Newest 'divisibility' Questions - Bitcoin Stack Exchange

Bitcoin is antifragile, criticism should be welcome

I'm very disappointed when I start a thread that seems to question Bitcoin and I get downvoted (like this one: https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/g90nlg/at_what_rate_can_mining_productivity_keep/ ). I'm a hodler, I think Bitcoin is the best kind of money that ever existed. It's just how money should be, its supply can't be manipulated by anyone, transactions can't be stopped by anyone, it's infinitely divisible, it's fungible, inflation is negligible. It's a fucking masterpiece.
And it's antifragile. Every time a government meddles with its citizens with capital controls, every time a bank freezes your account or makes transactions expensive and slow, every time you lose 3% converting currencies, every time a central bank increases its money supply, every time a government bailouts some grasshopper by devaluing your hard-earned money, Bitcoin grows stronger. None of that unfair bullshit can happen in Bitcoin.
So why when I make a legit question I'm just being downvoted? Is Bitcoin just a get rich quick scheme for you? Is this reddit just a place to post stupid memes and talk about today's price or a place to have actual discussions with others that care about Bitcoin long term?
submitted by VSAlpha to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Stupid question, since bitcoin is infinitely divisible, what makes 1btc more valuable than 0.1btc ?

Just wanted to know the current point of view on the issue. LTC is on fire, btc is on a run too. I have been a holder of both for a long time, I believe in the technology, just wondering.
submitted by tritonx to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Why Bitcoin and all crypto-currencies will continue to plummet

When Bitcoin first started to gain some traction, what were the selling points? The first was that it was useful; the block-chain technology offered a currency that was infinitely divisible, decentralized, and open source. Although the Bitcoin nay-sayers have attacked some of these merits, I don’t think this is where the problem lies. Bitcoin and block-chain technology is clearly very innovative and useful.
However, besides being useful, the other crucial selling point of Bitcoin is its scarcity. A currency is utterly worthless if it can be created or counterfeited at will. Bitcoin seemed to easily answer this problem by setting a hard limit on the number of possible Bitcoins to ever exist – 21 million. As these Bitcoins are “mined”, the mining process becomes more difficult and more time consuming, meaning the rate at which new Bitcoin comes into existence slows
asymptotically. Additionally, considering that all Bitcoin is stored digitally, there is an increasing amount of the currency that is stored on hard drives that are either inaccessible or destroyed. In other words, we will reach a point where the amount of usable bitcoin in circulation actually decreases. Then it seems as though Bitcoin has the problem of scarcity solved, right? After all, it can’t be counterfeited and no more than 21 million can ever be created! Well, it depends.
Let’s take a quick detour into simple economics. Let’s say you are looking to buy some peanut butter. You find the peanut butter aisle and see a couple of different brands. You see a jar of Skippy peanut butter priced at $4 and an equally sized jar of Jif for $5. In your mind, peanut butter is peanut butter, so you go with the less expensive Skippy brand. In this case, Skippy and Jif are considered substitutes. Furthermore, in your mind, they are perfect substitutes, meaning you will always choose the cheaper one regardless of how much cheaper it is. But what if everyone considered Skippy and Jiff to be perfect substitutes? Well, it should be pretty obvious that in this case, Skippy peanut butter would be flying off the shelves and not a single jar of Jif would be sold (assuming sufficient Skippy brand was in stock, of course). How would the manufacturers respond to this situation? Well, if Skippy was smart, they would raise the price until the price was only one penny less than that of Jif. They would still ensure that only Skippy brand butter was bought, and they would maximize their profit per jar sold. But Jif, being equally smart, would try to adopt the same strategy and always attempt to beat the price of Skippy by a penny. This perfectly competitive behavior would ultimately result in each firm producing and selling peanut butter at the same price- competitive equilibrium. The important lesson is that perfect substitutes will have identical prices, and any change in one price would mean an identical change in the other.
So how does this knowledge of substitutes and perfect substitutes apply to crypto-currency? It should be fairly obvious by now that I mean to show that Bitcoin has near-perfect substitutes. Of course, Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, Ethereum, and Litecoin are not identical. There are differences in fees, payment processing times, and infrastructure among these most popular currencies. In fact, even the prices of each coin are staggeringly different. How then, can I argue that these coins are perfect substitutes, or even substitutes at all?
First, we must acknowledge the fact that the vast majority of crypto-currency investors are very poorly informed when it comes to the technical aspects of any given coin. The vast majority of investors also do not even intend to use their crypto-currencies as currency, but instead are holding these currencies as a speculative venture. In other words, the difficult-to-understand technical differences between these coins don’t even exist for the majority of investors.
But if these coins are perfect substitutes in the eyes of investors, why are the prices so drastically different? Didn’t I just explain that perfect substitutes have identical prices? Well, in one sense, the prices are very different. The price of bitcoin is close to $4000 and Ethereum is hovering around $35. This would seem to indicate that Ethereum and Bitcoin are very different. But we have to remember that we are talking about digital, infinitely divisible, scale-independent items. These aren’t like jars of peanut butter. The important thing is that any movements made in the price of Bitcoin are mirrored, to scale, in the price of Ethereum, Bitcoin cash, and Litecoin among other coins. This can be seen at almost any time in the Coinbase App, where the price history charts for any established coin appear to move identically 95% of the time. This symmetry in price indicates that the vast majority of crypto investors view these coins as nearly identical, perfect substitutes.
So what’s the big deal? What’s wrong with having substitutes? Well, having perfect substitutes for Bitcoin defeats, entirely, the purpose of artificial scarcity. There may only be 21 million Bitcoins that can ever exist, but there is absolutely no bound on the number of identical crypto-coins that can exist. Saying Bitcoin is valuable because it is scarce is like saying Skippy peanut butter is extraordinarily valuable because the company will only ever make 21 million jars, even though a different company with the identical recipe continues production. Skippy peanut butter really isn’t scarce, and neither is Bitcoin.
New crypto-currencies pop up like daisies because there is an ability to make an immense profit from an ICO. But where does that money come from? In almost all certainty, this money is largely coming from money invested in other coins. In other words, it is money that is being moved from one coin to another as opposed to brand new investment. This is important. The amount of money being invested into crypto currencies exploded during Bitcoin’s rise to $20,000, but has since tapered off. At this point, especially when the prices of all crypto-currencies are falling, new investment is extremely hard to come by. Every day, there is less money and more coins (perfect substitutes) to invest it in. This means the prices of all coins will continue to fall, barring some extraordinary increase to crypto investment. But even with an increase to crypto investment, new coins will continue to be created, and speculative investment will continue to be split further and further.
There is no reason to think this trend will change. This will continue until nearly all speculative investment in crypto currency is withdrawn or lost. After the dust settles, this will ultimately result in coins with different prices (much lower than current values) according to infrastructure and usefulness. All coins that have no real infrastructure or use as a currency will reach $0, and all crypto investment will be focused on a few, easily purchasable, easily usable coins.
But we still have a long way to fall. The fact that the prices of the most popular crypto-currencies essentially mirror one another despite important technical differences between each coin indicates that the vast majority of remaining crypto investment is speculative as opposed to real investment. The bubble is still popping.
submitted by Drax_lem_sklounst to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Cash to Be Valued at $12,000,000 Each

Enjoy =)
Larry Page = $41 billion
Bill Gates = $86 billion
All Cryptocurrency's = $200 billion
Amazon = $402 billion
Apple = $730 billion
USD in circulation = $1,500 billion
Gold Market Cap = $8,200 billion
Physical Money (notes/coins) = $31,200 billion
Stock Markets = $66,800 billion
All U.S. Money (bank deposits/loans) = $83,000 billion
But why doesn't EVERYBODY just convert ALL of the world's money of the ENTIRE PLANET to paying each other in gold? Gold is a great 'store of value', isn't it? Yes, it sure has value, but because it is inconvenient, hard to transport, slow, not divisible (without a third party), and difficult to keep from being robbed (without a third party), that is why the entire planet does not transact in gold, and hence why Gold's market capitalization is only $8,200 billion.
The only way this is possible, is if gold was more convenient to transact with than everything else, especially VISA. Which is impossible. You can't pay for a $100.37 item on Amazon.com, through the internet, without a third party, in a split second, by using gold.
Bitcoin (whitepaper version), can do 1,000,000 transactions per second CHEAPER than VISA. (It can probably do even more in the future), it's also at the same time a tangible currency (that takes trillions of video cards to create one single uncounterfeitable coin) aka "store of value".
So, for example's sake, let's add up all of the money (listed above), and "flood" the entire planet into using a currency ("store of value"), that is ALSO a payment system in itself BY DESIGN, able to send money to the other side of the planet, instantly, without needing to use ANY kind of outside third party, because the coin ITSELF is the third party IF it is the Whitepaper Version of Bitcoin. But if the witness data (aka transaction signatures) are segregated from the chain, then the coin (economy itself) is no longer ITS' OWN "third party" anymore, but prone to whoever wants to take advantage of the segregated witness data (whether its blockstream, bitcoin core, AXA, miners, or banks, doesn't matter). Because when the chain of digital signatures is no longer part of the blockchain, the incentive to take advantage of the system and introduce a traditional (bankegovernment) "third party" is now profitable/possible to do so. Whereas, originally, without SegWit, anybody who tried to do this would infinitely lose money in trying to do so---aka mining coins was more profitable than trying to do a 51% attack. Hence, with SegWit, we introduce a loop-hole into Bitcoin, allowing double spending of anyone's transactions, reversing anyone's transactions, halting anyone's transactions, freezing anyone's transactions, charge-backs, etc.
Now introduce $191,659 billion (see above) of the world's money to a ONE WORLD CURRENCY, that DOES NOT REQUIRE A THIRD PARTY.
17,912 x $650 current value of Bitcoin (whitepaper version) = $11,642,800 , for one coin.
90% of people who buy Bitcoin don't even know what is "Segwit" or "Blockstream" or "Satoshi" or "Whitepaper". They think it's the 'norm' that it takes hours upon hours (or even days) to get their Bitcoin. They assume that because it's "hard to get", then that is why it is valuable. Upon all of the other reasons. It's all media. It is exactly what BitConnect is doing. The only reason people are buying it, is because everyone is gambling, but are fully convinced that it is "investing". This is why Bitcoin is not going to lose its' value instantly. Nor is it going to skyrocket to an astronomical value like $100,000 instantly. But it will most definitely NOT be used as replacement currency by Walmart, Amazon, Sams Club, Coca Cola, Target, etc, and so on, it goes on FOREVER. All of these companies use VISA.
But what about other coins that already exist with little to no fees, instant transactions and end up having little to no traction and don't look like anyone cares about them??
For example.
These are the top ones I felt like choosing. I can explain every coin on the list. But the entire point, is that for EVERY one of these coins, Bitcoin Cash does it better. Bitcoin Cash has 0-conf (Bitcoin used to have it until the system could not accept anymore transactions and started backlogging transactions---aka full blocks). Bitcoin Cash has scripting functions (aka smart contracts). Bitcoin used to have it when the transaction fees only cost 1-5 cents per block... But no one wants to use the scripting functions anymore when you have to pay $5-$100 for each block.
There is a reason why Satoshi did not design Bitcoin (whitepaper version) like any of the other coins. It is because he already thought about those other designs.
Bitcoin legacy forfeited it's security model (whitepaper version) as soon as it changed protocol to SegWit.
submitted by MartinGandhiKennedy to btc [link] [comments]

