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

makeorbrake

Shauny2010 wrote: »

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.

It's quite possible - no detractor will entertain the idea for one second that there's value in one Blockchain project let alone consider a totally immutable ledger like BTC..as that's the trade off. Interestingly Antonopoulos suggests that we need one but can only afford one immutable ledger. Im undecided at the minute but it's not such an outlandish idea per se.

Shauny2010 wrote: »

I 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.

Sounds logical to me. It will come from both miners and developers - due to the need to stay relevant.

Shauny2010 wrote: »

Its not Bitcoin anymore, the current Bitcoin is something else which looks like it will eventually be surpassed

I was blinded to it at the time of the fork but it seems clear to me that Blockstream want to take the project to store of value and go up against gold in the longer game. That wasn't what i bought into with BTC 5 years ago. It will probably maintain some relevance going forward.

Finally panning out and looking at other projects has been cathartic. Sure, there's plenty of rubbish but there is no doubt that real tangible projects will emerge.

Pintman Paddy Losty

I just want to publicly apologise to those who signed up to my PPL crypto price prediction Pm service. I have been badly wrong in my price predictions over the last few weeks. Even I didn't expect the price to languish this low for so long. It really has been a bloodbath the last few weeks. Even the tether printing machine hasn't been able to prop up the price.

I will refund all who signed up for the service. I hope you didn't lose too much on my advice.

JohnnyFlash

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

I just want to publicly apologise to those who signed up to my PPL crypto price prediction Pm service. I have been badly wrong in my price predictions over the last few weeks. Even I didn't expect the price to languish this low for so long. It really has been a bloodbath the last few weeks. Even the tether printing machine hasn't been able to prop up the price.

I will refund all who signed up for the service. I hope you didn't lose too much on my advice.

To paraphrase Dirty Harry, that’s mighty white of you.

Been a very difficult few weeks for investors. Tether appointed a new dude today to look after their money laundering requirements. Has the dudes on reddit very spooked.

GarIT

I predicted Paddy would be very wrong and I was right, if anyone want to sign up to my service where I tell you who not to take advice from let me know.

I don't want to be too harsh in that I do have respect for refunding people and apologising but I've said all along and will say again anyone who says they can accurately predict the price is a scammer.

h0neybadger

Said this weeks ago when he offered his services.

All numbers and predictions are pulled right out of their ass

rapul

Did people actually sign up? That's insane ,fool's

Whelo79

rapul wrote: »

Did people actually sign up? That's insane ,fool's

Of course nobody signed up. The man is a troll.

JohnnyFlash

h0neybadger wrote: »

Said this weeks ago when he offered his services.

All numbers and predictions are pulled right out of their ass

Just Paddy, or are all predictions just pulled out of ones ass? Some lads are big believers in technical analysis, while others think it’s a big dirty steaming pile of shït.
I think the entire price of Bitcoin (and all coins by extension) is now down to how Tether act. They rule the roost. The whole thing will collapse (bitcoin and alt coins) when they are raided. Bitfinex and Binance will collapse as a result.

h0neybadger

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Just Paddy, or are all predictions just pulled out of ones ass? Some lads are big believers in technical analysis, while others think it’s a big dirty steaming pile of shït.
I think the entire price of Bitcoin (and all coins by extension) is now down to how Tether act. They rule the roost. The whole thing will collapse (bitcoin and alt coins) when they are raided. Bitfinex and Binance will collapse as a result.

The majority of predictions are ass pulled.
Some analysis works, but not to the extent that most people claim it does.

tether is but a drop in the ocean to the crypto market.

Yes, if it goes bang, sure, there will be a drop. But BTC won’t collapse. Crypto won’t collapse.

GarIT

There are groups that make thousands of accounts on places like reddit and make a prediction each week, in opposite directions so we week they lose 50% of their accounts, but after a while they have one account that got everything right for months and charge thousands to follow their future predictions

Franz Von Peppercorn

GarIT wrote: »

There are groups that make thousands of accounts on places like reddit and make a prediction each week, in opposite directions so we week they lose 50% of their accounts, but after a while they have one account that got everything right for months and charge thousands to follow their future predictions

Clever that. Derren Brown did something similar in one of his specials once. For horse racing.

