Ven to VeT token swap is happening as we speak. Just got my VET in my binance wallet. Can't wait for the Thor power generation to begin, be interesting to see how the price moves as a token split hasn't happened in crypto before iirc.
Ven to VeT token swap is happening as we speak. Just got my VET in my binance wallet. Can't wait for the Thor power generation to begin, be interesting to see how the price moves as a token split hasn't happened in crypto before iirc.
Is that all you need to do is transfer to binance? Can you leave them there to generate thor?
Ven to VeT token swap is happening as we speak. Just got my VET in my binance wallet. Can't wait for the Thor power generation to begin, be interesting to see how the price moves as a token split hasn't happened in crypto before iirc.
Is that all you need to do is transfer to binance? Can you leave them there to generate thor?
I think the snapshot period was a day or so ago. So not sure if you’d be able to transfer your Ven to binance. But I’m pretty sure you’ll get Thor much like neo holders get gas on binance.
Iirc you can download the vet wallet app for your phone and send your Ven to your phone wallet and at some point a button will appear for you to swap to VET.
How have you got your Ven? In an Erc wallet or on an exchange? If it’s another exchange you might be okay and they’ll be swapped on there too.
Currently in my ether wallet. So should I go straight to the ven wallet?
Not 100% on mobile so can’t look up stuff. Visit the Vechain subreddit maybe and ask on their daily thread? But what you could do is convert your Ven to bitcoin, transfer bitcoin to binance and then buy VET when trading begins for vet
Ven to VeT token swap is happening as we speak. Just got my VET in my binance wallet. Can't wait for the Thor power generation to begin, be interesting to see how the price moves as a token split hasn't happened in crypto before iirc.
Ven to VeT token swap is happening as we speak. Just got my VET in my binance wallet. Can't wait for the Thor power generation to begin, be interesting to see how the price moves as a token split hasn't happened in crypto before iirc.
Ouch! That's some drop, hope it recovers fella!
? The price has dropped 100 times because the supply has been increased a hundred times. I have 100 times more VET than VEN so it’s fine. It’s still the same as it was the other day just about.
Obviously it’s nowhere near late January levels but hey ho, that’s the crypto market
Ven to VeT token swap is happening as we speak. Just got my VET in my binance wallet. Can't wait for the Thor power generation to begin, be interesting to see how the price moves as a token split hasn't happened in crypto before iirc.
Ouch! That's some drop, hope it recovers fella!
? The price has dropped 100 times because the supply has been increased a hundred times. I have 100 times more VET than VEN so it’s fine. It’s still the same as it was the other day just about.
Obviously it’s nowhere near late January levels but hey ho, that’s the crypto market
Ahhh, okay. Apologies, I thought they were consolidating and it tanked hard. *facepalm*
This all got a bit complicated for my dumb self... Therefore I stepped away... My initial £50 was down to about £29 when I walked away and would be something like £22 now...
This all got a bit complicated for my dumb self... Therefore I stepped away... My initial £50 was down to about £29 when I walked away and would be something like £22 now...
I also found it getting all a little too much for me, so got out. Luckily I managed to make a fair bit from the earlier 'spike' absolutely a case of more luck than judgment on my part!
Venezuela has issued a state run crypto currency backed by its oil, gas, gold and diamonds reserves. How is this any different from a traditional gold standard backed currency?
It shows how "crypto" can mean whatever the snake oil seller wants it to mean who has run out of real money.
In this case Venezuela shows it doesn't know how to sell snake oil and is bringing Snake Oil Salesmen into disrepute.
Venezuela has issued a state run crypto currency backed by its oil, gas, gold and diamonds reserves. How is this any different from a traditional gold standard backed currency?
It shows how "crypto" can mean whatever the snake oil seller wants it to mean who has run out of real money.
In this case Venezuela shows it doesn't know how to sell snake oil and is bringing Snake Oil Salesmen into disrepute.
i still believe you don't actually know what cryptocurrency is, and how its necessary for the blockchain.
You also ignore the fact that cryptos like nano are being used to get money from abroad directly to the venezualan people quickly and safely.
Venezuela has issued a state run crypto currency backed by its oil, gas, gold and diamonds reserves. How is this any different from a traditional gold standard backed currency?
It shows how "crypto" can mean whatever the snake oil seller wants it to mean who has run out of real money.
In this case Venezuela shows it doesn't know how to sell snake oil and is bringing Snake Oil Salesmen into disrepute.
i still believe you don't actually know what cryptocurrency is, and how its necessary for the blockchain.
You also ignore the fact that cryptos like nano are being used to get money from abroad directly to the venezualan people quickly and safely.