There will never be 21M bitcoins and there is (almost) nothing special about the year 2140.

2140 is often mentioned as if in this year mining rewards come to a sudden end when the 21 millionth bitcoin is mined. I thought I would clear up that this is not a very accurate representation.
If bitcoin were infinitely divisible, the mining reward would never become 0 and it would take infinitely long before all bitcoins were mined. But since bitcoin is not infinitely divisible, at some point (around 2136) the reward will become 1 satoshi and 4 years later 0 satoshi. So the reward will be irrelevant long before 2140 and in the end there will be no more than 20999999.9769 bitcoins. By the year 2109 there will already be less than 1 bitcoin left to mine and by 2041 more than 20.9M bitcoins will have been mined.
submitted by dskloet to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Infinite Hope

Infinite.
What is with these people and their love for the word "Infinite"? (See also, "unlimited", "limitless", "boundless" and "eternal"). They can't seem to get enough of describing aspects of this practice, and the members themselves, as "infinite". But people aren't infinite. We're finite, and mortal, and very limited in our capacities.
What gives, freaky cult?
So then I spent literally three minutes on the math part of YouTube, and learned something about the concept of "infinity". Did you know that it comes in at least two varieties: "countable" and "uncountable"?
From what I remember, the difference is: "Countable infinity" is a never-ending list of actual numbers, also known as "natural" numbers, such that you could theoretically count your way to any one of them. Whereas "Uncountable infinity" is infinity in the other direction: to the infinitely divisible. Between any two defined numbers there are infinite others: you can always add to the decimal place, at any place. That's infinity too, but in a way that can't be counted... because you could never figure out what the numbers are in the first place.
One concept of infinity stretches out into the distance, while the other one infinitely subdivides into something smaller. Both infinite... but not in the same way.
I think the version of infinity being used by the propagandists over at Sniffing Glue-dism magazine would have to be the second kind, right? The kind that subdivides into infinity? Human capacity could never be "infinite" in the countable sense, in terms of days or dollars or output, but that second type, that uncountable type... a religion could wax wooingly about that one all day, and it would never mean a thing.
You could go around saying that space itself is infinite, or that each moment of consciousness is infinitely subdivisible, and you wouldn't be wrong, but you wouldn't be provably right, either. You could say that there are three thousand "realms" contained within each moment of consciousness, and what would it matter? Is there a practical difference between that many and 2,999? Is this information of any use to a physicist? Does it even sound smart? No, to all three. It sounds like a throwback to more primitive times, like how the ancient Chinese used the number "ten thousand" as their standard way of saying "a countless many".
Remember, infinity isn't a number... It's more like the space within which all the numbers can exist. It's a term for what lies outside the realm of understanding, and in math it's what you get when the calculations break down. It means "error", "paradox", "does not compute".
But our concern here is not to grapple with the concept of Infinity per sé. No. Once again this story is about a funny group of propagandists with a looong track record of using language as a weapon, as a tool for confusion. Not only do they have no interest in explaining how they're using a term, but they have no interest in you having a concept of it yourself Your confusion, muddleheadedness, the glossy look you get when your brain runs low on glucose... that's their currency. They want you in the mushiest of middles.
A word like "infinite" is key to their deceptive ways because it sounds deep, it indicates paradox, and it also has a range of different meanings, which makes it easy to fling around like a pile of monkey shit, without having to commit to any particular train of thought. It checks all the boxes.
Oh, look! The recent cover of the World Tribune: "One Youth, Infinite Hope. 6,000 in 2020".
Six thousand new members, eh? What a depressing little goal. (What happened, did no one survive the war of 50k?) And how very finite. Funny how, if one person is so infinitely valuable, they still require 6,000 of them for work in the salt mines.
"One person awakening to their Buddhahood can change the world— introducing the SGI-USA’s new, hope-filled focus."
So they're basically recruiting the Messiah?
"This is a call to action from the youth of America."
Written by three people who look a little too old to be playing high school students.
(And I'm not saying that these three are stuck in the world of delusion or anything, but the one in the middle is literally named Maya. Draw your own conclusion.)
"It is a cry from the depths of our beings to call forth and raise a new generation of peacemakers who have both the philosophy and means to transform our country from the inside out."
They've invested in Bitcoin?
"This year, 2020, marks the 60th anniversary of SGI President Ikeda’s first visit to America, his launching point for the worldwide spread of Nichiren Buddhism."
Oh, is that what that smell is?
"In 1990, he cited the book The Cycles of American History by Dr. Arthur M. Schlesinger, who discusses the theory that America returns to its founding ideals every 30 years."
BAH GAWD, everyone! They're about to drop some knowledge on us!!
"This was evident in the 1930s and 1960s, with President Roosevelt’s New Deal and the American Civil Rights Movement. Furthermore, the 1990s marked a monumental shift in the SGI-USA’s history, in which we returned to the foundations of faith, the Gohonzon, Nichiren Daishonin’s writings and President Ikeda as our eternal mentor of kosen-rufu."
WHOOOOA!!! What a lesson!! Every thirty years... shit happens! It happened back in 1990. It happened back in 1960. And yes, 1930 was a thing too! 2020 is DESTINED to be another year of shit happening! I can feel it in my bones!!
In fact, without 2020 happening, there couldn't even be a 2021! This year is the most important year that is currently happening! It may be finite in length, but it's completely infinite in terms of how important it is!! Just like YOOOOU, gentle reader! You may be finite in every way that matters, but you at least have an uncountable amount of hope. What does this mean? We don't know, because this religion has all the emotional complexity of a soda commercial.
"Now, 30 years later, the youth of America are resolved to create another tangible shift. How so? By welcoming 6,000 young people to the SGI-USA this year."
Infinity plus six thousand?
"These future leaders of justice and peace will be the antidote to our country’s turmoil—from gun violence and climate catastrophe to anxiety, suicide and the opioid crisis."
Theeese warriors of the tangible arts... they will be unleashed upon the population, not unlike bioweapons in the war for human revolution, to set about the work of completely eliminating guns, drugs, suicide, and the climate itself. Be afraid! Be very very happy! Most of all, be infinite...
"We may sometimes feel powerless as a single individual to effect change in the world."
But please, don't let reality stand in your way...
"Our Buddhist practice, however, teaches us that “one is the mother of ten thousand”
See? Ten thousand.
"Everything starts from one inspired person, determined to make a difference."
True, but then would it also be fair to say that the vast majority of plans end in the mind of that same person? See, I'm more of a glass-infinitely-empty kind of Icchantika.
"When all the members of the SGI-USA stand up with the resolve to help one youth rise up with this same mission and awareness, we will undoubtedly create a tidal wave of hope throughout our country and the world."
Woo-hoo! Being religious hoo-has will surely change the world!! Nobody's tried that one yet!
And can we talk about phrasing? When it's not a war we're emulating, it has to be a devastating natural disaster such a tidal wave? You'd think the Japanese people would have had enough of both by now! Chill the fuck out already.
"The one youth we introduce will not only gain infinite hope in their own lives but will also be the source of infinite hope for their families, communities and society."
An indeterminate amount of hope, yes...
"We have a responsibility for the sake of humanity to stand up in this significant year. Let’s not be bystanders of history. Let’s be active participants by giving infinite hope to one young person."
Well, gee, that sounds all sorts of wrong... Do we all have to share the same person?
"This year, we are resolved to break through our own limitations, saturate our communities with the seeds of the Mystic Law..."
Ewwwww...
"...and nourish them through heartfelt dialogues and friendships, with one youth after another."
Ugh!!!
"What greater way is there for us to express our appreciation to our mentor in this 60th year of worldwide kosen-rufu?! Will you join us?"
I don't know. This all sounds a little too messy for my liking. I also can't decide if you guys are hippies or fascists, or just plain old energy vampires, and it sort of freaks me out.
Could I have infinite time to mull it over?
Thanks! Text you...uh...never.
submitted by ToweringIsle13 to sgiwhistleblowers [link] [comments]

What are Bitcoin and Other Cryptocurrencies Backed By?