Supernintento Chalmers

rapul wrote: »

Did people actually sign up? That's insane ,fool's

Well, actually I did and now have a new (to me) Audi TT as well as a pretty snazzy Belstaff leather jacket that I've had my eye on for a good while.

Pintman Paddy Losty

Supernintento Chalmers wrote: »

Well, actually I did and now have a new (to me) Audi TT as well as a pretty snazzy Belstaff leather jacket that I've had my eye on for a good while.

My first few PMs were very accurate. I hope you haven't bet on my last 2 though. Got it badly wrong. Let me know when your refund for this month comes through.

I am going to look at the formula again. I will tweak it and resume service soon.

makeorbrake

h0neybadger wrote: »

Yes, if it goes bang, sure, there will be a drop. But BTC won’t collapse. Crypto won’t collapse.

Some seem to relish the idea that if enough fingers get burnt, that will be the end of crypto. However, we can decouple the speculation from the tech. People can and will get burnt (and they have to take responsibility for that). That aside, the tech stays as people continue to build and innovate in the space.

JohnnyFlash

Supernintento Chalmers wrote: »

Well, actually I did and now have a new (to me) Audi TT as well as a pretty snazzy Belstaff leather jacket that I've had my eye on for a good while.

Good man yourself! Good to hear someone is making a few quid in the choppy waters of crypto these days. You must be raw from saw with that car and jacket combo.

Bob24

So bitcoin is surviving and there is a serious bloodbath going on accross the board in terms of altcoins ...

What do people thing is coming next?

el diablo

Bob24 wrote: »

So bitcoin is surviving and there is a serious bloodbath going on accross the board in terms of altcoins ...

What do people thing is coming next?

Think we'll drop quite a bit more and BTC will possibly go sub $5,000 in the coming weeks.

Bob24

el diablo wrote: »

Think we'll drop quite a bit more and BTC will possibly go sub $5,000 in the coming weeks.

Yeah quite possibly. Wondering if it could be the beginning of the end for some altcoins and a consolidation towards bitcoin.

Dohnjoe

Bob24 wrote: »

Yeah quite possibly. Wondering if it could be the beginning of the end for some altcoins and a consolidation towards bitcoin.

Perhaps, or a "dom.com crash" moment whereby some survive, many don't

Either way, the market is much lower than I thought it would be at this point, it's well beyond any sort of prediction.

el diablo

Bob24 wrote: »

Yeah quite possibly. Wondering if it could be the beginning of the end for some altcoins and a consolidation towards bitcoin.

Yeah, more than likely we'll see a large amount of project failures and exit scams in the alt-coins in the coming months.

sexmag

I've been reading more and more that this is all due to certain regulators in America trying to crash the price banks can buy in lower.

Give it 30 days and you'll start seeing positive stuff about crypto that will bring a bull run

Dohnjoe

sexmag wrote: »

I've been reading more and more that this is all due to certain regulators in America trying to crash the price banks can buy in lower.

Give it 30 days and you'll start seeing positive stuff about crypto that will bring a bull run

These convenient stories pop up all the time. The market is diving, no one knows where this will stop, a lot of fear, and ICO's are cashing out large amounts of Eth.

Personally I'm not too worried (in the long term) but in the short term it's showing no signs of abating

Kenny Logins

It's a Battle Royale and BTC will be the last man standing. :pac:

makeorbrake

Week on week the old money is busy getting itself setup and in place. They'll want to shake out more amateurs first - so I expect it to go down below 5k but I wouldnt be bothered how far it goes down after that point. It's an ok buy at that to me.

The alts are a no brainer i.e. that they will hit the wall. There can only be handful of coins left - there's not room for them all. I doubt that they're getting killed off yet - they'll take a pounding though. The front runners have to start showing some real world adoption before they start to get killed off I would think.

seannash

makeorbrake wrote: »

Week on week the old money is busy getting itself setup and in place. They'll want to shake out more amateurs first - so I expect it to go down below 5k but I wouldnt be bothered how far it goes down after that point. It's an ok buy at that to me.

The alts are a no brainer i.e. that they will hit the wall. There can only be handful of coins left - there's not room for them all. I doubt that they're getting killed off yet - they'll take a pounding though. The front runners have to start showing some real world adoption before they start to get killed off I would think.

The old money has been doing this since mid January according to everyone.
Its not that hard to invest in Crypto so I'm not sure what they are waiting for. Were basically saying institutional money is manipulating things but to do that they have to have already invested in Crypto.
I'd wager if we look back at the beginning of 2017 we would have seen an institutional money narrative to the explanations of peaks and troughs.