I think you are being unfair to @Dippenhall - I recall he read up on all this stuff.
Anyway, I did not and I still fail to get my head round the concept. Here's why.
First the jargon. In my experience people/firms that use hard to understand language do so deliberately to obfuscate and to make themselves appear more knowledgeable than they really are. I've found over the years that if you ask such people to explain their jargon in everyday words, they start to struggle.
Second - and I'd appreciate your input here - why are tokens, or whatever necessary for blockchain? In my experience you can pay for goods and services in whatever currency you choose. So let's say you are a large shipping company and want to keep a tight rein on the goods you are transporting. You decide to use the IBM blockchain to do this. Are you saying that IBM won't except payment for its services in US$?
Third, what happens to blockchain when something better comes along? My guess is that like so much in technology it just falls by the wayside and dies a quick but painful and neglected death.
Venezuela has issued a state run crypto currency backed by its oil, gas, gold and diamonds reserves. How is this any different from a traditional gold standard backed currency?
It shows how "crypto" can mean whatever the snake oil seller wants it to mean who has run out of real money.
In this case Venezuela shows it doesn't know how to sell snake oil and is bringing Snake Oil Salesmen into disrepute.
i still believe you don't actually know what cryptocurrency is, and how its necessary for the blockchain.
You also ignore the fact that cryptos like nano are being used to get money from abroad directly to the venezualan people quickly and safely.
I think i know what a crypto currency is. I know that blockchain technology is necessary to record holdings of cryptocurrency, I also know that blockchain does not need a cryptocurrency to run its algorithms. Blockchain is simply a set of algorithms that need a computer, not cryptocurrency, to function. The blockchain simply records a token of value acquired from a transaction, it is nothing more than a receipt. Nor is that token of value necessarily redeemable for value to acquire a different service or product or currency, it might simply provide confirmation that you have performed an obligation which releases a real asset or fiat currency.
Snake oil salesmen earn a living by charging for transactional services for individuals enticed to buy the record of a receipt called "Cryptocurrency". Turnover is necessary to generate revenue for the snake oil salesmen, so they supply hype and bullshit for circulation via social media in order to keep the wheels turning. But they are slowly being hemmed in by regulations that prevent outright misinformation and speculation to be passed off as fact or informed professional advice.
You don't have to agree with me, but please don't suggest I don't understand something just because we form different conclusions and interpretations from available evidence and facts.
I suggest you have not studied the Venezuela situation and understood that the government is simply selling to the Venezuelan people an interest in resources they effectively already own, hoping that calling it a "cryptocurrency" will mask the reality. The money does not exist, the cryptos are still held by the government, it is simply pretending they have been sold.
Venezuela has issued a state run crypto currency backed by its oil, gas, gold and diamonds reserves. How is this any different from a traditional gold standard backed currency?
It shows how "crypto" can mean whatever the snake oil seller wants it to mean who has run out of real money.
In this case Venezuela shows it doesn't know how to sell snake oil and is bringing Snake Oil Salesmen into disrepute.
i still believe you don't actually know what cryptocurrency is, and how its necessary for the blockchain.
You also ignore the fact that cryptos like nano are being used to get money from abroad directly to the venezualan people quickly and safely.
I think i know what a crypto currency is. I know that blockchain technology is necessary to record holdings of cryptocurrency, I also know that blockchain does not need a cryptocurrency to run its algorithms. Blockchain is simply a set of algorithms that need a computer, not cryptocurrency, to function. The blockchain simply records a token of value acquired from a transaction, it is nothing more than a receipt. Nor is that token of value necessarily redeemable for value to acquire a different service or product or currency, it might simply provide confirmation that you have performed an obligation which releases a real asset or fiat currency.
Snake oil salesmen earn a living by charging for transactional services for individuals enticed to buy the record of a receipt called "Cryptocurrency". Turnover is necessary to generate revenue for the snake oil salesmen, so they supply hype and bullshit for circulation via social media in order to keep the wheels turning. But they are slowly being hemmed in by regulations that prevent outright misinformation and speculation to be passed off as fact or informed professional advice.
You don't have to agree with me, but please don't suggest I don't understand something just because we form different conclusions and interpretations from available evidence and facts.
I suggest you have not studied the Venezuela situation and understood that the government is simply selling to the Venezuelan people an interest in resources they effectively already own, hoping that calling it a "cryptocurrency" will mask the reality. The money does not exist, the cryptos are still held by the government, it is simply pretending they have been sold.
A crypto currency is necessary to incentivise people to maintain the blockchain. So no, you do not understand the relationship between blockchain and crypto currency. Why would people maintain a decentralised blockchain when they have to pay the electric bills with no reward?