Bitcoin was created back in 2009 and became the first cryptocurrency ever designed. Cryptocurrencies have become increasingly popular in the last few years as they offer an efficient and decentralized way of transferring money.
Cryptocurrencies have always been an alternative to banks and fiat money. But why do they have any value at all and who dictates what they are worth? The value of Bitcoin is really calculated through supply and demand. The digital asset itself is backed by nothing more than perhaps the blockchain ledger.
Every single cryptocurrency uses a blockchain ledger, a system that records transactions between two or more parties in a verifiable and permanent way. This certainly adds value to Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. However, it is not what determines their price.
Why Things Have Value
Why does anything have any value at all? It has mostly because of supply and demand. Traditional currencies, for instance, are only backed by the government that issued them. Digital money, like Bitcoin, is not backed or linked to any physical reserves like gold and can certainly lose value due to different factors.
Cryptocurrencies have value because they require ‘work’ to exist. Cryptocurrencies are maintained thanks to the mining process, a process in which transactions are verified by different people. This process requires a certain amount of work, electricity, and money.
Key Factors That Affect The Value of Cryptocurrencies
Since most cryptocurrencies are not physically backed by anything, their value is determined through supply and demand based on a few important factors. One of the biggest advantages of cryptocurrencies is scarcity. The supply of most cryptocurrencies is fixed, and, unlike traditional currencies, no one can issue more than the maximum limit. This means that cryptocurrencies are deflationary by nature.
Another key factor that benefits cryptocurrencies is divisibility. Any cryptocurrency can be divided into smaller units. A simple change in Bitcoin’s code could allow the digital asset to be divided into infinitely smaller units at any time.
Additionally, transferring cryptocurrencies can be extremely fast and cheap compared to traditional methods. Fees are somewhat fixed no matter the amount you send, which means that theoretically you could send 1 million Bitcoins to someone and pay only a few dollars in fees (or even less).
In a way, one could say that Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies are backed by the public’s faith in them as they have realized that the current monetary system is not as robust as one might think.
Why Are Cryptocurrencies so Volatile Then?
In comparison to traditional currencies and even stocks, cryptocurrencies are far more volatile, meaning that the current price of any given crypto can change drastically in hours. It’s quite common to see Bitcoin’s price go up or down 5-10% within a few days. In fact, even in periods of low volatility, most cryptocurrencies still experience price moves of up to 1-2%, which is considered extremely high in traditional markets.
The explanation, however, is quite simple. Cryptocurrencies, in general, lack the liquidity that the rest of the markets enjoy. According to statistics from Statista, the average daily turnover in the global foreign exchange market was around $6.5 trillion daily. The cryptocurrency market, on average, sees around $80 billion in daily trading volume, and according to various sources, a lot of the volume is actually fake.
The problem with illiquidity is that someone who wants to sell or buy a huge amount of Bitcoin or any cryptocurrency will simply ‘eat’ all the orders in the order book of the exchange, catapulting the price up or crashing it. That is the only reason why cryptocurrencies, in general, are extremely volatile.
Some Cryptocurrencies Are Actually Backed by Things
There are, however, some cryptocurrencies that are backed by gold, assets, and even fiat money. Tether (USDT) became the most popular cryptocurrency backed by fiat, later known as a ‘stablecoin’.
Stablecoins
A stablecoin is designed to always be worth $1.00 by maintaining 1 dollar in some sort of reserve. The first stablecoin to become widely popular was Tether, however, there was a lot of controversy surrounding it. Most of the criticism came from the fact that Tether Limited was unable to prove they actually have the funds to cover all the Tether issued.
Additionally, on 30 April 2019, Tether Limited’s lawyer actually admitted that each coin is only backed by $0.74 in cash.
Currently, there are over a dozen stablecoins that are backed by fiat, commodities, and even cryptocurrencies. TrueUSD is similar to Tether but it is considered to be one of the most reliable stablecoins currently as the company behind it has been extremely transparent and conducted an independent audit back in March 2019.
A more complex stablecoin is Dai, which is backed by Ethereum and pegged to the dollar. The system behind Dai basically locks Ethereum in a public contract. If the value of Dai distances too far from $1, the system will make use of the contract to stabilize it back. There is, however, a small problem: Dai is not entirely decentralized as the technology behind it is being monitored by the Maker Foundation.
DigixDAO is another stablecoin and it’s backed by bars of actual gold. It is an ERC-20 token created back in 2014. The digital asset is entirely decentralized and autonomous and can in fact be extended to be backed by other precious metals and even physical assets. According to the company, the gold is stored in custodial vaults at the Singapore Safe House, and 1 DGX will always equal 1 gram of gold.
Cryptocurrencies Backed by Assets
Not all cryptocurrencies backed by assets are stablecoins. For instance, the first oil-backed cryptocurrency was introduced by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro back in 2017. El Petro, although highly criticized, is supposedly the first cryptocurrency to be backed by oil thanks to the country’s huge oil and mineral reserves.
Petro is, however, not pegged to anything, and its value can increase or decrease at any given time.
Tokenization of Assets
Something that has become quite popular over the last few years is the tokenization of traditional stocks and assets. There are countless blockchain startups tokenizing almost anything to represent ownership.
The tokenization of assets brings numerous benefits like greater liquidity, more transparency, cheaper and faster transactions, and more accessibility. Tokenization itself is quite difficult to regulate, and all tokenization assets have to be compliant with the law, something that issuers struggle to achieve.
Conclusion
While traditional cryptocurrencies are not necessarily backed by anything physical, they still hold a lot of value solely based on supply and demand. This is the case with numerous other assets and even fiat money.
Cryptocurrencies have come a long way and there is a wide variety of them. Stablecoins are the most popular when it comes to asset-backed cryptocurrencies. They serve as an alternative to fiat money and bring a lot of liquidity to the market. There are definitely concerns as people question their stability, however, they have become an important factor in the market.
Additionally, other projects aside from stablecoins have implemented asset-backed cryptocurrencies. There are numerous cryptocurrencies out there backed by precious metals, physical assets, stocks, and even other cryptocurrencies. We are definitely going to see even more in the near future as they bring a lot more security to investors and the crypto space in general.

SwapSpace team is always ready for discussion. You can drop an email with your suggestions and questions to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Join our social networks: Twitter, Medium, Facebook, Telegram The best rates on https://swapspace.co/
submitted by SwapSpace_co to CryptoTechnology [link] [comments]

Intergalactic Money: The deep impact of a self-evolving infinitely-scalable general-purpose realtime unforkable public blockchain federation

Intergalactic Money: The deep impact of a self-evolving infinitely-scalable general-purpose realtime unforkable public blockchain federation
Prologue: This article is a strategic response to the following crypto-related papers published in 2017: 1. “An (Institutional) Investor’s Take on Cryptoassets” by John Pfeffer of Pfeffer Capital and 2. “Plasma: Scalable Autonomous Smart Contracts” by Joseph Poon of Lightning Network and Vitalik Buterin of Ethereum Foundation.
John Pfeffer in his paper titled “An (Institutional) Investor’s Take on Cryptoassets” claims that “scaling solutions for blockchains in particular and decentralized networks including (implied) DAG-based networks such as PoS, Sharding, etc. are bullish for adoption and users/consumers but bearish for token value/investors. Even without those technology shifts, the cost of using decentralized protocols is deflationary, since the cost of processing power, storage and bandwidth are deflationary.” Farther he states “ It’s a mistake to compare monopoly network effects of Facebook or other centralized platforms to blockchain protocols because blockchain protocols can be forked to a functionally identical blockchain with the same history and users up to the moment if a parent chain persists in being arbitrarily expensive to use(i.e. rent-seeking). Like TCP/IP but unlike Facebook, blockchain protocols are open-source software that anyone can copy or fork freely.” Add regulatory pressures on bitcoin and public permissionless currency and its negative impact.

https://preview.redd.it/zjyhwcacmml11.jpg?width=636&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ea21ea7e6957cb39dfbb57fa3193e5805578d38d