That being said I'm happy to get another crack at gaining some coins I've been interested in but at a much more reasonable price.

ionapaul

The 'this dip is down to market manipulation, the institutions are getting ready to pile in' argument is about as believable as the 'this dip is just down to the Chinese new year, the money will come roaring back in within a few weeks' nonsense earlier in the year. Pure wishful thinking.

Bob24

While not as obviously ridiculous as the Chinese New Year one, I’m not buying it either.

That maket manipulation exists in cryptos I definitely believe, but I haven’t seen any evidence that Wall Street bankers have ganged up to drive prices down.

sexmag

While ALT coins are down BTCs dominance is up meaning even though the price of BTC is dropping people are buying it

Might mean people are holding their fund in BTC until this storm blows over and then move back to the surviving ALT coins

Bob24

sexmag wrote: »

While ALT coins are down BTCs dominance is up meaning even though the price of BTC is dropping people are buying it

Might mean people are holding their fund in BTC until this storm blows over and then move back to the surviving ALT coins

Just my view, but I’m not sure all that money is going back into altcoins.

For now the only practical use cryptos have been successful at is being a store of value (although not a stable one) and a speculative asset - I.e. “digital gold” even though I don’t think it is a perfect analogy as gold also has practical uses and is not completely virtual.

And while I see a space for a digital and decentralised asset doing that, the world doesn’t need tens or hundreds of them (I’m not even sure it needs more than one) - so one (or a few) of them has to become the king and conquer all the others, and while it could change obviously for now bitcoin is the best positioned to do that (IMO as long as it is good enough technology doesn’t matter too much, once a coin has the best established brand and has gained everyone’s trust as the king of digital assets, being slightly better from a technology standpoint won’t be enough to replace it). Hence why it makes sense to me for money to flow away from altcoins and into bitcoin (unless some altcoins can show other practical uses to justify their existence).

seannash

Bob24 wrote: »

Just my view, but I’m not sure all that money is going back into altcoins.

For now the only practical use cryptos have been successful at is being a store of value (although not a stable one) and a speculative asset - I.e. “digital gold” even though I don’t think it is a perfect analogy as gold also has practical uses and is not completely virtual.

And while I see a space for a digital and decentralised asset doing that, the world doesn’t need tens or hundreds of them (I’m not even sure it needs more than one) - so one (or a few) of them has to become the king and conquer all the others, and while it could change obviously for new bitcoin is the better positioned to do that (IMO as long as it is good enough technology doesn’t matter too much, once a coin has the best established brand and has gained everyone’s trust as the king of digital assets, being slightly better from a technology standpoint won’t be enough to replace it). Hence why it makes sense to me for money to flow away from altcoins and into bitcoin (unless some altcoins can show other practical uses to justify their existence).

I'm kinda waiting to see how companies like Shipchain do. I can see it succeed as a company and I'm really curious to see what that will do for cryptocurrencies when companies like them begin to succeed.

sexmag

seannash wrote: »

I'm kinda waiting to see how companies like Shipchain do. I can see it succeed as a company and I'm really curious to see what that will do for cryptocurrencies when companies like them begin to succeed.

The idea is pretty good, its taking the standard track and trace of small goods to the bigger ones. Seems like a good thing to hold a bag off and at the price its at now sure why not

smacl

seannash wrote: »

I'm kinda waiting to see how companies like Shipchain do. I can see it succeed as a company and I'm really curious to see what that will do for cryptocurrencies when companies like them begin to succeed.

This is where I see blockchain having the biggest value in the medium term. Not a store of value so much as a mechanism for tracking assets that have a value. As such, I still very much doubt that BTC will be a winner in the long term as it is a weak solution here. ETH if Casper-2 comes to fruition is well placed, but for me IOTA is possibly better placed for larger numbers of lower value assets. e.g. I couldn't see ETH scaling for something like tracking food products but IOTA just might.

Personally, I'm planning to buy back in if we see stability again for a couple of continuous weeks. I reckon it could still have a fair bit to fall yet, after all BTC is still up on this time last year and ETH is only ~6%-7% down.

