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

el diablo

Chancer3001 wrote: »

Horrible day.

Except veritasium somehow up 40%

There are a couple of channels that pump the crap out of that ****coin (Bix Weir, Clif High etc). It has barely any liquidity, the owner holds 98% of the tokens and none of the exchanges will touch it.

banie01

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Jaysus, Banie, you coming around to my line of thinking?!

I have shared my own beliefs on those particular issues public here for a while.
Its not made me a sceptic, but I do believe that it's going to have an impact.

As for ICO's, they are akin to boiler house scams.

Pussyhands

....I just wanna be rich 0_0

Anthracite

sexmag wrote: »

Did you actually read my comment before replying?

He didn't predict anything though, did he?

Or at least, a prediction no better than mine: at some point, in the near future, the price of Bitcoin will change rapidly for many complex reasons mostly related to human psychology.

It may go up or down.

I look forward to pointing back to the this prediction in the coming weeks and claiming prescience

Pintman Paddy Losty

Anthracite wrote: »

He didn't predict anything though, did he?

Or at least, a prediction no better than mine: at some point, in the near future, the price of Bitcoin will change rapidly for many complex reasons mostly related to human psychology.

It may go up or down.

I look forward to pointing back to the this prediction in the coming weeks and claiming prescience

Only one person on this forum has been able to nail their colours to the mast with a solid price prediction and succeed on more than one occasion.

GarIT

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

Only one person on this forum has been able to nail their colours to the mast with a solid price prediction and succeed on more than one occasion.

Who?

Bob24

Looks like there might be another massive drop kicking off right now:

Pintman Paddy Losty

GarIT wrote: »

Who?

Yours truly.


Refer to my April 01st and May 01st predictions. Only two I made and both were bang on the money.

GarIT

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

Yours truly.


Refer to my April 01st and May 01st predictions. Only two I made and both were bang on the money.

Sure

Pintman Paddy Losty

GarIT wrote: »

Sure

Only man to put his bollocks on the block and was vindicated on both occasions.

sexmag

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

Only man to put his bollocks on the block and was vindicated on both occasions.

And then said you would charge people for the service instead of actually putting your money where your mouth is.

Fair play though 2 out of 2,I couldn't do it

JohnnyFlash

sexmag wrote: »

And then said you would charge people for the service instead of actually putting your money where your mouth is.

Fair play though 2 out of 2,I couldn't do it

I've become very knowledgeable about Bitcoin, altcoins, and blockchain in general. Fascinating on technical, psychological, economic, and environmental levels. In reality it's almost impossible short crypto - you can do so on Bitfinex or Bitmex, but the whole market is so manipulated with wash trading, fake volume, painting the tape, tether and other pegged coins that you really wouldn't want to.



I think much of the sudden downturn is related to the shambolic EOS launch. Even the true disciples of crypto saw what 4 billion raised delivered in reality - nothing.

makeorbrake

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

I think much of the sudden downturn is related to the shambolic EOS launch. Even the true disciples of crypto saw what 4 billion raised delivered in reality - nothing.

Well, this is an interesting departure, JF. Lets have your SP on EOS then. Does it have any redeeming factors?...anything to bring to the table? Otherwise, what are it's flaws?

I have not followed the launch that closely but I wasn't aware of any criticism of the launch itself. It's an interesting test case as it's the first time there's been a launch with this type of structure. There has been criticism of the potential for centralisation by way of the 21 block producers - that's the only thing that I've heard as a negative related to the past couple of weeks with EOS.

They've raised a savage amount of $$ - no doubt. It makes me wonder what would happen if those resources are actually used to build out the eco-system IF there's substance to their offering.

However, I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you simply see NO value proposition (with or without looking at it) on the basis that this is your blanket view regardless of the project??

Anthracite

Bob24 wrote: »

Looks like there might be another massive drop kicking off right now:

Exactly as I predicted earlier today!

Anthracite wrote: »

at some point, in the near future, the price of Bitcoin will change rapidly for many complex reasons mostly related to human psychology.

It may go up or down.

Earleybird

Anthracite wrote: »

Exactly as I predicted earlier today!