A blockchain can hold any kind of information, not just cryptocurrency.
Your problem is with unregulated speculative markets, not crypto.
Venezuela has issued a state run crypto currency backed by its oil, gas, gold and diamonds reserves. How is this any different from a traditional gold standard backed currency?
It shows how "crypto" can mean whatever the snake oil seller wants it to mean who has run out of real money.
In this case Venezuela shows it doesn't know how to sell snake oil and is bringing Snake Oil Salesmen into disrepute.
i still believe you don't actually know what cryptocurrency is, and how its necessary for the blockchain.
You also ignore the fact that cryptos like nano are being used to get money from abroad directly to the venezualan people quickly and safely.
I think you are being unfair to @Dippenhall - I recall he read up on all this stuff.
Anyway, I did not and I still fail to get my head round the concept. Here's why.
First the jargon. In my experience people/firms that use hard to understand language do so deliberately to obfuscate and to make themselves appear more knowledgeable than they really are. I've found over the years that if you ask such people to explain their jargon in everyday words, they start to struggle.
Second - and I'd appreciate your input here - why are tokens, or whatever necessary for blockchain? In my experience you can pay for goods and services in whatever currency you choose. So let's say you are a large shipping company and want to keep a tight rein on the goods you are transporting. You decide to use the IBM blockchain to do this. Are you saying that IBM won't except payment for its services in US$?
Third, what happens to blockchain when something better comes along? My guess is that like so much in technology it just falls by the wayside and dies a quick but painful and neglected death.
Tokens are necessary to maintain the blockchain. A blockchain is maintained by nodes or "miners". These administer the network and are who validate transactions/contributions/new information to the blockchain. Tokens are necessary to incentivise people to continue to maintain the network. Why spend money on electric when you're not getting anything out of it? The blockchain would die a death. The more the network is used, the higher the value of the token as the more complex the blocks get over time and more computer power/electric will be needed to perform tasks.
The speculative market has taken this value and run with it, which is why you see the original blockchain network, bitcoin, worth such a high value.
It's all in Satoshi Nakomoto's Bitcoin white paper which outlines the idea of blockchain technology https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
As for being superseded... what's your idea that's better than blockchain? It's a bit of a redundant question, what happens to the internet when something comes up better than the internet? In fact, there are some that theorising that "the internet 2.0" will be based on the blockchain, and so would likely be using cryptocurrency.
Venezuela has issued a state run crypto currency backed by its oil, gas, gold and diamonds reserves. How is this any different from a traditional gold standard backed currency?
It shows how "crypto" can mean whatever the snake oil seller wants it to mean who has run out of real money.
In this case Venezuela shows it doesn't know how to sell snake oil and is bringing Snake Oil Salesmen into disrepute.
i still believe you don't actually know what cryptocurrency is, and how its necessary for the blockchain.
You also ignore the fact that cryptos like nano are being used to get money from abroad directly to the venezualan people quickly and safely.
I think you are being unfair to @Dippenhall - I recall he read up on all this stuff.
Anyway, I did not and I still fail to get my head round the concept. Here's why.
First the jargon. In my experience people/firms that use hard to understand language do so deliberately to obfuscate and to make themselves appear more knowledgeable than they really are. I've found over the years that if you ask such people to explain their jargon in everyday words, they start to struggle.
Second - and I'd appreciate your input here - why are tokens, or whatever necessary for blockchain? In my experience you can pay for goods and services in whatever currency you choose. So let's say you are a large shipping company and want to keep a tight rein on the goods you are transporting. You decide to use the IBM blockchain to do this. Are you saying that IBM won't except payment for its services in US$?
Third, what happens to blockchain when something better comes along? My guess is that like so much in technology it just falls by the wayside and dies a quick but painful and neglected death.
Tokens are necessary to maintain the blockchain. A blockchain is maintained by nodes or "miners". These administer the network and are who validate transactions/contributions/new information to the blockchain. Tokens are necessary to incentivise people to continue to maintain the network. Why spend money on electric when you're not getting anything out of it? The blockchain would die a death. The more the network is used, the higher the value of the token as the more complex the blocks get over time and more computer power/electric will be needed to perform tasks.
The speculative market has taken this value and run with it, which is why you see the original blockchain network, bitcoin, worth such a high value.
It's all in Satoshi Nakomoto's Bitcoin white paper which outlines the idea of blockchain technology https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
As for being superseded... what's your idea that's better than blockchain? It's a bit of a redundant question, what happens to the internet when something comes up better than the internet? In fact, there are some that theorising that "the internet 2.0" will be based on the blockchain, and so would likely be using cryptocurrency.