Dohnjoe

smacl wrote: »

This is where I see blockchain having the biggest value in the medium term. Not a store of value so much as a mechanism for tracking assets that have a value. As such, I still very much doubt that BTC will be a winner in the long term as it is a weak solution here. ETH if Casper-2 comes to fruition is well placed, but for me IOTA is possibly better placed for larger numbers of lower value assets. e.g. I couldn't see ETH scaling for something like tracking food products but IOTA just might.

Personally, I'm planning to buy back in if we see stability again for a couple of continuous weeks. I reckon it could still have a fair bit to fall yet, after all BTC is still up on this time last year and ETH is only ~6%-7% down.

I think the trick will be spotting the coins with the most value to the whole system in the medium and long run. Most large financial institutions and stock exchanges are looking at and developing blockchain solutions - some with their own systems started from scratch, others with Eth or other coins or in conjunction with other crypto projects

It's all happening irrespective of prices on the crypto market

makeorbrake

seannash wrote: »

The old money has been doing this since mid January according to everyone. Were basically saying institutional money is manipulating things but to do that they have to have already invested in

I need to clarify a distinction in what I'm saying. There have been 'whales' in the market for a long time and they can move the market. The institutional money is at a different level. I'm talking about GoldmanSachs, JP Morgan, etc.
Institutions have been waiting on custodial solutions and an SEC approved ETF - which will facilitate 401(k) and IRA plan money feeding in to crypto. Some of them have been involved in providing custodial solutions.

ionapaul wrote: »

The 'this dip is down to market manipulation, the institutions are getting ready to pile in' argument is about as believable as the 'this dip is just down to the Chinese new year, the money will come roaring back in within a few weeks' nonsense earlier in the year. Pure wishful thinking.

Institutions are getting involved - there's a shed load of tangible info to back that up - simply google it.

Bob24 wrote: »

That maket manipulation exists in cryptos I definitely believe, but I haven’t seen any evidence that Wall Street bankers have ganged up to drive prices down.

I think this is right on the money (literally).

makeorbrake

Bob24 wrote: »

For now the only practical use cryptos have been successful at is being a store of value (although not a stable one) and a speculative asset - I.e. “digital gold” even though I don’t think it is a perfect analogy as gold also has practical uses and is not completely virtual.

They're not all focused on being a transactional currency or store of value. Some of them have quite different applications. However, I do agree that they certainly can't all survive and most of them will fall by the wayside pretty quickly.

makeorbrake

smacl wrote: »

I couldn't see ETH scaling for something like tracking food products but IOTA just might.

Bit of a sale on at the moment (over and above most other altcoins - it's dived). Board room shenanigans have not helped. I am still enthusiastic about IOTA but my enthusiasm has definitely cooled. The upside always remains immense but there are so many obstacles along the way...concerns about security vulnerabilities, scaling issues and other technical issues, the coo and to cap it off, the leadership team at loggerheads.

seannash wrote:

I'm kinda waiting to see how companies like Shipchain do.

What is it's USP? What does it have that other coins don't?

Dohnjoe

makeorbrake wrote: »

They're not all focused on being a transactional currency or store of value. Some of them have quite different applications. However, I do agree that they certainly can't all survive and most of them will fall by the wayside pretty quickly.

Store of value coins are pretty much useless (as a store of value) due to their high volatility. Their only use case in that regard seems to be for speculation or hedging

Otherwise stable-coins are the only cryptos currently that have any hope of being used as an alternative currency

seannash

makeorbrake wrote: »

What is it's USP? What does it have that other coins don't?

Not trying to be a dick but just take a quick look into it and it'll be apparent what their USP is. Basically it allows better tracking of inventory during transport.

makeorbrake

seannash wrote: »

Not trying to be a dick but just take a quick look into it and it'll be apparent what their USP is. Basically it allows better tracking of inventory during transport.

Not trying to be a dick either - but drowning in coins and other stuff...you mentioned it - I asked....end of.

smacl

makeorbrake wrote: »

Bit of a sale on at the moment (over and above most other altcoins - it's dived). Board room shenanigans have not helped. I am still enthusiastic about IOTA but my enthusiasm has definitely cooled. The upside always remains immense but there are so many obstacles along the way...concerns about security vulnerabilities, scaling issues and other technical issues, the coo and to cap it off, the leadership team at loggerheads.