It’s obvious from his statements; John is not aware of latest R&D projects focused on improving decentralized networks and advances in decentralized protocols especially “Unforkable Realtime Blockchains” such as Algorand, Bitlattice and Orch.Network based on Recursive STARKs and FHE/SHE. He is also ignorant of the fact that there are several projects working on self-evolving censor-proof quantum safe protocols such as Orch Network (token symbol: ORC and URL: https://orch.network/). These protocols have adopted a continuous development strategy while getting ready for next paradigm shifts in technology e.g. practical quantum computing and quantum internet. He also does not understand that a futuristic protocol token with infinite-divisibility integrated with a hybrid quantum-classical computational infrastructure can easily counteract and neutralize the deflationary nature of its own tokens and its limited supply hardcap making it infinitely scalable and elastic.
While I agree with his following statement: “A non-sovereign, non-fiat, trustless, censorship-resistant cryptoasset would be a far better alternative for most foreign currency international reserves. IMF SDRs are already a synthetic store of value, so could also be easily and sensibly replaced by such a cryptoasset.”, this necessarily does not make BTC the right candidate for several reasons: 1. BTC is not a self-improving self-evolvable fully censorship-resistant cryptoasset which is a must for it to qualify as a viable reserve asset and appeal to long-term institutional and high networth investors.
Bitcoins miners are mostly corporate entities having large investments in ASIC-based mining equipments. It’s not impossible to corner 51% mining power by a centralized resourceful entity compromising double spending protection and other trustless security measures built-in. So BTC is not truly decentralized. 2. The underlying hash algorithm and encryption protocol of BTC known as SHA-256 can be broken by multi-qubit quantum circuits and quantum computers under active development in labs across the world. So BTC is not future-proof and its very existence is threatened unless its core developers continuously modify and improve its underlying security model and technology. 3. Bitcoin is not infinitely-divisible that’s it’s not only upwardly non-scalable, the same is true for its downward scalability. In fact BTC has only 8 decimal places known as Satoshis(1 satoshi = 0.00000001 BTC)
Futuristic protocol tokens such as infinitely scalable minerless Orch(ORC) should be more attractive to long-term investors looking for an alternative non-sovereign, non-fiat, and trustless, censorship-resistant privacy preserving high-velocity cryptoasset.
In their paper titled “Plasma: Scalable Autonomous Smart Contracts” Joseph Poon and Vitalik Buterin defines their proposal as “Plasma is a proposed framework for incentivized and enforced execution of ‘smart contracts’ which is scalable to a significant amount of state updates per second (potentially billions) enabling the blockchain to be able to represent a significant amount of decentralized financial applications worldwide.” Now first thing is it’s not clear what do they mean by “Autonomous Smart Contracts” and what specifically autonomous component in Plasma it refers to. For example, an autonomous weapon would set the target and hit it on its own without any humans in the loop or an autonomous self-driving car would drive down to a destination point without any human navigating it.
Now contrary to their claims, their off-chain and second-layer scaling solution with Ethereum(ETH) as the root blockchain is neither censor-proof nor truly scalable as this requires state-channel based masternodes/validators. So it’s not a feasible solution at all as trust issues will crop up at every moment.
Moreover, Scalable Multi-Party Computation is feasible only in a platform that guarantees functional encryption i.e. query, exchange and computation between encrypted objects, data and entities which is possible only via recursive STARKs and Lattice-based FHE(Fully Homomorphic Encryption). A second-layer protocol like Plasma does not have the capability of providing functional encryption to all distributed anonymous parties having zero mutual trusts.
There is a repeated effort to push some dangerous products under a guise of advanced blockchains and decentralized platforms. For instance, hidden external oracles and corporate entity-controlled decentralized platforms. Blockchain applications live in their own digital realm, totally orthogonal to the real world and environment we live in. Be it decentralized application or a smart contract, their reach is limited to the space they can control. Any use case projection in our reality eventually confronts the following hard fact: how can an app efficiently and securely interact with the physical world? Now hidden external oracles like that of oraclize.it and hardware pythias are being marketed as the solutions to this problem. But (IMHO) internal encrypted entities of Orch (ORC) platform known as Degents having access to cryptographically reliable external software/hardware sensors-actors will transparently and securely interact with the external world/environment.
Only minerless future-proof general-purpose decentralized networks such as Orch(ORC) designed from scratch as an MPC(Multiparty Computation) platform can deliver truly scalable MPC solutions flawlessly and reliably to millions of consumers simultaneously without compromising on security and trustlessness.
The far reaching impact of a self-evolving infinitely-scalable general-purpose realtime unforkable public blockchain with built-in quantum safe privacy and multicompute features will be immeasurable and profound.
It would transform the whole universe of blockchain and decentralized networks inlcuding all blockchain-based and blockchainfree platforms such as DAG-based and DHT-based platforms e.g. IOTA, Nano and Holochain.
Orch Network (native token symbol: ORC and URL: https://orch.network) will enable and power following dapps and user-cases:

  1. Privacy-preserving Infinitely-divisible Hypercurrency and Confidential Global Payment System with integrated encrypted decentralized chat service
  2. Unmanned Decentralized Cryptoasset Exchanges
  3. Large-scale Federated IoT Networks
  4. Decentralized DNS Clusters
  5. Anonymous trading of Tokenized Financial Assets and Derivatives Contracts
  6. Automated Hedge Funds
  7. Crypto darkpools
  8. Temporal Insurance Products
  9. Global Supply chain and unmanned cargo ships and drones
  10. Realtime Encrypted Video Communication capable Anonymous Web Infrastructure
  11. High-velocity Non-sovereign Reserve Asset
  12. Near-Perfect Coin Mixer
  13. Decentralized Marketplace App
  14. Transparent Robust Stable Coins
  15. Decentralized P2P Storage of functionally encrypted data
  16. Permissionless ICO Platforms
  17. Decentralized and Encrypted Facebook, gmail, Twitter and google-like search/answer engines
  18. Decentralized CDNs
  19. Customizable Decentralized Governance System for blockchains and dapps
Another important thing that will boost the price and value of Orch Network token ORC is its integrated Turing Incomplete cyber contract protocol running Turing Incomplete cyber contracts written in Crackcity(a Turing Incomplete language derived from Crack and Simplicity) that runs on top of Crack Machine(s). Crack machines are Orch’s blockchain virtual machines.
Ethereum’s main deficiency and Achilles’ heel is its Turing Complete smart contract programming language Solidity.

  1. Turing-complete languages are fundamentally inappropriate for writing “smart contracts” — because such languages are inherently undecidable, which makes it impossible to know what a “smart contract” will do before running it.
(2) We should learn from Wall Street’s existing DSLs (domain-specific languages) for financial products and smart contracts, based on declarative and functional languages such as Ocaml and Haskell — instead of doing what the Web 2.0 programmers” behind Solidity did, and what Peter Todd is also apparently embarking upon: ie, ignoring the lessons that Wall Street has already learned, and “reinventing the wheel”, using less-suitable languages such as C++ and JavaScript-like languages (Solidity), simply because they seem “easier” for the “masses” to use.
(3) We should also consider using specification languages (to say what a contract does) along with implementation languages (saying how it should do it) — because specifications are higher-level and easier for people to read than implementations which are lower-level meant for machines to run — and also because ecosystems of specification/implementation language pairs (such as Coq/Ocaml) support formal reasoning and verification tools which could be used to mathematically prove that a smart contract’s implementation is “correct” (ie, it satisfies its specification) before even running it.
Turing-complete languages lead to “undecidable” programs (ie, you cannot figure out what you do until after you run them)
One hint: recall that Gödel’s incompleteness theorem proved that any mathematical system which is (Turing)-complete, must also be inconsistent incomplete [hat tip] — that is, in any such system, it must be possible to formulate propositions which are undecidable within that system.
This is related to things like the Halting Problem.
And by the way, Ethereum’s concept of “gas” is not a real solution to the Halting Problem: Yes, running out of “gas” means that the machine will “stop” eventually, but this naïve approach does not overcome the more fundamental problems regarding undecidability of programs written using a Turing-complete language.
The take-away is that:
When using any Turing-complete language, it will always be possible for someone (eg, the DAO hacker, or some crook like Bernie Madoff, or some well-meaning but clueless dev from slock.it) to formulate a “smart contract” whose meaning cannot be determined in advance by merely inspecting the code: ie, it will always be possible to write a smart contract whose meaning can only be determined after running the code.
Take a moment to contemplate the full, deep (and horrifying) implications of all this.
Some of the greatest mathematicians and computer scientists of the 20th century already discovered and definitively proved (much to the consternation most of their less-sophisticated (naïve) colleagues — who nevertheless eventually were forced to come around and begrudgingly agree with them) that: Given a “smart contract” written in a Turing-complete language, it is impossible to determine the semantics / behavior of that “smart contract” in advance, by mere inspection — either by a human, or even by a machine such as a theorem prover or formal reasoning tool (because such tools unfortunately only work on more-restricted languages, not on Turing-complete languages — for info on such more-restricted languages, see further below on “constructivism” and “intuitionistic logic”).
The horrifying conclusion is that: the only way to determine the semantics / behavior of a “smart contract” is “after-the-fact” — ie, by actually running it on some machine (eg, the notorious EVM) — and waiting to see what happens (eg, waiting for a hacker to “steal” tens of millions of dollars — simply because he understood the semantics / behavior of the code better than the developers did.
Last but not the least, increasing regulatory pressures on Bitcoin, Ethereum and other permissionless public cryptocurrencies/cryptotokens will impact their prices negatively in the medium to long-term.
The need for a hyperfast private zero-knowledge proof cryptocurrency that keeps payer-payee and payment data private and secure along with a decentralized scalable multicomputation platform can’t be overemphasized.
submitted by OrchNetwork to u/OrchNetwork [link] [comments]

Idea: Progeny AltCoins. Think of Bitcoin as Gold and a specifically programmed AltCoin-in-a-box as currency directly redeemable for Bitcoin held in a "Fort Knox" wallet.

So I have this idea which I haven't seen anywhere else, and wanted to share it to see if it makes sense or not.
My understanding is that bitcoin has some issues with transaction speed (and/or transaction cost) which causes people to worry about its ability to go mainstream and establish itself as a core global currency.
What if instead of expecting bitcoin to be as practical as USD, EUR, GBP etc, we actually thought of it more like the Gold of crypto?
Back when we tied our national currencies to gold, the paper notes were meant to be literally redeemable for gold (or silver, or coin, etc). The currency was tied to a guaranteed asset.
Paper is much easier to carry around than gold. It is much more divisible (infinitely so) than gold. It is more practical in virtually every way possible - it just has no value outside of the promise it carries. It promises to be worth gold. So as long as people believe gold has value, the paper has value. And whether gold is convenient for handling transactions or not is irrelevant.
So why not use Bitcoin the same way?
We need to program a specific "AltCoin-In-A-Box" program which anyone could easily run and create their own AltCoin.
It would work like this:
During setup of the new AltCoin, the new blockchain programmatically ties itself to a bitcoin wallet, which we will call "Fort Knox". An exchange rate is chosen, for example, 1BTC = 1000 ProgenyCoins, and the setup is complete.
An interface is then made available which allows people to buy your newly created ProgenyCoins from the "Federal Reserve" of ProgenyCoin-istan. Register your intent to buy (provide bitcoin address where BTC are coming from, and ProgenyCoins address where your ProgenyCoins will go), then send 1BTC to "Fort Knox" and await the (slow, painful, horrific) BTC transaction to be confirmed.
As soon as the BTC transaction is confirmed, "The Federal Reserve" sends you 1000 ProgenyCoins. "The Federal Reserve" can produce as many of these coins as it needs to meet the BTC deposit in Fort Knox, and will only pay out ProgenyCoins for that reason. Similarly, sending ProgenyCoins to "The Federal Reserve" will allow you to withdraw BTC to a BTC wallet of your choosing.
Buying ProgenyCoins from the fed on this brand spanking new tiny blockchain which is optimised for rapid, free transactions has now given you a practical local currency to use in everyday transactions which doesn't require the bitcoin chain, but still benefits from all of the value held in the bitcoin chain. If bitcoin rises in value, so too will the value of your ProgenyCoins. And since all of these new progeny coins are being created by locking BTC up in "Fort Knoxes" all over the planet, the value of BTC is likely to increase to match the increased demand and lost supply.
Basically, the parent BTC blockchain is spawning lightweight, mostly-independent, children chains to do the transaction work for it. Hence the progeny reference. Obviously.
Considerations and Risk
  1. By making the original code for this concept a well established opensource piece of software, the "AltCoin-In-A-Box" certificate of BTC redeemability will guarantee the value of every new ProgenyCoin you encounter. Presumably the "AltCoin-In-A-Box" software could also include a generic platform which will handle all such coin-wallets in one place.
  2. Each new coin will need to gain enough nodes/miners to ensure security against attacks before people can be confident trusting them to not steal their money. Perhaps an international organisation can help provide early stage node hosting for a fee paid by the originator of the currency? (I haven't really put any thought into the incentivisation for 'mining' - I guess transactions would need a miner fee to ensure people did run full nodes?)
  3. Many more I haven't thought of, I am sure.
Thoughts?
submitted by Aegist to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Intergalactic Money: The deep impact of a self-evolving infinitely-scalable general-purpose realtime unforkable public blockchain federation