Thank you very much for taking the trouble to respond. It's much appreciated. Can I raise a few more points? For me, the thing is, would the providers of the hardware/power not be happier getting US$ instead of some token, let's call it Figment, which if it has any value at all, is going to be highly volatile? Surely, getting paid for the use of your kit/power/software in a currency with a stable value would be better than getting paid in something that might end up being worth a lot but is more likely to end up costing you money? And how do you change your Figment for actual money and how much might it cost? Is not the only reason the miners are getting paid in Figments because the people behind the Figment can't give them any real money because they don't have any?
As for what might be better than blockchain, I have no idea on what that might look like. But then I had no idea in the 1970s that a 8" floppy disk that could store what I thought was a whopping 80Kb of data would be made to look very silly indeed compared to something the size of a fingernail which can now hold 512Gb.
But if I was asking for something better than blockchain, that something would include stuff like auditability of the software, to cut down on the hacks. Without that, the risks might be small but are potentially huge. Something that's greener, all those machines....I read somewhere that the electricity required for one bitcoin trade could power a house for a month - if that's true then the blockchain concept is in deep doggy doo. Accountability, anti-money laundering, regulation, guaranteed data accuracy, (all those things the crypto evangelists don't like) are essential, some supply chain standards and the ability of different blockchains to "talk" to each other. I'm sure there's other stuff too. Finally and most importantly probably, is speed of operation. Or lack thereof. Again I have read somewhere (maybe now out of date?) that bitcoin can only cope with 7 transactions per second. Is that right? Because if so, it makes bitcoin the direct equivalent of an 8" floppy- something that's crying out to be superseded. I haven't looked it up but I assume VISA transactions would be many factors of that figure? Clearly that needs to change otherwise those that need an urgent transaction will find their fees steadily increasing in order to prioritise some form of "same day delivery" guarantee.
Edited to add: here you go, stuff on bitcoin's energy consumption. https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption An interesting read, I've no idea on accuracy of course. But the same consumption as Austria? Is that really correct I wonder? It seems not only staggering but wholly unsustainable in the event that cryptos get scaled up.
Venezuela has issued a state run crypto currency backed by its oil, gas, gold and diamonds reserves. How is this any different from a traditional gold standard backed currency?
It shows how "crypto" can mean whatever the snake oil seller wants it to mean who has run out of real money.
In this case Venezuela shows it doesn't know how to sell snake oil and is bringing Snake Oil Salesmen into disrepute.
i still believe you don't actually know what cryptocurrency is, and how its necessary for the blockchain.
You also ignore the fact that cryptos like nano are being used to get money from abroad directly to the venezualan people quickly and safely.
I think you are being unfair to @Dippenhall - I recall he read up on all this stuff.
Anyway, I did not and I still fail to get my head round the concept. Here's why.
First the jargon. In my experience people/firms that use hard to understand language do so deliberately to obfuscate and to make themselves appear more knowledgeable than they really are. I've found over the years that if you ask such people to explain their jargon in everyday words, they start to struggle.
Second - and I'd appreciate your input here - why are tokens, or whatever necessary for blockchain? In my experience you can pay for goods and services in whatever currency you choose. So let's say you are a large shipping company and want to keep a tight rein on the goods you are transporting. You decide to use the IBM blockchain to do this. Are you saying that IBM won't except payment for its services in US$?
Third, what happens to blockchain when something better comes along? My guess is that like so much in technology it just falls by the wayside and dies a quick but painful and neglected death.
Tokens are necessary to maintain the blockchain. A blockchain is maintained by nodes or "miners". These administer the network and are who validate transactions/contributions/new information to the blockchain. Tokens are necessary to incentivise people to continue to maintain the network. Why spend money on electric when you're not getting anything out of it? The blockchain would die a death. The more the network is used, the higher the value of the token as the more complex the blocks get over time and more computer power/electric will be needed to perform tasks.
The speculative market has taken this value and run with it, which is why you see the original blockchain network, bitcoin, worth such a high value.
It's all in Satoshi Nakomoto's Bitcoin white paper which outlines the idea of blockchain technology https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
As for being superseded... what's your idea that's better than blockchain? It's a bit of a redundant question, what happens to the internet when something comes up better than the internet? In fact, there are some that theorising that "the internet 2.0" will be based on the blockchain, and so would likely be using cryptocurrency.
Thank you very much for taking the trouble to respond. It's much appreciated. Can I raise a few more points? For me, the thing is, would the providers of the hardware/power not be happier getting US$ instead of some token, let's call it Figment, which if it has any value at all, is going to be highly volatile? Surely, getting paid for the use of your kit/power/software in a currency with a stable value would be better than getting paid in something that might end up being worth a lot but is more likely to end up costing you money? And how do you change your Figment for actual money and how much might it cost? Is not the only reason the miners are getting paid in Figments because the people behind the Figment can't give them any real money because they don't have any?