I think that we're going to see it go up or down or sideways next. You heard it here first folks.

JohnnyFlash

makeorbrake wrote: »

Well, this is an interesting departure, JF. Lets have your SP on EOS then. Does it have any redeeming factors?...anything to bring to the table? Otherwise, what are it's flaws?


However, I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you simply see NO value proposition (with or without looking at it) on the basis that this is your blanket view regardless of the project??

I see absolutely no value proposition to EOS. In that you are very much correct. And I've been the most consistent poster in this forum when it comes to calling out the lack of genuinely real world deliverables and use cases when it comes to these preposterous ICO offerings. Buy the hype, and sell the reality.



EOS offers: nothing.


Ok, decentralized consensus is at the essence of the EOS pitch. And blockchain as a tech. Has some potential use cases. They couldn't deliver (after Block.One raised 4 billion!!) on the back of it:


A single compelling use-case.
A way of easily voting on conensus.

An explanation of how buying these coins offers the owner a means of ownership/added value based on the EOS operating model.



What I see is a very well considered exit scam. Brock Pierce, Dan Larimor and that crew have already exited the market. You can download the source code, share the private keys, and vote all you want. On what? Where will EOS change a single industry in the next 2 years? Cause no other start-up could raise that sort of capital without a very driven and clear use-case.

makeorbrake

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

I see absolutely no value proposition to EOS. In that you are very much correct.

I may not be able to short crypto (one thing we can agree on!) but I'd have put the farm on this response.

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

And I've been the most consistent poster in this forum when it comes to calling out the lack of genuinely real world deliverables and use cases when it comes to these preposterous ICO offerings.

hmm...there's a certain consistency there alright - but you never take any account for any form of technological improvement. I'm not saying i'm convinced by EOS (yet) but it shows some progression on blockchain 1.0 (bitcoin) and blockchain 2.0 (ethereum).

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Ok, decentralized consensus is at the essence of the EOS pitch. And blockchain as a tech. Has some potential use cases.

So you've identified use cases but they have not?

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

They couldn't deliver (after Block.One raised 4 billion!!) on the back of it

When did they raise the 4B? How much time from raising the 4B is sufficient for them to develop the project further?

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

A way of easily voting on conensus.

As per my last post, I have not been following it that closely - what has gone wrong with voting? I understand that voting may take a while - but that in and of itself isn't an issue, is it?

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

What I see is a very well considered exit scam. Brock Pierce, Dan Larimor and that crew have already exited the market.

I'll say that Brock Pierce for me is a red flag (not for what he may or may not get up to in his private life - but because of where he has brought a previous business and also that piece featured on John Oliver's summary of Cryptocurrency). Dan Larimer brought Steemit through from start to finish - so he has some track record.

Do zero fee transactions not mean anything to you?
Does solving the scaling issue not mean anything to you?
How about much faster tx confirmations?
Is it not progressive to have removed miners as a stakeholder group from the equation?
Are they worthy of any recognition or acknowledgement?

I'm not in any way saying that EOS is golden - I have not researched it sufficiently to form an opinion on it. However, I do see some iterative progress with it by comparison with what has gone before.

As stated previously, I wouldn't be inclined to agree with you on much(!) but I do accept that many of these projects are early in terms of getting all the way through towards the use cases that are bandied about...leaving them very high risk as everyone here accepts and understands. That said, you appreciate that it's a platform - which provides others with the ability to build things out on - in line with whatever use cases they have in mind?

Would be interested to hear the viewpoint of someone who has properly kicked the tyres of EOS - with the belief that it will deliver as an outcome.

sexmag

https://www.coindesk.com/jim-chanos-is-out-of-his-depth-trashing-crypto-assets/

Good article to have a little read

TallyRand

makeorbrake wrote: »

I may not be able to short crypto (one thing we can agree on!) but I'd have put the farm on this response.


hmm...there's a certain consistency there alright - but you never take any account for any form of technological improvement. I'm not saying i'm convinced by EOS (yet) but it shows some progression on blockchain 1.0 (bitcoin) and blockchain 2.0 (ethereum).


So you've identified use cases but they have not?