Intergalactic Money: The deep impact of a self-evolving infinitely-scalable general-purpose realtime unforkable public blockchain federation
Prologue: This article is a strategic response to the following crypto-related papers published in 2017: 1. “An (Institutional) Investor’s Take on Cryptoassets” by John Pfeffer of Pfeffer Capital and 2. “Plasma: Scalable Autonomous Smart Contracts” by Joseph Poon of Lightning Network and Vitalik Buterin of Ethereum Foundation.
John Pfeffer in his paper titled “An (Institutional) Investor’s Take on Cryptoassets” claims that “scaling solutions for blockchains in particular and decentralized networks including (implied) DAG-based networks such as PoS, Sharding, etc. are bullish for adoption and users/consumers but bearish for token value/investors. Even without those technology shifts, the cost of using decentralized protocols is deflationary, since the cost of processing power, storage and bandwidth are deflationary.” Farther he states “ It’s a mistake to compare monopoly network effects of Facebook or other centralized platforms to blockchain protocols because blockchain protocols can be forked to a functionally identical blockchain with the same history and users up to the moment if a parent chain persists in being arbitrarily expensive to use(i.e. rent-seeking). Like TCP/IP but unlike Facebook, blockchain protocols are open-source software that anyone can copy or fork freely.” Add regulatory pressures on bitcoin and public permissionless currency and its negative impact.
It’s obvious from his statements; John is not aware of latest R&D projects focused on improving decentralized networks and advances in decentralized protocols especially “Unforkable Realtime Blockchains” such as Algorand, Bitlattice and Orch.Network based on Recursive STARKs and FHE/SHE. He is also ignorant of the fact that there are several projects working on self-evolving censor-proof quantum safe protocols such as Orch Network (token symbol: ORC and URL: https://orch.network/). These protocols have adopted a continuous development strategy while getting ready for next paradigm shifts in technology e.g. practical quantum computing and quantum internet. He also does not understand that a futuristic protocol token with infinite-divisibility integrated with a hybrid quantum-classical computational infrastructure can easily counteract and neutralize the deflationary nature of its own tokens and its limited supply hardcap making it infinitely scalable and elastic.

https://preview.redd.it/lj2bgefhmml11.jpg?width=636&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ce282da0942d65464d7edf2c822fff4737f0aa87
While I agree with his following statement: “A non-sovereign, non-fiat, trustless, censorship-resistant cryptoasset would be a far better alternative for most foreign currency international reserves. IMF SDRs are already a synthetic store of value, so could also be easily and sensibly replaced by such a cryptoasset.”, this necessarily does not make BTC the right candidate for several reasons: 1. BTC is not a self-improving self-evolvable fully censorship-resistant cryptoasset which is a must for it to qualify as a viable reserve asset and appeal to long-term institutional and high networth investors.
Bitcoins miners are mostly corporate entities having large investments in ASIC-based mining equipments. It’s not impossible to corner 51% mining power by a centralized resourceful entity compromising double spending protection and other trustless security measures built-in. So BTC is not truly decentralized. 2. The underlying hash algorithm and encryption protocol of BTC known as SHA-256 can be broken by multi-qubit quantum circuits and quantum computers under active development in labs across the world. So BTC is not future-proof and its very existence is threatened unless its core developers continuously modify and improve its underlying security model and technology. 3. Bitcoin is not infinitely-divisible that’s it’s not only upwardly non-scalable, the same is true for its downward scalability. In fact BTC has only 8 decimal places known as Satoshis(1 satoshi = 0.00000001 BTC)
Futuristic protocol tokens such as infinitely scalable minerless Orch(ORC) should be more attractive to long-term investors looking for an alternative non-sovereign, non-fiat, and trustless, censorship-resistant privacy preserving high-velocity cryptoasset.
In their paper titled “Plasma: Scalable Autonomous Smart Contracts” Joseph Poon and Vitalik Buterin defines their proposal as “Plasma is a proposed framework for incentivized and enforced execution of ‘smart contracts’ which is scalable to a significant amount of state updates per second (potentially billions) enabling the blockchain to be able to represent a significant amount of decentralized financial applications worldwide.” Now first thing is it’s not clear what do they mean by “Autonomous Smart Contracts” and what specifically autonomous component in Plasma it refers to. For example, an autonomous weapon would set the target and hit it on its own without any humans in the loop or an autonomous self-driving car would drive down to a destination point without any human navigating it.
Now contrary to their claims, their off-chain and second-layer scaling solution with Ethereum(ETH) as the root blockchain is neither censor-proof nor truly scalable as this requires state-channel based masternodes/validators. So it’s not a feasible solution at all as trust issues will crop up at every moment.
Moreover, Scalable Multi-Party Computation is feasible only in a platform that guarantees functional encryption i.e. query, exchange and computation between encrypted objects, data and entities which is possible only via recursive STARKs and Lattice-based FHE(Fully Homomorphic Encryption). A second-layer protocol like Plasma does not have the capability of providing functional encryption to all distributed anonymous parties having zero mutual trusts.
There is a repeated effort to push some dangerous products under a guise of advanced blockchains and decentralized platforms. For instance, hidden external oracles and corporate entity-controlled decentralized platforms. Blockchain applications live in their own digital realm, totally orthogonal to the real world and environment we live in. Be it decentralized application or a smart contract, their reach is limited to the space they can control. Any use case projection in our reality eventually confronts the following hard fact: how can an app efficiently and securely interact with the physical world? Now hidden external oracles like that of oraclize.it and hardware pythias are being marketed as the solutions to this problem. But (IMHO) internal encrypted entities of Orch (ORC) platform known as Degents having access to cryptographically reliable external software/hardware sensors-actors will transparently and securely interact with the external world/environment.
Only minerless future-proof general-purpose decentralized networks such as Orch(ORC) designed from scratch as an MPC(Multiparty Computation) platform can deliver truly scalable MPC solutions flawlessly and reliably to millions of consumers simultaneously without compromising on security and trustlessness.
The far reaching impact of a self-evolving infinitely-scalable general-purpose realtime unforkable public blockchain with built-in quantum safe privacy and multicompute features will be immeasurable and profound.
It would transform the whole universe of blockchain and decentralized networks inlcuding all blockchain-based and blockchainfree platforms such as DAG-based and DHT-based platforms e.g. IOTA, Nano and Holochain.
Orch Network (native token symbol: ORC and URL: https://orch.network) will enable and power following dapps and user-cases:

  1. Privacy-preserving Infinitely-divisible Hypercurrency and Confidential Global Payment System with integrated encrypted decentralized chat service
  2. Unmanned Decentralized Cryptoasset Exchanges
  3. Large-scale Federated IoT Networks
  4. Decentralized DNS Clusters
  5. Anonymous trading of Tokenized Financial Assets and Derivatives Contracts
  6. Automated Hedge Funds
  7. Crypto darkpools
  8. Temporal Insurance Products
  9. Global Supply chain and unmanned cargo ships and drones
  10. Realtime Encrypted Video Communication capable Anonymous Web Infrastructure
  11. High-velocity Non-sovereign Reserve Asset
  12. Near-Perfect Coin Mixer
  13. Decentralized Marketplace App
  14. Transparent Robust Stable Coins
  15. Decentralized P2P Storage of functionally encrypted data
  16. Permissionless ICO Platforms
  17. Decentralized and Encrypted Facebook, gmail, Twitter and google-like search/answer engines
  18. Decentralized CDNs
  19. Customizable Decentralized Governance System for blockchains and dapps
Another important thing that will boost the price and value of Orch Network token ORC is its integrated Turing Incomplete cyber contract protocol running Turing Incomplete cyber contracts written in Crackcity(a Turing Incomplete language derived from Crack and Simplicity) that runs on top of Crack Machine(s). Crack machines are Orch’s blockchain virtual machines.
Ethereum’s main deficiency and Achilles’ heel is its Turing Complete smart contract programming language Solidity.

