his actions benefit mankind, but no man deserves to benefit from exploiting others. If you fail to use your wealth in a responsible manner you don't deserve it. This is the difference between aristocracy and plutocracy. A plutocrat evolves into an aristocrat when he learns to use his power for the benefit of society as a whole. Bill Gates deserves to have tens of billions of dollar, because he uses his wealth in a manner that he believes will benefit society as a whole.
How is this relevant to cryptocurrency? Cryptocurrency allows us to do things we could not do before and emancipates people. At current exchange rates I have earned about €200 worth of Bitcoin simply through comments on Reddit. This would not have been possible without Bitcoin. Similarly, Bitcoin allowed chronically sick people to purchase euthanasia drugs on-line, thus giving them back autonomy and dignity. Bitcoin also allows people to avoid high fees associated with sending money across borders. Finally and perhaps most importantly, Bitcoin allows us to avoid having our wealth used to fund unethical banks and governments. Thus it follows that people who invested in Bitcoin and thereby raised its value and sustainability deserve to benefit from the fruits of their labor.
However, if cryptocurrency turns from a tool of liberation into a tool of oppression, we do not deserve to benefit. This is what my short story on /Bitcoin was about. A dystopian scenario, where early adapters rule as an elite over the human race and economic chaos emerged due to deflation. Rather than discuss how to avoid this scenario, the majority of comments consisted of offense at the notion that Austrian economic policies might not lead to paradise on Earth.
The solution to keep cryptocurrency a tool of liberation rather than oppression lies in cryptopluralism. Cryptopluralism envisions a world with a variety of different cryptocurrencies existing side by side and fulfilling different niches. Some cryptocurrencies will be geared towards fast confirmation times, others towards low fees, some towards high anonymity and yet others towards stable value. Others will be used by local communities to operate according to political ideals, and some may even be used as a reward for using processing power for scientific research. Most people will use different cryptocurrencies in every day of their life. A man might have three different cryptocurrency balances, one for his local village's market, one for his country and one for international payments. By owning multiple cryptocurrencies his net wealth will remain more stable over time as well.
In my experience, bitcoiners hate this idea. They're looking for a get rich quick scheme and oppose anything that might threaten their way to untold riches. Erik Voorhees, who owns about 100.000 Bitcoin (currently worth about 50 million dollar) leads the charge of Bitcoiners convinced that any alternative system that seeks to apply the Bitcoin idea to a specific niche is a "pump and dump" scheme that has no chance of success. Their greed causes them to pray for a horror scenario where all currencies are devalued and the whole world is forced to step over to Bitcoin, a single global currency used for every transaction and a system that creates an eternal hierarchy.
This won't happen however. Imagining for a moment the year 2018, when much of the Central African Republic receives Internet access, people there are not going to accept being forced to sacrifice all their wealth to a bunch of American libertarians to join the global digital economy. People will start their own cryptocurrencies and those cryptocurrencies that succeed will be the ones that do not reward early adapters to a ridiculously excessive degree.
There will be a redistribution of wealth, causing large fortunes in dollars, euro and other conventional currencies not to survive the transition unscathed. Similarly, cryptocurrency will reduce housing prices, as real estate will no longer be the preferred method of storing wealth. Gold and silver will also go down in value, as the type of people who buy such commodities will invest more of their savings in cryptocurrency.
For me personally, my Bitcoin investment has seen a pleasant increase in value, but I do not expect Bitcoin to rise much further in price. I doubt it will ever reach 2,000 dollar, the long-term valuation of 1,300 dollar that an American bank made doesn't seem unfair. I will not sell my Bitcoin, as I have a long history of changing my mind and/or taking horrible decisions and I want to keep a stake in a community that is still in its infancy. I will however, invest in alternative cryptocurrencies. If you asked Bitcoiners in June of this year for their opinion they would have told you to avoid altcoins, thus causing you to miss out on a 100-fold increase in value of Freicoin, a coin that introduced demurrage, in just half a year. I am currently waiting patiently for Securecoin to drop in value, at which point I will step in.
I encourage everyone to transfer at least some of their wealth from parasitic banks and corporations to cryptocurrency, a technology that has the future. Make sure not to put all of your eggs in one basket, unless you have experience with carrying baskets and the time to watch your basket carefully.
submitted by accountt1234 to accountt1234 [link] [comments]

Pooling money for a table/sponsorship of BTC Miami by the FreiCoin community (devs+pools+services+exchanges+community=Everyone)

Okay guys, I want to make something awesome happen, but i can't afford it. I want to get a table at bitcoin miami I want to try and see if we can get the core frc devs (maaku/jtimon/galambo/impaler00n), frc foundation, the major frc pools, an exchange trading FRC and some random at large frc members to be manning the booth in miami.
lease discuss this over the next day. i really think that the investment of our funds and time would be a great experience, not only bringing freicoin's image more public but for all of us to be able to sit down and try to work together on something and get to know each other in person
I think reddit is the most open and easiest format for us to discuss this so the other coin communities can easily see it.
submitted by FRCJoe to freicoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin's Competition - Top 5 Cryptocurrency Contenders Official TBC to BITCOIN Exchange Leaked - YouTube How to Exchange Litecoin for Bitcoin How To Send Bitcoin to an Exchange How To Withdraw Bitcoin Vault (BTCV) To Liquid Exchange ...

Freiexchange is a exchange for freicoin and other altcoins. Top 10 Markets. Market Name Last Price 24h Volume 24 High 24 Low Exchange one asset for another in our advanced and secure Bitcoin exchange. The best place to buy, sell and trade your cryptocurrencies. Start your trading journey today. Making cryptocurrency trading accessible to everyone, anywhere in the world. Spot-markets for Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, Ripple, Litecoin and many more digital assets. Places to buy bitcoin in exchange for other currencies. Note: Exchanges provide highly varying degrees of safety, security, privacy, and control over your funds and information. Perform your own due diligence and choose a wallet where you will keep your bitcoin before selecting an exchange. This Bitcoin and Freicoin convertor is up to date with exchange rates from September 30, 2020. Enter the amount to be converted in the box to the left of Bitcoin. Use "Swap currencies" to make Freicoin the default currency. Click on Freicoins or Bitcoins to convert between that currency and all other currencies. Freicoin (FRC) is a cryptocurrency, launched in February 2017. Freicoin (FRC) Price for today is $0.0044136, for the last 24-hours 2,598 FRC's were exchanged with a trade volume of $11.47.It's currently traded on 2 exchange(s) and has 5 active market(s), the top two exchange pairs are litecoin & ethereum.

[index] [21005] [21708] [25055] [26011] [7971] [23276] [4324] [29848] [1998] [6718]

Bitcoin's Competition - Top 5 Cryptocurrency Contenders

How view the Token/Coins on Etherscan and take advantage of a Pre-ICO !!! How to earn in the First Crypto ECO System Blockchain Open your Free Account best site to buy bitcoins, bitcoin setup, where to purchase bitcoin, bitcoin qr code, btc address, where can i buy bitcoin, how to send money, easiest way to buy bitcoins, buy bitcoin now, bitcoin ... How to use Shapeshift to exchange bitcoin? - Duration: 9:08. One Month 24,322 views. 9:08. GDAX Tutorial - How to Trade for Free - Stop vs. Limit Orders - Duration: 8:28. Official Tbc to Bitcoin. Sylvio Gesell's idea from a hundred years ago has been tested with success, then it was shut down by the Austrian government. One modern rendition of the idea is Freicoin based on Bitcoin, but ...