When did they raise the 4B? How much time from raising the 4B is sufficient for them to develop the project further?

As per my last post, I have not been following it that closely - what has gone wrong with voting? I understand that voting may take a while - but that in and of itself isn't an issue, is it?

I'll say that Brock Pierce for me is a red flag (not for what he may or may not get up to in his private life - but because of where he has brought a previous business and also that piece featured on John Oliver's summary of Cryptocurrency). Dan Larimer brought Steemit through from start to finish - so he has some track record.

Do zero fee transactions not mean anything to you?
Does solving the scaling issue not mean anything to you?
How about much faster tx confirmations?
Is it not progressive to have removed miners as a stakeholder group from the equation?
Are they worthy of any recognition or acknowledgement?

I'm not in any way saying that EOS is golden - I have not researched it sufficiently to form an opinion on it. However, I do see some iterative progress with it by comparison with what has gone before.

As stated previously, I wouldn't be inclined to agree with you on much(!) but I do accept that many of these projects are early in terms of getting all the way through towards the use cases that are bandied about...leaving them very high risk as everyone here accepts and understands. That said, you appreciate that it's a platform - which provides others with the ability to build things out on - in line with whatever use cases they have in mind?

Would be interested to hear the viewpoint of someone who has properly kicked the tyres of EOS - with the belief that it will deliver as an outcome.

As a casual, sceptic observer of crypto I think Johnny is very consistent and if I used this forum as a microcosm of crypto I’d be very negative on it.

No one wants to put their mark on any coins now it seems, the doubts are creeping in.

Using above argument about eos which you brought on with questions to JF and while you ask him to argue his side you use words like “I haven’t been following it closely” “X is a red flag” “a lot of these projects are very high risk” (gambling) and you want to hear from someone with positive things to say in eos?

Will you challenge that person as much as Johnny?.

makeorbrake

TallyRand wrote: »

No one wants to put their mark on any coins now it seems, the doubts are creeping in.

If you mean that nobody posted on EOS, I don't think you can draw any conclusions on that! As JF outlined, EOS have just raised a shed load of money...so there are people out there that have an interest in it. I'm curious about it myself - hence my last post.

TallyRand wrote: »

Using above argument about eos which you brought on with questions to JF and while you ask him to argue his side you use words like “I haven’t been following it closely” “X is a red flag” “a lot of these projects are very high risk” (gambling) and you want to hear from someone with positive things to say in eos?

I don't really know where you're going with that? I indicated a couple of things that I'm not happy with myself when it comes to EOS - so that's hardly me being partisan. As you've noted, I said that I wasn't fully up to speed re. EOS - hence my encouragement for JF to come back on certain points and someone to put the counter argument.
You are aware that this is a DISCUSSION board, right? The problem with JF is that he posts something up - but will never come back on queries raised. I find that kind of pointless.

TallyRand wrote: »

Will you challenge that person as much as Johnny?.

If I have the knowledge, absolutely. However, this is not a private discussion. I don't control it - anyone can ask whatever they want and make whatever point they want.

If I amend my request and I ask anyone who has a negative view of EOS to comment, does that make you feel better? Why don't you tell us what is wrong about the EOS proposition or are you just going to be a hurler on the ditch???

grindle

TallyRand wrote: »

As a casual, sceptic observer of crypto I think Johnny is very consistent and if I used this forum as a microcosm of crypto I’d be very negative on it.

The only thing Johnny is consistent with is evasion and wilful ignorance

EOS is a PoS (the other kind of PoS) ponzi scamcoin, no different to every half-hearted BTC fork

JohnnyFlash

grindle wrote: »

The only thing Johnny is consistent with is evasion and wilful ignorance

EOS is a PoS (the other kind of PoS) ponzi scamcoin, no different to every half-hearted BTC fork

Bit harsh there Grindle. I’m the only one here posting links from academics and neutral observers. Not my fault most of them agree that crypto is a scam. There’s some new research out this morning showing the enormous price rise in bitcoin, and therefore all other currencies, was as a result of tethers being printed. Research grounded in fact, and not some pseudo-religious belief in blockchain

People who bought made up magic beans in November, December and January are about 80-99% out of pocket. To buy coins that were created by compiling some code and hyping them up. Coins with no practical usage, and with enormous negative consequences for the environment if they were ever to become popular.