  1. Turing-complete languages are fundamentally inappropriate for writing “smart contracts” — because such languages are inherently undecidable, which makes it impossible to know what a “smart contract” will do before running it.
(2) We should learn from Wall Street’s existing DSLs (domain-specific languages) for financial products and smart contracts, based on declarative and functional languages such as Ocaml and Haskell — instead of doing what the Web 2.0 programmers” behind Solidity did, and what Peter Todd is also apparently embarking upon: ie, ignoring the lessons that Wall Street has already learned, and “reinventing the wheel”, using less-suitable languages such as C++ and JavaScript-like languages (Solidity), simply because they seem “easier” for the “masses” to use.
(3) We should also consider using specification languages (to say what a contract does) along with implementation languages (saying how it should do it) — because specifications are higher-level and easier for people to read than implementations which are lower-level meant for machines to run — and also because ecosystems of specification/implementation language pairs (such as Coq/Ocaml) support formal reasoning and verification tools which could be used to mathematically prove that a smart contract’s implementation is “correct” (ie, it satisfies its specification) before even running it.
Turing-complete languages lead to “undecidable” programs (ie, you cannot figure out what you do until after you run them)
One hint: recall that Gödel’s incompleteness theorem proved that any mathematical system which is (Turing)-complete, must also be inconsistent incomplete [hat tip] — that is, in any such system, it must be possible to formulate propositions which are undecidable within that system.
This is related to things like the Halting Problem.
And by the way, Ethereum’s concept of “gas” is not a real solution to the Halting Problem: Yes, running out of “gas” means that the machine will “stop” eventually, but this naïve approach does not overcome the more fundamental problems regarding undecidability of programs written using a Turing-complete language.
The take-away is that:
When using any Turing-complete language, it will always be possible for someone (eg, the DAO hacker, or some crook like Bernie Madoff, or some well-meaning but clueless dev from slock.it) to formulate a “smart contract” whose meaning cannot be determined in advance by merely inspecting the code: ie, it will always be possible to write a smart contract whose meaning can only be determined after running the code.
Take a moment to contemplate the full, deep (and horrifying) implications of all this.
Some of the greatest mathematicians and computer scientists of the 20th century already discovered and definitively proved (much to the consternation most of their less-sophisticated (naïve) colleagues — who nevertheless eventually were forced to come around and begrudgingly agree with them) that: Given a “smart contract” written in a Turing-complete language, it is impossible to determine the semantics / behavior of that “smart contract” in advance, by mere inspection — either by a human, or even by a machine such as a theorem prover or formal reasoning tool (because such tools unfortunately only work on more-restricted languages, not on Turing-complete languages — for info on such more-restricted languages, see further below on “constructivism” and “intuitionistic logic”).
The horrifying conclusion is that: the only way to determine the semantics / behavior of a “smart contract” is “after-the-fact” — ie, by actually running it on some machine (eg, the notorious EVM) — and waiting to see what happens (eg, waiting for a hacker to “steal” tens of millions of dollars — simply because he understood the semantics / behavior of the code better than the developers did.
Last but not the least, increasing regulatory pressures on Bitcoin, Ethereum and other permissionless public cryptocurrencies/cryptotokens will impact their prices negatively in the medium to long-term.
The need for a hyperfast private zero-knowledge proof cryptocurrency that keeps payer-payee and payment data private and secure along with a decentralized scalable multicomputation platform can’t be overemphasized.
submitted by OrchNetwork to u/OrchNetwork [link] [comments]

What are Bitcoin and Other Cryptocurrencies Backed By?

Bitcoin was created back in 2009 and became the first cryptocurrency ever designed. Cryptocurrencies have become increasingly popular in the last few years as they offer an efficient and decentralized way of transferring money.
Cryptocurrencies have always been an alternative to banks and fiat money. But why do they have any value at all and who dictates what they are worth? The value of Bitcoin is really calculated through supply and demand. The digital asset itself is backed by nothing more than perhaps the blockchain ledger.
Every single cryptocurrency uses a blockchain ledger, a system that records transactions between two or more parties in a verifiable and permanent way. This certainly adds value to Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. However, it is not what determines their price.
Why Things Have Value
Why does anything have any value at all? It has mostly because of supply and demand. Traditional currencies, for instance, are only backed by the government that issued them. Digital money, like Bitcoin, is not backed or linked to any physical reserves like gold and can certainly lose value due to different factors.
Cryptocurrencies have value because they require ‘work’ to exist. Cryptocurrencies are maintained thanks to the mining process, a process in which transactions are verified by different people. This process requires a certain amount of work, electricity, and money.
Key Factors That Affect The Value of Cryptocurrencies
Since most cryptocurrencies are not physically backed by anything, their value is determined through supply and demand based on a few important factors. One of the biggest advantages of cryptocurrencies is scarcity. The supply of most cryptocurrencies is fixed, and, unlike traditional currencies, no one can issue more than the maximum limit. This means that cryptocurrencies are deflationary by nature.
Another key factor that benefits cryptocurrencies is divisibility. Any cryptocurrency can be divided into smaller units. A simple change in Bitcoin’s code could allow the digital asset to be divided into infinitely smaller units at any time.
Additionally, transferring cryptocurrencies can be extremely fast and cheap compared to traditional methods. Fees are somewhat fixed no matter the amount you send, which means that theoretically you could send 1 million Bitcoins to someone and pay only a few dollars in fees (or even less).
In a way, one could say that Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies are backed by the public’s faith in them as they have realized that the current monetary system is not as robust as one might think.
Why Are Cryptocurrencies so Volatile Then?
In comparison to traditional currencies and even stocks, cryptocurrencies are far more volatile, meaning that the current price of any given crypto can change drastically in hours. It’s quite common to see Bitcoin’s price go up or down 5-10% within a few days. In fact, even in periods of low volatility, most cryptocurrencies still experience price moves of up to 1-2%, which is considered extremely high in traditional markets.
The explanation, however, is quite simple. Cryptocurrencies, in general, lack the liquidity that the rest of the markets enjoy. According to statistics from Statista, the average daily turnover in the global foreign exchange market was around $6.5 trillion daily. The cryptocurrency market, on average, sees around $80 billion in daily trading volume, and according to various sources, a lot of the volume is actually fake.
The problem with illiquidity is that someone who wants to sell or buy a huge amount of Bitcoin or any cryptocurrency will simply ‘eat’ all the orders in the order book of the exchange, catapulting the price up or crashing it. That is the only reason why cryptocurrencies, in general, are extremely volatile.
Some Cryptocurrencies Are Actually Backed by Things
There are, however, some cryptocurrencies that are backed by gold, assets, and even fiat money. Tether (USDT) became the most popular cryptocurrency backed by fiat, later known as a ‘stablecoin’.
Stablecoins
A stablecoin is designed to always be worth $1.00 by maintaining 1 dollar in some sort of reserve. The first stablecoin to become widely popular was Tether, however, there was a lot of controversy surrounding it. Most of the criticism came from the fact that Tether Limited was unable to prove they actually have the funds to cover all the Tether issued.
Additionally, on 30 April 2019, Tether Limited’s lawyer actually admitted that each coin is only backed by $0.74 in cash.
Currently, there are over a dozen stablecoins that are backed by fiat, commodities, and even cryptocurrencies. TrueUSD is similar to Tether but it is considered to be one of the most reliable stablecoins currently as the company behind it has been extremely transparent and conducted an independent audit back in March 2019.
A more complex stablecoin is Dai, which is backed by Ethereum and pegged to the dollar. The system behind Dai basically locks Ethereum in a public contract. If the value of Dai distances too far from $1, the system will make use of the contract to stabilize it back. There is, however, a small problem: Dai is not entirely decentralized as the technology behind it is being monitored by the Maker Foundation.
DigixDAO is another stablecoin and it’s backed by bars of actual gold. It is an ERC-20 token created back in 2014. The digital asset is entirely decentralized and autonomous and can in fact be extended to be backed by other precious metals and even physical assets. According to the company, the gold is stored in custodial vaults at the Singapore Safe House, and 1 DGX will always equal 1 gram of gold.
Cryptocurrencies Backed by Assets
Not all cryptocurrencies backed by assets are stablecoins. For instance, the first oil-backed cryptocurrency was introduced by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro back in 2017. El Petro, although highly criticized, is supposedly the first cryptocurrency to be backed by oil thanks to the country’s huge oil and mineral reserves.
Petro is, however, not pegged to anything, and its value can increase or decrease at any given time.
Tokenization of Assets
Something that has become quite popular over the last few years is the tokenization of traditional stocks and assets. There are countless blockchain startups tokenizing almost anything to represent ownership.
The tokenization of assets brings numerous benefits like greater liquidity, more transparency, cheaper and faster transactions, and more accessibility. Tokenization itself is quite difficult to regulate, and all tokenization assets have to be compliant with the law, something that issuers struggle to achieve.
Conclusion
While traditional cryptocurrencies are not necessarily backed by anything physical, they still hold a lot of value solely based on supply and demand. This is the case with numerous other assets and even fiat money.
Cryptocurrencies have come a long way and there is a wide variety of them. Stablecoins are the most popular when it comes to asset-backed cryptocurrencies. They serve as an alternative to fiat money and bring a lot of liquidity to the market. There are definitely concerns as people question their stability, however, they have become an important factor in the market.
Additionally, other projects aside from stablecoins have implemented asset-backed cryptocurrencies. There are numerous cryptocurrencies out there backed by precious metals, physical assets, stocks, and even other cryptocurrencies. We are definitely going to see even more in the near future as they bring a lot more security to investors and the crypto space in general.