As for what might be better than blockchain, I have no idea on what that might look like. But then I had no idea in the 1970s that a 8" floppy disk that could store what I thought was a whopping 80Kb of data would be made to look very silly indeed compared to something the size of a fingernail which can now hold 512Gb.
But if I was asking for something better than blockchain, that something would include stuff like auditability of the software, to cut down on the hacks. Without that, the risks might be small but are potentially huge. Something that's greener, all those machines....I read somewhere that the electricity required for one bitcoin trade could power a house for a month - if that's true then the blockchain concept is in deep doggy doo. Accountability, anti-money laundering, regulation, guaranteed data accuracy, (all those things the crypto evangelists don't like) are essential, some supply chain standards and the ability of different blockchains to "talk" to each other. I'm sure there's other stuff too. Finally and most importantly probably, is speed of operation. Or lack thereof. Again I have read somewhere (maybe now out of date?) that bitcoin can only cope with 7 transactions per second. Is that right? Because if so, it makes bitcoin the direct equivalent of an 8" floppy- something that's crying out to be superseded. I haven't looked it up but I assume VISA transactions would be many factors of that figure? Clearly that needs to change otherwise those that need an urgent transaction will find their fees steadily increasing in order to prioritise some form of "same day delivery" guarantee.
Edited to add: here you go, stuff on bitcoin's energy consumption. https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption An interesting read, I've no idea on accuracy of course. But the same consumption as Austria? Is that really correct I wonder? It seems not only staggering but wholly unsustainable in the event that cryptos get scaled up.
The entire point of giving tokens rather than USD is that the blockchain is decentralised and not one entity can give fiat currency to another, because the first entity doesn't exist. The token is worth something because the more tokens you have, the more decision power you can hold in the network when there are hard forks etc in your particular crypto community. For instance, once some one raises a potential imrpovement/change to the base code of the network you can help decide how the community goes forward, both with how you would use the tokens and use the new fork, or voting for it if the network is slightly more centralised. Also the speculation market creates the value as well.
In terms of your other points:
Hacks: Hacking a decentralised network is basically impossible. You can potentially steal by hacking into another persons wallet, but in terms of taking the whole system it wouldn't happen, there would be too many miners. Your fraudulent transaction would not be validated by the rest of the network making it incomplete.
In terms of things being better and commenting on the floppy disk.. its a bit like saying you're not keen on computing in the 70s because of the floppy disk's storage size. You're witnessing the birth of something as big as computing. Bitcoin is the first blockchain but as you say is horribly built for wide scale and green adoption. There are blockchains out there like IOTA and NANO that are more node based rather than miner based, in order to get your transaction approved by the blockchain, you have to validate at least 2 other transactions first. This makes the network faster the more people are on it, rather than slower, like bitcoin.
Venezuela has issued a state run crypto currency backed by its oil, gas, gold and diamonds reserves. How is this any different from a traditional gold standard backed currency?
It shows how "crypto" can mean whatever the snake oil seller wants it to mean who has run out of real money.
In this case Venezuela shows it doesn't know how to sell snake oil and is bringing Snake Oil Salesmen into disrepute.
i still believe you don't actually know what cryptocurrency is, and how its necessary for the blockchain.
You also ignore the fact that cryptos like nano are being used to get money from abroad directly to the venezualan people quickly and safely.
I think you are being unfair to @Dippenhall - I recall he read up on all this stuff.
Anyway, I did not and I still fail to get my head round the concept. Here's why.
First the jargon. In my experience people/firms that use hard to understand language do so deliberately to obfuscate and to make themselves appear more knowledgeable than they really are. I've found over the years that if you ask such people to explain their jargon in everyday words, they start to struggle.
Second - and I'd appreciate your input here - why are tokens, or whatever necessary for blockchain? In my experience you can pay for goods and services in whatever currency you choose. So let's say you are a large shipping company and want to keep a tight rein on the goods you are transporting. You decide to use the IBM blockchain to do this. Are you saying that IBM won't except payment for its services in US$?
Third, what happens to blockchain when something better comes along? My guess is that like so much in technology it just falls by the wayside and dies a quick but painful and neglected death.
Tokens are necessary to maintain the blockchain. A blockchain is maintained by nodes or "miners". These administer the network and are who validate transactions/contributions/new information to the blockchain. Tokens are necessary to incentivise people to continue to maintain the network. Why spend money on electric when you're not getting anything out of it? The blockchain would die a death. The more the network is used, the higher the value of the token as the more complex the blocks get over time and more computer power/electric will be needed to perform tasks.