I’d suggest some introspection could be a useful exercise.

makeorbrake

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

I’m the only one here posting links from academics and neutral observers.

Firstly - that's not true. On any given day, there is research out there that may support or detract from crypto. As regards neutral observers, I don't believe in any such thing - and certainly not in this space above all others (and that applies to both sides of the debate)!

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

There’s some new research out this morning showing the enormous price rise in bitcoin, and therefore all other currencies, was as a result of tethers being printed. Research grounded in fact, and not some pseudo-religious belief in blockchain

As you are aware, I'm fully on board with your take on the Tether scenario. However, this nonsense about a pseudo-religious belief in blockchain has nothing to do with it. The Tether aspect affects pricing. In the meantime, the tech is being developed all the while (which is far more important). You're labeling with your 'pseudo religious belief' comment. Those that are enthusiastic about crypto are part of a broad church. Sure, some of them may be over-exuberant but others still are pretty pragmatic about it.
By the same token, there are plenty that are fundamentalists in the nay-sayer department where crypto is concerned - so it cuts both ways.

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

People who bought made up magic beans in November, December and January are about 80-99% out of pocket.

Sure - where's the beef here? Nobody will disagree with you.

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

To buy coins that were created by compiling some code and hyping them up. Coins with no practical usage, and with enormous negative consequences for the environment if they were ever to become popular.

Ok, so those people bought crypto that was overvalued. They may also have bought particular coins that have no potential whatsoever. However, you are throwing the baby out with the bathwater. To suggest that there is no promise or application for any coin is inaccurate. Furthermore, you refer to coins with regard to energy usage. There's only one significant coin which has a dependency on high energy usage but you are writing them all off inaccurately on that basis.

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

I’d suggest some introspection could be a useful exercise.

A two way street JF....could be cathartic for your good self.

Shauny2010

Haven't posted in a while, I got stopped out of nearly all of my Altcoins over the last 8 weeks. Unfortunately I did not go fully into cash but ended up back in Bitcoin and Bitcoin cash. It's been a wake up call and time to take stock of the good the bad and the dam right ugly.
My own view at the moment is we are still deep in a bear market which could last a lot longer than people expect. I'm thinking we could see Bitcoin go as low as $3000 over the next 18 months, and it could be 3 years untill we see a recovery. Yes that long!
Many of the Altcoins have dwindled away and I suspect that they have and are being abandoned by the developers. Theirs a lot of bad ugly news to hit the market yet, between scam coins, market manipulations and Government investigations things will get worse before they get better.

Having said that I see it as an opportunity for those who missed out and want to enter this space, just don't invested in the bad and Ugly!

Shauny2010

makeorbrake wrote: »

If you mean that nobody posted on EOS, I don't think you can draw any conclusions on that! As JF outlined, EOS have just raised a shed load of mone

Just to point out EOS is just software nothing more. Block.one aka Dan & Co. collected a shed load of money for themselves not EOS

smacl

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

People who bought made up magic beans in November, December and January are about 80-99% out of pocket.

You undermine your own credibility with gross exaggeration there Johnny. Picking the middle of the each of the above month we see the following for BTC and ETH (which amount for a very large bulk of the trading).

Month|BTC|Today|%Loss|ETH|Today|%Loss
Nov|5,790|5602|3.2|280|432.5|54 (gain)
Dec|14,600|5602|61.6|592|432.5|26
Jan|11,200|5602|50|1083|432.5|60
Avg|10,530|5602|38.2|651|432.5|10


Figures taken from coinbase, could be up or down a few % on another exchange but there or thereabouts. People who bought in at that time are down on average roughly about 24%, If you swap out November for February it becomes 44% on average.