Yep, they're certainly not doing themselves any favours at the moment, but my feeling is the technology will survive and do well even if there's a largely different team in place by the time this comes about. Whether the current coin will ever make for a sound investment is something else again. If you think of the atomic piece of information stored in many blockchain systems as 'who owned what when' if the 'what' part is very low value, security becomes less of an issue than scalability and minimal transaction cost. Once you take mining out of the equation, as proof of work makes transaction costs too high, I'm guessing for one portion of the market the winner will be lowest transaction cost at acceptable speed and acceptable levels of security. In this domain, lowest cost is based around fewest CPU cycles on cheap hardware with minimum bandwidth where IOTA still has the advantage. As you move onto higher value items, security and speed become more important and other solutions are going to be stronger. There are lots of use cases across the spectrum here, but high volume, low cost, micro-transactions does seem like one of the larger markets. (Says he reading the tea leaves and scratching his head).

makeorbrake

@smacl : I simply can't answer the things that I've got concerns about between not having the technical background and not being privy to the finer detail even if I could interpret it. The COO thing never goes away. It seems very logical the way they explain it i.e. that once there's sufficient numbers, we'll take it away. However, many folks with more tech savvy than me seem unconvinced. They have changed the approach from COO to a point whereby there won't be a COO - to now talking in terms of a distributed COO. ....which is leading some to believe that they can't figure out how to remove it.

Is there really much utility in IOTA if it were to remain centralised - as in that case, isn't it far easier to use a centralised database?

The security aspects - well, who's to say how that will play. They've gone against the grain, rolling their own crypto (which seems to be an industry no-no) and taken it a step further with trinary (although I understand they're thinking in terms of use with Jinn processors). They also handled the MIT thing badly. It may mean nothing but a major vulnerability exploit could sink it (and I know that's a risk with every single project - but it 'seems' to be that little bit more risky here).

Many of these projects are all fine and dandy until they come to implement. It has always been claimed that IOTA scales yet right now they're already dealing with scaling related issues (hence the proposal of Economic Clustering).

The immaturity is not exclusive to IOTA - it's right across the sector. They're all techies who started out from humble beginnings and now find themselves managing billion dollar projects. Ordinarily I wouldn't be too bothered but given the other aspects and the body of work they have in front of them, it doesn't help.

Been sitting on the fence for quite a while. At some stage, I guess I'll buy in - but nowhere near what I originally thought I'd put in...at least not until we see more.

sexmag

https://www.investinblockchain.com/periodic-table-cryptocurrencies/

Very nice interesting table and so neatly presented

Pussyhands

The whole thing is completely a gamble. There's no rationale to anything.

I follow the biggest online forums and everything is unpredictable. It reminds me of a sponge. The water is our money. The sponge is dipped in the water and the rich squeeze the money out and dip it back into the water again. And repeat.

There's some wealthy people making massive money in this.

Any rise or fall has a reason that people make up to rationalise it. Like at christmas when people were saying they take their money out for presents.

And that the wall street bankers get their bonuses so there's gonna be a rise.

Same thing with hackings etc. None of these things affect the price imo.

makeorbrake

@pussyhands : I got totally disillusioned trying to do Fundamental analysis using media streams. There's no such thing as unbiased media and some of it has an agenda that will lose the likes of us $ if we pay heed to it. I still read the stuff...but try and read between the lines and not put too much value on it.

Fian

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I think the trick will be spotting the coins with the most value to the whole system in the medium and long run. Most large financial institutions and stock exchanges are looking at and developing blockchain solutions - some with their own systems started from scratch, others with Eth or other coins or in conjunction with other crypto projects

It's all happening irrespective of prices on the crypto market

"coins" are not a way to invest in a concept. If a particular coin is used for an innovative or clever use of blockchain that is great. But it doesn't provide a value to the coin because anyone else can just create an alternative that performs exactly the same function. And ultimately it is likely that the ones that will be used will be backed by nation states, not some random startup from a garage in california or whatever. So a coin that perofrms a clever function is not inherently valuable.