SwapSpace team is always ready for discussion. You can drop an email with your suggestions and questions to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Join our social networks: Twitter, Medium, Facebook, Telegram The best rates on https://swapspace.co/
submitted by SwapSpace_co to CoinBase [link] [comments]

In terms on moneyness, fungibility is key and Bitcoin maximalist know this, but I can be hand waved away because it is getting better, and it is harder to produce plus origin story, first to market. What would be required to make Monero harder - as in harder to produce given differences with algos?

submitted by homoredditus to Monero [link] [comments]

My best attempt to simplify the math of a 10 million dollar Bitcoin [1₿=10million]

🤖₿ So 21 million #bitcoins will ever exist, unlike the dollar that is infinitely printed, which is why it loses value. A #bitcoin is infinitely divisible so no matter how expensive 1 coin gets, infinite fractions of it can be purchased and used. You don't have to buy 1 coin. It's value is the money and things of value behind it÷the number of bitcoins that exist. There are 36 million millionaires in the world today, so by the time every 1 of them try to grab a full bitcoin when it becomes a must have investment, there won't be enough for all of them. That easily pushes 1 coin past 1 million dollars in value when they try to grab a whole coin. Then there are 260 trillion in global #stock markets through #stocks and #derivatives, or what others call #institutionalmoney. The the first US #exchanges are opening to bitcoin and #cryptocurrencies this summer. Once bitcoin is allowed to be traded for stocks, which is only a matter of time now with the #stockmarket opening to the #cryptocurrency markets already, that makes that 260 trillion open to be put behind bitcoin. When that starts to happen; 260 trillion divided by 21 million #bitcoins, puts #1bitcoin over 10 million dollars a coin, or 12 million a coin to be exact. This will likely happen in our lifetimes with everything happening now. That makes every dollar invested even at an 11k price, to be worth 1k$ in possibly 10 years at this rate. ₿🤖
There's more to it like the halvings; about every 4 years the distribution of bitcoin going out gets cut in half. The first 4 years 10.5 million bitcoins went out and the demand and use was small so the price was cheap. From less than a penny cheap in 2009, to over 1000$ in 2013 after it first halved. After that from 2013 through 2016 with only 5.25 million bitcoins were being mined/made; then it halved again in 2016 for a second time & the price ran up to 20k a coin because the supply got cut in half to only 2.125 million bitcoins being created with higher demand and use cases. This is where we are now until summer 2020 when the 3rd halving will happen. After that, the next halving will only have 1.05125 million new #bitcoins getting created until 2024, with 10 trillion in value of institutional markets opening up to it. The potential for the next halving with the halved new coin supply, plus increased demand and use cases is anywhere from 100k to 500k in the short term by late 2020 or early 2021, then another 80+% drop as usual. But in short, at the current prices you're in a good position to be fine after the next correction/drop that'll come after the upcoming halving skyrockets the price. I for one won't stop accumulating till we break 20k again, aka the last all time high. My golden rule is to never buy during new all time high prices, and thankfully we're still under it. So learn about it now and stack up before we break 20k again, because after we do the growth will be stupid fast.
Calculated plug ins for 1 million and 10 million
submitted by BuyBitcoinWhileItsLo to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Trouble Grasping the Divisibility Issue

I am trying to wrap my head around the divisibility concept. I expect there is a simplistic answer but I can’t find it.
From what I can tell, a bitcoin (I get the difference between Bitcoin and bitcoin) is basically infinitely divisible. I am trying to understand why a bank, a money transmitter, etc. couldn’t buy one single bitcoin, embrace the divisibility aspect of that single bitcoin, and secure their own mining equipment (to handle the transactions….due to the almost certain fork), thereby creating a crypto specific to that company. It seems like money transmitters and other companies would be embracing this if billion dollar industries could potentially be disrupted.
Can someone explain why this doesn’t make sense?
submitted by TryingToLearnBTC to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

What are Bitcoin and Other Cryptocurrencies Backed By?

Bitcoin was created back in 2009 and became the first cryptocurrency ever designed. Cryptocurrencies have become increasingly popular in the last few years as they offer an efficient and decentralized way of transferring money.
Cryptocurrencies have always been an alternative to banks and fiat money. But why do they have any value at all and who dictates what they are worth? The value of Bitcoin is really calculated through supply and demand. The digital asset itself is backed by nothing more than perhaps the blockchain ledger.
Every single cryptocurrency uses a blockchain ledger, a system that records transactions between two or more parties in a verifiable and permanent way. This certainly adds value to Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. However, it is not what determines their price.
Why Things Have Value
Why does anything have any value at all? It has mostly because of supply and demand. Traditional currencies, for instance, are only backed by the government that issued them. Digital money, like Bitcoin, is not backed or linked to any physical reserves like gold and can certainly lose value due to different factors.
Cryptocurrencies have value because they require ‘work’ to exist. Cryptocurrencies are maintained thanks to the mining process, a process in which transactions are verified by different people. This process requires a certain amount of work, electricity, and money.
Key Factors That Affect The Value of Cryptocurrencies
Since most cryptocurrencies are not physically backed by anything, their value is determined through supply and demand based on a few important factors. One of the biggest advantages of cryptocurrencies is scarcity. The supply of most cryptocurrencies is fixed, and, unlike traditional currencies, no one can issue more than the maximum limit. This means that cryptocurrencies are deflationary by nature.
Another key factor that benefits cryptocurrencies is divisibility. Any cryptocurrency can be divided into smaller units. A simple change in Bitcoin’s code could allow the digital asset to be divided into infinitely smaller units at any time.
Additionally, transferring cryptocurrencies can be extremely fast and cheap compared to traditional methods. Fees are somewhat fixed no matter the amount you send, which means that theoretically you could send 1 million Bitcoins to someone and pay only a few dollars in fees (or even less).
In a way, one could say that Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies are backed by the public’s faith in them as they have realized that the current monetary system is not as robust as one might think.
Why Are Cryptocurrencies so Volatile Then?
In comparison to traditional currencies and even stocks, cryptocurrencies are far more volatile, meaning that the current price of any given crypto can change drastically in hours. It’s quite common to see Bitcoin’s price go up or down 5-10% within a few days. In fact, even in periods of low volatility, most cryptocurrencies still experience price moves of up to 1-2%, which is considered extremely high in traditional markets.
The explanation, however, is quite simple. Cryptocurrencies, in general, lack the liquidity that the rest of the markets enjoy. According to statistics from Statista, the average daily turnover in the global foreign exchange market was around $6.5 trillion daily. The cryptocurrency market, on average, sees around $80 billion in daily trading volume, and according to various sources, a lot of the volume is actually fake.
The problem with illiquidity is that someone who wants to sell or buy a huge amount of Bitcoin or any cryptocurrency will simply ‘eat’ all the orders in the order book of the exchange, catapulting the price up or crashing it. That is the only reason why cryptocurrencies, in general, are extremely volatile.
Some Cryptocurrencies Are Actually Backed by Things
There are, however, some cryptocurrencies that are backed by gold, assets, and even fiat money. Tether (USDT) became the most popular cryptocurrency backed by fiat, later known as a ‘stablecoin’.
Stablecoins
A stablecoin is designed to always be worth $1.00 by maintaining 1 dollar in some sort of reserve. The first stablecoin to become widely popular was Tether, however, there was a lot of controversy surrounding it. Most of the criticism came from the fact that Tether Limited was unable to prove they actually have the funds to cover all the Tether issued.
Additionally, on 30 April 2019, Tether Limited’s lawyer actually admitted that each coin is only backed by $0.74 in cash.
Currently, there are over a dozen stablecoins that are backed by fiat, commodities, and even cryptocurrencies. TrueUSD is similar to Tether but it is considered to be one of the most reliable stablecoins currently as the company behind it has been extremely transparent and conducted an independent audit back in March 2019.
A more complex stablecoin is Dai, which is backed by Ethereum and pegged to the dollar. The system behind Dai basically locks Ethereum in a public contract. If the value of Dai distances too far from $1, the system will make use of the contract to stabilize it back. There is, however, a small problem: Dai is not entirely decentralized as the technology behind it is being monitored by the Maker Foundation.
DigixDAO is another stablecoin and it’s backed by bars of actual gold. It is an ERC-20 token created back in 2014. The digital asset is entirely decentralized and autonomous and can in fact be extended to be backed by other precious metals and even physical assets. According to the company, the gold is stored in custodial vaults at the Singapore Safe House, and 1 DGX will always equal 1 gram of gold.
Cryptocurrencies Backed by Assets
Not all cryptocurrencies backed by assets are stablecoins. For instance, the first oil-backed cryptocurrency was introduced by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro back in 2017. El Petro, although highly criticized, is supposedly the first cryptocurrency to be backed by oil thanks to the country’s huge oil and mineral reserves.
Petro is, however, not pegged to anything, and its value can increase or decrease at any given time.
Tokenization of Assets
Something that has become quite popular over the last few years is the tokenization of traditional stocks and assets. There are countless blockchain startups tokenizing almost anything to represent ownership.
The tokenization of assets brings numerous benefits like greater liquidity, more transparency, cheaper and faster transactions, and more accessibility. Tokenization itself is quite difficult to regulate, and all tokenization assets have to be compliant with the law, something that issuers struggle to achieve.
Conclusion
While traditional cryptocurrencies are not necessarily backed by anything physical, they still hold a lot of value solely based on supply and demand. This is the case with numerous other assets and even fiat money.
Cryptocurrencies have come a long way and there is a wide variety of them. Stablecoins are the most popular when it comes to asset-backed cryptocurrencies. They serve as an alternative to fiat money and bring a lot of liquidity to the market. There are definitely concerns as people question their stability, however, they have become an important factor in the market.
Additionally, other projects aside from stablecoins have implemented asset-backed cryptocurrencies. There are numerous cryptocurrencies out there backed by precious metals, physical assets, stocks, and even other cryptocurrencies. We are definitely going to see even more in the near future as they bring a lot more security to investors and the crypto space in general.

SwapSpace team is always ready for discussion. You can drop an email with your suggestions and questions to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Join our social networks: Twitter, Medium, Facebook, Telegram The best rates on https://swapspace.co/
submitted by SwapSpace_co to CryptoCurrencyTrading [link] [comments]

What are Bitcoin and Other Cryptocurrencies Backed By?