Maybe you could enlighten us as to where you got the 80%-99% figure from for those three months, you being a follower of peer reviewed scientific papers and all that?

makeorbrake

grindle wrote: »

EOS is a PoS (the other kind of PoS) ponzi scamcoin, no different to every half-hearted BTC fork

Shauny2010 wrote: »

Just to point out EOS is just software nothing more. Block.one aka Dan & Co. collected a shed load of money for themselves not EOS

Thanks for posting your views. I guess that its an horrendous amount of money. IF those funds were to be used to fund projects to build on the EOS platform, that's a pretty scary prospect. However, I did also think that human nature being what it is, that cash would just get cleared off the table. Leaving aside the probable cashing out which will be a disaster for those that contributed the $4B, technically does EOS leave anything behind that is beneficial technologically despite the fact that those that have put their money in will get burnt?

Is it fair to say that all projects are currently overvalued (all in the top 20)?

Shauny2010 wrote:

Theirs a lot of bad ugly news to hit the market yet, between scam coins, market manipulations and Government investigations things will get worse before they get better. Having said that I see it as an opportunity for those who missed out and want to enter this space, just don't invested in the bad and Ugly!

Surely it will be necessary to sit on the sidelines though until those govt. investigations actually result in weeding out one or two obvious manipulations?...even if looking at a project that has plenty of merit..

smacl

grindle wrote: »

EOS is a PoS (the other kind of PoS) ponzi scamcoin, no different to every half-hearted BTC fork

I take it from that you mean EOS is both kinds of PoS?

Inquitus

Shauny2010 wrote: »

Having said that I see it as an opportunity for those who missed out and want to enter this space, just don't invested in the bad and Ugly!

It could also be the case everything out there to date is the bad and the ugly. If we look at the dotcom boom, most of those fast out of the gate did not last the distance, being replaced by better platforms that learnt the lessons of the past or adapted better, no reason the same is not true of cryptos.

smacl

Inquitus wrote: »

It could also be the case everything out there to date is the bad and the ugly. If we look at the dotcom boom, most of those fast out of the gate did not last the distance, being replaced by better platforms that learnt the lessons of the past or adapted better, no reason the same is not true of cryptos.

Could be, but equally well might not be the case. Successful software and IT is often evolutionary, so while later iterations of what current cryptos are might be very different they may also hold value through that change. Buying crypto is without a doubt a high risk endeavour and the advice you'll see repeated here and elsewhere is to only spend what you're willing to lose. My feeling is that like dot com, most cryptos will end up as a busted flush but a small select few will be huge. So you take a punt or not on that basis.

Dohnjoe

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

People who bought made up magic beans in November, December and January are about 80-99% out of pocket.

A little exaggerated. The market is currently down around 60% to 70% from (Jan) peak.

The problem with crypto is the unpredictability - for example one purchase in 2014 was down 90% by early 2017 (following a 3 year bear). That coin then spiked to a peak (like most cryptos did) and currently sits around down approx 60% to 70% down from ATH. It's current 2018 bear value is still up 400% from that 2014 bull buy date. As are many coins. Can't argue with those return percentages. Buffet got 30% a year and he was considered an oracle. They might be magic beans, but the cash is real.

I'm not disagreeing with crypto skepticism and cynicism - I actually agree with a lot of it. But every time there's a bear or a long lull the same type of commentators come out of the woodwork and make these same comments.

Inquitus

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Snip

There was a speculative bubble which has burst, there was a right time to get in and get massive gains, that time has now passed. Crypto sentiment is at an all time low, for now, in so far as those relatively ignorant people who drove the bubble have been burnt. Regulation, Tether, really bad scam ICO's getting exposed in the near future, are all going to be a drag on prices. I think it is going to take a good while for cryptos to weather that negative publicity storm and come out the other side, I have no doubt they will, but also no idea whether that valuation will be above or below current levels.

makeorbrake

Inquitus wrote: »

there was a right time to get in and get massive gains, that time has now passed. Crypto sentiment is at an all time low, for now, in so far as those relatively ignorant people who drove the bubble have been burnt. Regulation, Tether, really bad scam ICO's getting exposed in the near future, are all going to be a drag on prices.