The speculative market has taken this value and run with it, which is why you see the original blockchain network, bitcoin, worth such a high value.
It's all in Satoshi Nakomoto's Bitcoin white paper which outlines the idea of blockchain technology https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
As for being superseded... what's your idea that's better than blockchain? It's a bit of a redundant question, what happens to the internet when something comes up better than the internet? In fact, there are some that theorising that "the internet 2.0" will be based on the blockchain, and so would likely be using cryptocurrency.
Thank you very much for taking the trouble to respond. It's much appreciated. Can I raise a few more points? For me, the thing is, would the providers of the hardware/power not be happier getting US$ instead of some token, let's call it Figment, which if it has any value at all, is going to be highly volatile? Surely, getting paid for the use of your kit/power/software in a currency with a stable value would be better than getting paid in something that might end up being worth a lot but is more likely to end up costing you money? And how do you change your Figment for actual money and how much might it cost? Is not the only reason the miners are getting paid in Figments because the people behind the Figment can't give them any real money because they don't have any?
As for what might be better than blockchain, I have no idea on what that might look like. But then I had no idea in the 1970s that a 8" floppy disk that could store what I thought was a whopping 80Kb of data would be made to look very silly indeed compared to something the size of a fingernail which can now hold 512Gb.
But if I was asking for something better than blockchain, that something would include stuff like auditability of the software, to cut down on the hacks. Without that, the risks might be small but are potentially huge. Something that's greener, all those machines....I read somewhere that the electricity required for one bitcoin trade could power a house for a month - if that's true then the blockchain concept is in deep doggy doo. Accountability, anti-money laundering, regulation, guaranteed data accuracy, (all those things the crypto evangelists don't like) are essential, some supply chain standards and the ability of different blockchains to "talk" to each other. I'm sure there's other stuff too. Finally and most importantly probably, is speed of operation. Or lack thereof. Again I have read somewhere (maybe now out of date?) that bitcoin can only cope with 7 transactions per second. Is that right? Because if so, it makes bitcoin the direct equivalent of an 8" floppy- something that's crying out to be superseded. I haven't looked it up but I assume VISA transactions would be many factors of that figure? Clearly that needs to change otherwise those that need an urgent transaction will find their fees steadily increasing in order to prioritise some form of "same day delivery" guarantee.
Edited to add: here you go, stuff on bitcoin's energy consumption. https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption An interesting read, I've no idea on accuracy of course. But the same consumption as Austria? Is that really correct I wonder? It seems not only staggering but wholly unsustainable in the event that cryptos get scaled up.
Hacks: Hacking a decentralised network is basically impossible. You can potentially steal by hacking into another persons wallet, but in terms of taking the whole system it wouldn't happen, there would be too many miners. Your fraudulent transaction would not be validated by the rest of the network making it incomplete.
Not strictly true, there is something called the 51% Attack. Has happened to Bitcoin Gold, Litecoin Cash, Verge and others. Millions stolen in those attacks.
Venezuela has issued a state run crypto currency backed by its oil, gas, gold and diamonds reserves. How is this any different from a traditional gold standard backed currency?
It shows how "crypto" can mean whatever the snake oil seller wants it to mean who has run out of real money.
In this case Venezuela shows it doesn't know how to sell snake oil and is bringing Snake Oil Salesmen into disrepute.
i still believe you don't actually know what cryptocurrency is, and how its necessary for the blockchain.
You also ignore the fact that cryptos like nano are being used to get money from abroad directly to the venezualan people quickly and safely.
I think you are being unfair to @Dippenhall - I recall he read up on all this stuff.
Anyway, I did not and I still fail to get my head round the concept. Here's why.
First the jargon. In my experience people/firms that use hard to understand language do so deliberately to obfuscate and to make themselves appear more knowledgeable than they really are. I've found over the years that if you ask such people to explain their jargon in everyday words, they start to struggle.
Second - and I'd appreciate your input here - why are tokens, or whatever necessary for blockchain? In my experience you can pay for goods and services in whatever currency you choose. So let's say you are a large shipping company and want to keep a tight rein on the goods you are transporting. You decide to use the IBM blockchain to do this. Are you saying that IBM won't except payment for its services in US$?
Third, what happens to blockchain when something better comes along? My guess is that like so much in technology it just falls by the wayside and dies a quick but painful and neglected death.
Tokens are necessary to maintain the blockchain. A blockchain is maintained by nodes or "miners". These administer the network and are who validate transactions/contributions/new information to the blockchain. Tokens are necessary to incentivise people to continue to maintain the network. Why spend money on electric when you're not getting anything out of it? The blockchain would die a death. The more the network is used, the higher the value of the token as the more complex the blocks get over time and more computer power/electric will be needed to perform tasks.