Lets say you decide that blockchain is the way to handle property conveyancing - after all the main problem for solicitors conveying property is establishing exactly what property is owned, by whom, and essentially what the history of the property is. A blockchain can carry all that information in a secure and uncorruptible way. So that looks like somewhere we should eventually go and it will be far more efficient than title searches in the registry of deeds. But no way will a private company be trusted to administer that, it will be administered by the government. And the value of each "coin" in such a system will be tied to the value of the property it represents, not whether the use of blockchain for such a system is valuable.

smacl

Fian wrote: »

Lets say you decide that blockchain is the way to handle property conveyancing - after all the main problem for solicitors conveying property is establishing exactly what property is owned, by whom, and essentially what the history of the property is. A blockchain can carry all that information in a secure and uncorruptible way. So that looks like somewhere we should eventually go and it will be far more efficient than title searches in the registry of deeds. But no way will a private company be trusted to administer that, it will be administered by the government. And the value of each "coin" in such a system will be tied to the value of the property it represents, not whether the use of blockchain for such a system is valuable.

I think you're picking a very poor example with property there, as relative to just about any other commodity it has a very high price, low transaction rate, and is already tracked by the state. Take another use case I've come across recently, tracking ownership of building tools (e.g. power tools, laser levels and the like) which are currently being heavily targeted for theft by organised crime across Ireland and the UK. The state has no interest in tracking these goods (or any other consumer goods), but the owners most certainly do. The coin in this case equates to a ledger entry and associated transactions in an asset tracking blockchain and has a value based on the demand for such tracking. Once you start getting on-site audits of companies for proof of ownership of tools, this drives demand. We already have this in the software industry where audits are carried out on licenses in use as part of ISO 27000, and we're seeing blockchain such as TAAL addressing this use case. Personally, I don't see nation states getting involved for use cases much beyond what they already do with current database technology. Whether or not coins have a future as an investment vehicle long term is something else again.

sexmag

smacl wrote: »

I think you're picking a very poor example with property there, as relative to just about any other commodity it has a very high price, low transaction rate, and is already tracked by the state. Take another use case I've come across recently, tracking ownership of building tools (e.g. power tools, laser levels and the like) which are currently being heavily targeted for theft by organised crime across Ireland and the UK. The state has no interest in tracking these goods (or any other consumer goods), but the owners most certainly do. The coin in this case equates to a ledger entry and associated transactions in an asset tracking blockchain and has a value based on the demand for such tracking. Once you start getting on-site audits of companies for proof of ownership of tools, this drives demand. We already have this in the software industry where audits are carried out on licenses in use as part of ISO 27000, and we're seeing blockchain such as TAAL addressing this use case. Personally, I don't see nation states getting involved for use cases much beyond what they already do with current database technology. Whether or not coins have a future as an investment vehicle long term is something else again.

Thats a fantastic example smacl, its great to see the good potential of blockchain technology when its presented like that

makeorbrake

Fian wrote: »

"coins" are not a way to invest in a concept. If a particular coin is used for an innovative or clever use of blockchain that is great. But it doesn't provide a value to the coin

smacl nailed that one down for you. The 'value' arises due to the demand for the use case and thus the coin.

Fian wrote: »

because anyone else can just create an alternative that performs exactly the same function.

That's not true though. The second comer is going to have to offer something new - a u.s.p. You can put it to the test in next to no time. Lets say you set up Fiancoin as a replica of bitcoin. You can do it without any skill and in little to no time. How is Fiancoin going to be worth $6339?

Fian wrote: »

And ultimately it is likely that the ones that will be used will be backed by nation states

Backed by what? And are those offerings you speak to going to be centralised?

Fian wrote: »

not some random startup from a garage in california or whatever.

Garage startups? Hewlett-Packard? ....Dell? ...with a combined market cap of $100B . I'm sure there are other garage startups but those two spring to mind right now.

Fian wrote: »

But no way will a private company be trusted to administer that, it will be administered by the government.

You're missing the point completely. Well, ok - if the project you're talking about is going to be centralised, sure. The whole reason this all kicked off is that it demonstrated that it was and is possible to construct systems that assume there is NO trust.
As regards governments, I wouldn't - and don't - trust one of them as far as I could throw them.

unkel

makeorbrake wrote: »

Garage startups? Hewlett-Packard? ....Dell? ...with a combined market cap of $100B . I'm sure there are other garage startups but those two spring to mind right now.

How about MS, Apple, Google, Amazon?

The 4 biggest companies in the world by market cap all started in a garage :cool:

Pussyhands

unkel wrote: »

How about MS, Apple, Google, Amazon?

The 4 biggest companies in the world by market cap all started in a garage :cool:

How many companies started in garages in the last 10 years are worth billions now?