It depends on how you look at it. I have no problem going long. However, I'd prefer the 'Tether' boil to have been lanced before I do so. More or less in line with that, probably all cryptos are still overvalued proportionate to where they are at. i.e. if these were conventional start-ups, there is no way they would have the valuations they currently have based on what they have as yet to achieve (for the most part) despite some very promising prospects in some cases.

Therefore, I don't think there are any missed opportunities. There is a total impatience in the crypto space though. A wave of people got burnt and it will be VERY hard for them to come back. However, there will be others and there are others that are still involved (or got out the right side of it). The important thing is that the real tangible work is being done in the background (oblivious to the speculative aspect) on the serious projects. Those that are complete vapourware will at some point dissipate into oblivion.

Straw poll - Do you believe crypto's to be overvalued still when you actually look at the fundamentals? Question only relevant to those that look at the long term prospects of a project and the fundamentals of each project.

JohnnyFlash

No proof of work solution will ever become a solution. Cause of the horrific energy usage at the core of the solution.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jan/17/bitcoin-electricity-usage-huge-climate-cryptocurrency

Bitcoin uses as much CO2 as 1 million transatlantic flights! Ethereum is catching up quick. Any coin built on the ethereum platform will fail as well. Because of the energy usage and preposterous transaction fees.

makeorbrake

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

No proof of work solution will ever become a solution. Cause of the horrific energy usage at the core of the solution.
Bitcoin uses as much CO2 as 1 million transatlantic flights!

Yes and no. There is one problem in your assessment (and that of other nay-sayers) as you place NO value on a system of totally immutable transactions but you will contenance actual waste of electrical resouces in other areas. I'd highly recommend the following discussion =>

The third industrial revolution.

It is relevant to us all and also references blockchain based systems.

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Ethereum is catching up quick. Any coin built on the ethereum platform will fail as well. Because of the energy usage and preposterous transaction fees.

Eh, I know you spend more time on researching this whole thing than I do (for whatever reason??). You know well that ETH are looking at rolling out 2x updates all together;

i.e. Sharding to deal with the scalability issue & a potential switch from PoW to PoS.

And of course, you simply ignore any other projects that - from the get go - don't have an energy usage issue...

JohnnyFlash

makeorbrake wrote: »

Yes and no. There is one problem in your assessment (and that of other nay-sayers) as you place NO value on a system of totally immutable transactions but you will contenance actual waste of electrical resouces in other areas. I'd highly recommend the following discussion =>

The third industrial revolution.

It is relevant to us all and also references blockchain based systems.



Eh, I know you spend more time on researching this whole thing than I do (for whatever reason??). You know well that ETH are looking at rolling out 2x updates all together;

i.e. Sharding to deal with the scalability issue & a potential switch from PoW to PoS.

And of course, you simply ignore any other projects that - from the get go - don't have an energy usage issue...

They don’t have an energy usage issue cause no one uses them. Only speculate on the price of the coins. Name one non pow coin that is being used anywhere, and how it improves upon a current industry.

Dohnjoe

Inquitus wrote: »

There was a speculative bubble which has burst, there was a right time to get in and get massive gains, that time has now passed. Crypto sentiment is at an all time low, for now, in so far as those relatively ignorant people who drove the bubble have been burnt.

There have been many speculative bubbles in crypto. After each one, the above is repeated. I'm not saying you're wrong, this might be "the one", but I've read it so many times by this stage. I've even said so myself a good few times, and will admit in each case I've been wrong.

sabat

Dohnjoe wrote: »

There have been many speculative bubbles in crypto. After each one, the above is repeated. I'm not saying you're wrong, this might be "the one", but I've read it so many times by this stage. I've even said so myself a good few times, and will admit in each case I've been wrong.

The difference between this current (December till now) peak and crash and previous iterations is that every one of the latter group was caused by a specific event such as a hack, legislation, insider fraud etc whereas this time around the scheme simply collapsed under its own weight.

makeorbrake

sabat wrote: »

The difference between this current (December till now) peak and crash and previous iterations is that every one of the latter group was caused by a specific event such as a hack, legislation, insider fraud etc whereas this time around the scheme simply collapsed under its own weight.