The speculative market has taken this value and run with it, which is why you see the original blockchain network, bitcoin, worth such a high value.
It's all in Satoshi Nakomoto's Bitcoin white paper which outlines the idea of blockchain technology https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
As for being superseded... what's your idea that's better than blockchain? It's a bit of a redundant question, what happens to the internet when something comes up better than the internet? In fact, there are some that theorising that "the internet 2.0" will be based on the blockchain, and so would likely be using cryptocurrency.
Thank you very much for taking the trouble to respond. It's much appreciated. Can I raise a few more points? For me, the thing is, would the providers of the hardware/power not be happier getting US$ instead of some token, let's call it Figment, which if it has any value at all, is going to be highly volatile? Surely, getting paid for the use of your kit/power/software in a currency with a stable value would be better than getting paid in something that might end up being worth a lot but is more likely to end up costing you money? And how do you change your Figment for actual money and how much might it cost? Is not the only reason the miners are getting paid in Figments because the people behind the Figment can't give them any real money because they don't have any?
As for what might be better than blockchain, I have no idea on what that might look like. But then I had no idea in the 1970s that a 8" floppy disk that could store what I thought was a whopping 80Kb of data would be made to look very silly indeed compared to something the size of a fingernail which can now hold 512Gb.
But if I was asking for something better than blockchain, that something would include stuff like auditability of the software, to cut down on the hacks. Without that, the risks might be small but are potentially huge. Something that's greener, all those machines....I read somewhere that the electricity required for one bitcoin trade could power a house for a month - if that's true then the blockchain concept is in deep doggy doo. Accountability, anti-money laundering, regulation, guaranteed data accuracy, (all those things the crypto evangelists don't like) are essential, some supply chain standards and the ability of different blockchains to "talk" to each other. I'm sure there's other stuff too. Finally and most importantly probably, is speed of operation. Or lack thereof. Again I have read somewhere (maybe now out of date?) that bitcoin can only cope with 7 transactions per second. Is that right? Because if so, it makes bitcoin the direct equivalent of an 8" floppy- something that's crying out to be superseded. I haven't looked it up but I assume VISA transactions would be many factors of that figure? Clearly that needs to change otherwise those that need an urgent transaction will find their fees steadily increasing in order to prioritise some form of "same day delivery" guarantee.
Edited to add: here you go, stuff on bitcoin's energy consumption. https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption An interesting read, I've no idea on accuracy of course. But the same consumption as Austria? Is that really correct I wonder? It seems not only staggering but wholly unsustainable in the event that cryptos get scaled up.
Hacks: Hacking a decentralised network is basically impossible. You can potentially steal by hacking into another persons wallet, but in terms of taking the whole system it wouldn't happen, there would be too many miners. Your fraudulent transaction would not be validated by the rest of the network making it incomplete.
Not strictly true, there is something called the 51% Attack. Has happened to Bitcoin Gold, Litecoin Cash, Verge and others. Millions stolen in those attacks.
They all sound like awful coins to be honest. I’m not sure verge was the one everyone was saying it was a scam from the beginning.
Rumour doing the rounds last couple of months Facebook are going to acquire Coinbase. Would be massive news and will probably lead to Facebook being hosted on a blockchain with its own crypto currency.
Good mature debate on both sides here now, and credit to @kentaddick in particular for continuing to make the pro-crypto argument against multiple sceptics.
Hope it continues like this, for me it's been an education.
Comments
Obviously it’s nowhere near late January levels but hey ho, that’s the crypto market
Binance will support VTHOR distribution
https://support.binance.com/hc/en-us/articles/360008868451-Binance-Will-Support-the-Distribution-of-VTHO-to-VET-Holders
Will be distributed at the end of every month.
Now you've got me wondering........
It shows how "crypto" can mean whatever the snake oil seller wants it to mean who has run out of real money.
In this case Venezuela shows it doesn't know how to sell snake oil and is bringing Snake Oil Salesmen into disrepute.
You also ignore the fact that cryptos like nano are being used to get money from abroad directly to the venezualan people quickly and safely.
Anyway, I did not and I still fail to get my head round the concept. Here's why.
First the jargon. In my experience people/firms that use hard to understand language do so deliberately to obfuscate and to make themselves appear more knowledgeable than they really are. I've found over the years that if you ask such people to explain their jargon in everyday words, they start to struggle.