If we are to believe JF, there was market manipulation in the run up to December (and bizarrely I do!...wtf!). This is all to do with speculation. In the meantime, the technology is being quietly developed all the while.

makeorbrake

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

They don’t have an energy usage issue cause no one uses them.

Rubbish! Lets take an example of a top ten crypto. The user validates 2x transactions as part of the process of them completing a transaction of their own. Where is the energy usage there? Where is the increased energy usage if it's scaled up?

You know very well that PoS based systems don't have anywhere near the energy usage of PoW based Bitcoin (if any at all as the above example attests to).

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Name one non pow coin that is being used anywhere, and how it improves upon a current industry.

You're regurgitating the same points over and over. We've covered this ground -asked and answered already but I'll indulge you.
You can't expect instant results in a nascent ground breaking tech such as this - it doesn't happen in one single step. If you applied this current logic to the development of the web, you would have stopped technological advancement in it's tracks (as that took years to be built).
It's widely accepted by all that the tech is in its infancy. Younger projects build on what went before and improve upon it. Although much harder to achieve, older projects try to correct themselves in order to overcome issues such as scaling, energy consumption, etc (I'm thinking in terms of Ethereum here re. sharding/casper). ETH is the first truly programmable crypto - it's just 3 years in.

Dohnjoe

sabat wrote: »

The difference between this current (December till now) peak and crash and previous iterations is that every one of the latter group was caused by a specific event such as a hack, legislation, insider fraud etc whereas this time around the scheme simply collapsed under its own weight.

Most experienced people I know were telling friends/colleagues who wanted to get in in Dec to wait for the crash. It's a given. Real event or boogeyman, 95% of the value of these things is psychological, and that is what dictates the value, including the FOMO rises and the steep falls

The top ten coins (ish) are still approx 100% up on this time last year. Have to lose 50% value to cut even. Anyway, in the next year or two, I get the feeling I may be using quotes from some users

makeorbrake

Dohnjoe wrote: »

The top ten coins (ish) are still approx 100% up on this time last year. Have to lose 50% value to cut even. Anyway, in the next year or two, I get the feeling I may be using quotes from some users

Taking crypto generally, you think the space is generally over priced right now and still in need of correction?

sexmag

makeorbrake wrote: »

Taking crypto generally, you think the space is generally over priced right now and still in need of correction?

I like to think of this when i think of crypto

Value: the regard that something is held to deserve; the importance, worth, or usefulness of something.

I believe that cryptos have value, real value that can be used and is being used as currencys.

What that value is though is all based on the need of it from someone else but so is a lot of things, old cars,rare comic books etc

makeorbrake

sexmag wrote: »

I like to think of this when i think of crypto

Value: the regard that something is held to deserve; the importance, worth, or usefulness of something.

I believe that cryptos have value, real value that can be used and is being used as currencys.

What that value is though is all based on the need of it from someone else but so is a lot of things, old cars,rare comic books etc

Dohnjoe referred to valuation being psychological which I tend to agree with. However, market psychology can result in enthusiasm for new tech being over-exuberant. That can lead to a correction. It happened with the December surge, it happened in dot com times, it will happen with the conventional markets sometime soon.
So I'm wondering if enough air was let out of the tyres or whether there's still room for some more price deflation. I agree that there's plenty of potential but through conventional channels, many of these projects wouldn't arrive at the current valuations they;re currently at. They'd need more real world adoption to justify the numbers. That leads me to believe that there is more scope for correction.

Of course, I may be wrong...hence my question to see what others think.

Dohnjoe

makeorbrake wrote: »

Taking crypto generally, you think the space is generally over priced right now and still in need of correction?

The two real "floors" now since Jan have been less worse than I expected, and any sharp rises were naturally crushed by the bears (or reality as I'd call it), so far nothing out of the ordinary. It's not 2014 where we simply didn't know if it could recover, so it's less of an "unknown". Far better infrastructure. If nothing dramatic happens in the next 2 months, and the next dip isn't lower than early April or a week ago, then I think that will be quite interesting

Dohnjoe

makeorbrake wrote: »

Dohnjoe referred to valuation being psychological which I tend to agree with. However, market psychology can result in enthusiasm for new tech being over-exuberant. That can lead to a correction. It happened with the December surge, it happened in dot com times, it will happen with the conventional markets sometime soon.
So I'm wondering if enough air was let out of the tyres or whether there's still room for some more price deflation. I agree that there's plenty of potential but through conventional channels, many of these projects wouldn't arrive at the current valuations they;re currently at. They'd need more real world adoption to justify the numbers. That leads me to believe that there is more scope for correction.