Second - and I'd appreciate your input here - why are tokens, or whatever necessary for blockchain? In my experience you can pay for goods and services in whatever currency you choose. So let's say you are a large shipping company and want to keep a tight rein on the goods you are transporting. You decide to use the IBM blockchain to do this. Are you saying that IBM won't except payment for its services in US$?
Third, what happens to blockchain when something better comes along? My guess is that like so much in technology it just falls by the wayside and dies a quick but painful and neglected death.
I think i know what a crypto currency is. I know that blockchain technology is necessary to record holdings of cryptocurrency, I also know that blockchain does not need a cryptocurrency to run its algorithms. Blockchain is simply a set of algorithms that need a computer, not cryptocurrency, to function. The blockchain simply records a token of value acquired from a transaction, it is nothing more than a receipt. Nor is that token of value necessarily redeemable for value to acquire a different service or product or currency, it might simply provide confirmation that you have performed an obligation which releases a real asset or fiat currency.
Snake oil salesmen earn a living by charging for transactional services for individuals enticed to buy the record of a receipt called "Cryptocurrency". Turnover is necessary to generate revenue for the snake oil salesmen, so they supply hype and bullshit for circulation via social media in order to keep the wheels turning. But they are slowly being hemmed in by regulations that prevent outright misinformation and speculation to be passed off as fact or informed professional advice.
You don't have to agree with me, but please don't suggest I don't understand something just because we form different conclusions and interpretations from available evidence and facts.
I suggest you have not studied the Venezuela situation and understood that the government is simply selling to the Venezuelan people an interest in resources they effectively already own, hoping that calling it a "cryptocurrency" will mask the reality. The money does not exist, the cryptos are still held by the government, it is simply pretending they have been sold.
A blockchain can hold any kind of information, not just cryptocurrency.
Your problem is with unregulated speculative markets, not crypto.
The speculative market has taken this value and run with it, which is why you see the original blockchain network, bitcoin, worth such a high value.
It's all in Satoshi Nakomoto's Bitcoin white paper which outlines the idea of blockchain technology https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
As for being superseded... what's your idea that's better than blockchain? It's a bit of a redundant question, what happens to the internet when something comes up better than the internet? In fact, there are some that theorising that "the internet 2.0" will be based on the blockchain, and so would likely be using cryptocurrency.
As for what might be better than blockchain, I have no idea on what that might look like. But then I had no idea in the 1970s that a 8" floppy disk that could store what I thought was a whopping 80Kb of data would be made to look very silly indeed compared to something the size of a fingernail which can now hold 512Gb.
But if I was asking for something better than blockchain, that something would include stuff like auditability of the software, to cut down on the hacks. Without that, the risks might be small but are potentially huge. Something that's greener, all those machines....I read somewhere that the electricity required for one bitcoin trade could power a house for a month - if that's true then the blockchain concept is in deep doggy doo. Accountability, anti-money laundering, regulation, guaranteed data accuracy, (all those things the crypto evangelists don't like) are essential, some supply chain standards and the ability of different blockchains to "talk" to each other. I'm sure there's other stuff too. Finally and most importantly probably, is speed of operation. Or lack thereof. Again I have read somewhere (maybe now out of date?) that bitcoin can only cope with 7 transactions per second. Is that right? Because if so, it makes bitcoin the direct equivalent of an 8" floppy- something that's crying out to be superseded. I haven't looked it up but I assume VISA transactions would be many factors of that figure? Clearly that needs to change otherwise those that need an urgent transaction will find their fees steadily increasing in order to prioritise some form of "same day delivery" guarantee.
Edited to add: here you go, stuff on bitcoin's energy consumption. https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption An interesting read, I've no idea on accuracy of course. But the same consumption as Austria? Is that really correct I wonder? It seems not only staggering but wholly unsustainable in the event that cryptos get scaled up.
In terms of your other points:
Hacks: Hacking a decentralised network is basically impossible. You can potentially steal by hacking into another persons wallet, but in terms of taking the whole system it wouldn't happen, there would be too many miners. Your fraudulent transaction would not be validated by the rest of the network making it incomplete.
In terms of things being better and commenting on the floppy disk.. its a bit like saying you're not keen on computing in the 70s because of the floppy disk's storage size. You're witnessing the birth of something as big as computing. Bitcoin is the first blockchain but as you say is horribly built for wide scale and green adoption. There are blockchains out there like IOTA and NANO that are more node based rather than miner based, in order to get your transaction approved by the blockchain, you have to validate at least 2 other transactions first. This makes the network faster the more people are on it, rather than slower, like bitcoin.
Rumour doing the rounds last couple of months Facebook are going to acquire Coinbase. Would be massive news and will probably lead to Facebook being hosted on a blockchain with its own crypto currency.
Hope it continues like this, for me it's been an education.