Of course, I may be wrong...hence my question to see what others think.

The market is much smarter than many give it credit for. Jan crashed heavily but not before people made a lot of money. There's a significant number of people who want to position themselves before a rise like that even if they know it's going to crash - which ironically helps create those kind of rises

So like I said, cat out of the bag, but human psychology doesn't change

(Of course right now there's still a fair bit of residual hungover, caution and low confidence)

JohnnyFlash

Proof of Work is completely unsustainable. Environmentally, socially, and economically. So ye all need to get rid of that stuff from the portfolio. Lightening is a farce so far. Off chain implementations reintroduce a lack of decentralised trust.

Proof of stake is centralisation under a different name.

Next innovation of blockchain? Cause I can see some merits in it, only none of it involves lads hodling crypto coins in the expectation that someone will buy it for more money in the future.

Name one coin that rewards people for owning them (and how that would work is even better), has a real world application, doesn’t involve using enormous amounts of electricity, and is scalable.

Not a single example exists so far. This is preposterous stuff. The entire crypto space. It’s a mess of con artists, hype, and fake money.

makeorbrake

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Proof of Work is completely unsustainable. Environmentally, socially, and economically.

Can you please stop posting the same stuff post on top of post. We get it - you object to the energy usage involved in PoW whilst you place no value whatsoever in a totally immutable blockchain. Point made clearly - can we move on?

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

So ye all need to get rid of that stuff from the portfolio.

Because you say so!? I think we can leave people to make up their own minds.

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Lightening is a farce so far. Off chain implementations reintroduce a lack of decentralised trust.

LN is hardly even borne to the world and you want to strangle it! As regards Layer 2 and centralisation, there are some concerns about that but work is being done to address that (if you can let them get on with it). Innovation would be truly stifled for all time if you had yer mitts on the levers of power.

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Proof of stake is centralisation under a different name.

Sweeping inaccurate statement. It can involve centralisation but it doesn't have to be the case.

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Next innovation of blockchain? Cause I can see some merits in it

What are the merits? You claim that you have an open mind on these things but I really don't believe you - you've never once conceded any beneficial aspect of blockchain / DLT / crypto.

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

..only none of it involves lads hodling crypto coins in the expectation that someone will buy it for more money in the future.

You don't like speculators - then don't do it JF :-) What of it?
If there is merit in the coin and use cases follow, demand rises with the utility of the coin. If the circulated volume is limited, then the price of the coin will rise....and DONT come back with this nonsense that you can create as many coins or cryptos as you like. They'll be on another network - so it doesn't matter.

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Not a single example exists so far. This is preposterous stuff. The entire crypto space. It’s a mess of con artists, hype, and fake money.

And your 'contribution' in this instance is material for the 'sceptics' thread at best. It adds nothing.

Shauny2010

I think that while the energy consumption of PoW is alarming, it now has a similar feeling to the past problem with Bitcoins blockchain size. At the time it was thought that the blockchain would get too big and would eventually cause the collapse of Bitcoin. As it turned out it was not an issue.
With regard to the energy usage, by the economic nature of Pow miners will find the most efficient and cost effective way. Just look at all the green energy in use. Its in a miners interest to be cost effective.
I do agree with JF with regards to Lightning Network. Bitcoin has been sabotaged, this off chain scaling solution was promoted by the likes of Blockstream corporation. (See here for a good explanation)
Its not Bitcoin anymore, the current Bitcoin is something else which looks like it will eventually be surpassed

Dr Bolouswki

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Name one coin that rewards people for owning them (and how that would work is even better), has a real world application, doesn’t involve using enormous amounts of electricity, and is scalable.

Ethereum after Casper. If you don't understand why, you understand even less than it appears you do.