Bitcoin was created back in 2009 and became the first cryptocurrency ever designed. Cryptocurrencies have become increasingly popular in the last few years as they offer an efficient and decentralized way of transferring money.
Cryptocurrencies have always been an alternative to banks and fiat money. But why do they have any value at all and who dictates what they are worth? The value of Bitcoin is really calculated through supply and demand. The digital asset itself is backed by nothing more than perhaps the blockchain ledger.
Every single cryptocurrency uses a blockchain ledger, a system that records transactions between two or more parties in a verifiable and permanent way. This certainly adds value to Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. However, it is not what determines their price.
Why Things Have Value
Why does anything have any value at all? It has mostly because of supply and demand. Traditional currencies, for instance, are only backed by the government that issued them. Digital money, like Bitcoin, is not backed or linked to any physical reserves like gold and can certainly lose value due to different factors.
Cryptocurrencies have value because they require ‘work’ to exist. Cryptocurrencies are maintained thanks to the mining process, a process in which transactions are verified by different people. This process requires a certain amount of work, electricity, and money.
Key Factors That Affect The Value of Cryptocurrencies
Since most cryptocurrencies are not physically backed by anything, their value is determined through supply and demand based on a few important factors. One of the biggest advantages of cryptocurrencies is scarcity. The supply of most cryptocurrencies is fixed, and, unlike traditional currencies, no one can issue more than the maximum limit. This means that cryptocurrencies are deflationary by nature.
Another key factor that benefits cryptocurrencies is divisibility. Any cryptocurrency can be divided into smaller units. A simple change in Bitcoin’s code could allow the digital asset to be divided into infinitely smaller units at any time.
Additionally, transferring cryptocurrencies can be extremely fast and cheap compared to traditional methods. Fees are somewhat fixed no matter the amount you send, which means that theoretically you could send 1 million Bitcoins to someone and pay only a few dollars in fees (or even less).
In a way, one could say that Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies are backed by the public’s faith in them as they have realized that the current monetary system is not as robust as one might think.
Why Are Cryptocurrencies so Volatile Then?
In comparison to traditional currencies and even stocks, cryptocurrencies are far more volatile, meaning that the current price of any given crypto can change drastically in hours. It’s quite common to see Bitcoin’s price go up or down 5-10% within a few days. In fact, even in periods of low volatility, most cryptocurrencies still experience price moves of up to 1-2%, which is considered extremely high in traditional markets.
The explanation, however, is quite simple. Cryptocurrencies, in general, lack the liquidity that the rest of the markets enjoy. According to statistics from Statista, the average daily turnover in the global foreign exchange market was around $6.5 trillion daily. The cryptocurrency market, on average, sees around $80 billion in daily trading volume, and according to various sources, a lot of the volume is actually fake.
The problem with illiquidity is that someone who wants to sell or buy a huge amount of Bitcoin or any cryptocurrency will simply ‘eat’ all the orders in the order book of the exchange, catapulting the price up or crashing it. That is the only reason why cryptocurrencies, in general, are extremely volatile.
Some Cryptocurrencies Are Actually Backed by Things
There are, however, some cryptocurrencies that are backed by gold, assets, and even fiat money. Tether (USDT) became the most popular cryptocurrency backed by fiat, later known as a ‘stablecoin’.
Stablecoins
A stablecoin is designed to always be worth $1.00 by maintaining 1 dollar in some sort of reserve. The first stablecoin to become widely popular was Tether, however, there was a lot of controversy surrounding it. Most of the criticism came from the fact that Tether Limited was unable to prove they actually have the funds to cover all the Tether issued.
Additionally, on 30 April 2019, Tether Limited’s lawyer actually admitted that each coin is only backed by $0.74 in cash.
Currently, there are over a dozen stablecoins that are backed by fiat, commodities, and even cryptocurrencies. TrueUSD is similar to Tether but it is considered to be one of the most reliable stablecoins currently as the company behind it has been extremely transparent and conducted an independent audit back in March 2019.
A more complex stablecoin is Dai, which is backed by Ethereum and pegged to the dollar. The system behind Dai basically locks Ethereum in a public contract. If the value of Dai distances too far from $1, the system will make use of the contract to stabilize it back. There is, however, a small problem: Dai is not entirely decentralized as the technology behind it is being monitored by the Maker Foundation.
DigixDAO is another stablecoin and it’s backed by bars of actual gold. It is an ERC-20 token created back in 2014. The digital asset is entirely decentralized and autonomous and can in fact be extended to be backed by other precious metals and even physical assets. According to the company, the gold is stored in custodial vaults at the Singapore Safe House, and 1 DGX will always equal 1 gram of gold.
Cryptocurrencies Backed by Assets
Not all cryptocurrencies backed by assets are stablecoins. For instance, the first oil-backed cryptocurrency was introduced by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro back in 2017. El Petro, although highly criticized, is supposedly the first cryptocurrency to be backed by oil thanks to the country’s huge oil and mineral reserves.
Petro is, however, not pegged to anything, and its value can increase or decrease at any given time.
Tokenization of Assets
Something that has become quite popular over the last few years is the tokenization of traditional stocks and assets. There are countless blockchain startups tokenizing almost anything to represent ownership.
The tokenization of assets brings numerous benefits like greater liquidity, more transparency, cheaper and faster transactions, and more accessibility. Tokenization itself is quite difficult to regulate, and all tokenization assets have to be compliant with the law, something that issuers struggle to achieve.
Conclusion
While traditional cryptocurrencies are not necessarily backed by anything physical, they still hold a lot of value solely based on supply and demand. This is the case with numerous other assets and even fiat money.
Cryptocurrencies have come a long way and there is a wide variety of them. Stablecoins are the most popular when it comes to asset-backed cryptocurrencies. They serve as an alternative to fiat money and bring a lot of liquidity to the market. There are definitely concerns as people question their stability, however, they have become an important factor in the market.
Additionally, other projects aside from stablecoins have implemented asset-backed cryptocurrencies. There are numerous cryptocurrencies out there backed by precious metals, physical assets, stocks, and even other cryptocurrencies. We are definitely going to see even more in the near future as they bring a lot more security to investors and the crypto space in general.

SwapSpace team is always ready for discussion. You can drop an email with your suggestions and questions to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Join our social networks: Twitter, Medium, Facebook, Telegram The best rates on https://swapspace.co/
submitted by SwapSpace_co to CoinTelegraph [link] [comments]

What are Bitcoin and Other Cryptocurrencies Backed By?

Bitcoin was created back in 2009 and became the first cryptocurrency ever designed. Cryptocurrencies have become increasingly popular in the last few years as they offer an efficient and decentralized way of transferring money.
Cryptocurrencies have always been an alternative to banks and fiat money. But why do they have any value at all and who dictates what they are worth? The value of Bitcoin is really calculated through supply and demand. The digital asset itself is backed by nothing more than perhaps the blockchain ledger.
Every single cryptocurrency uses a blockchain ledger, a system that records transactions between two or more parties in a verifiable and permanent way. This certainly adds value to Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. However, it is not what determines their price.
Why Things Have Value
Why does anything have any value at all? It has mostly because of supply and demand. Traditional currencies, for instance, are only backed by the government that issued them. Digital money, like Bitcoin, is not backed or linked to any physical reserves like gold and can certainly lose value due to different factors.
Cryptocurrencies have value because they require ‘work’ to exist. Cryptocurrencies are maintained thanks to the mining process, a process in which transactions are verified by different people. This process requires a certain amount of work, electricity, and money.
Key Factors That Affect The Value of Cryptocurrencies
Since most cryptocurrencies are not physically backed by anything, their value is determined through supply and demand based on a few important factors. One of the biggest advantages of cryptocurrencies is scarcity. The supply of most cryptocurrencies is fixed, and, unlike traditional currencies, no one can issue more than the maximum limit. This means that cryptocurrencies are deflationary by nature.
Another key factor that benefits cryptocurrencies is divisibility. Any cryptocurrency can be divided into smaller units. A simple change in Bitcoin’s code could allow the digital asset to be divided into infinitely smaller units at any time.
Additionally, transferring cryptocurrencies can be extremely fast and cheap compared to traditional methods. Fees are somewhat fixed no matter the amount you send, which means that theoretically you could send 1 million Bitcoins to someone and pay only a few dollars in fees (or even less).
In a way, one could say that Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies are backed by the public’s faith in them as they have realized that the current monetary system is not as robust as one might think.
Why Are Cryptocurrencies so Volatile Then?
In comparison to traditional currencies and even stocks, cryptocurrencies are far more volatile, meaning that the current price of any given crypto can change drastically in hours. It’s quite common to see Bitcoin’s price go up or down 5-10% within a few days. In fact, even in periods of low volatility, most cryptocurrencies still experience price moves of up to 1-2%, which is considered extremely high in traditional markets.
The explanation, however, is quite simple. Cryptocurrencies, in general, lack the liquidity that the rest of the markets enjoy. According to statistics from Statista, the average daily turnover in the global foreign exchange market was around $6.5 trillion daily. The cryptocurrency market, on average, sees around $80 billion in daily trading volume, and according to various sources, a lot of the volume is actually fake.
The problem with illiquidity is that someone who wants to sell or buy a huge amount of Bitcoin or any cryptocurrency will simply ‘eat’ all the orders in the order book of the exchange, catapulting the price up or crashing it. That is the only reason why cryptocurrencies, in general, are extremely volatile.
Some Cryptocurrencies Are Actually Backed by Things
There are, however, some cryptocurrencies that are backed by gold, assets, and even fiat money. Tether (USDT) became the most popular cryptocurrency backed by fiat, later known as a ‘stablecoin’.
Stablecoins
A stablecoin is designed to always be worth $1.00 by maintaining 1 dollar in some sort of reserve. The first stablecoin to become widely popular was Tether, however, there was a lot of controversy surrounding it. Most of the criticism came from the fact that Tether Limited was unable to prove they actually have the funds to cover all the Tether issued.
Additionally, on 30 April 2019, Tether Limited’s lawyer actually admitted that each coin is only backed by $0.74 in cash.
Currently, there are over a dozen stablecoins that are backed by fiat, commodities, and even cryptocurrencies. TrueUSD is similar to Tether but it is considered to be one of the most reliable stablecoins currently as the company behind it has been extremely transparent and conducted an independent audit back in March 2019.
A more complex stablecoin is Dai, which is backed by Ethereum and pegged to the dollar. The system behind Dai basically locks Ethereum in a public contract. If the value of Dai distances too far from $1, the system will make use of the contract to stabilize it back. There is, however, a small problem: Dai is not entirely decentralized as the technology behind it is being monitored by the Maker Foundation.
DigixDAO is another stablecoin and it’s backed by bars of actual gold. It is an ERC-20 token created back in 2014. The digital asset is entirely decentralized and autonomous and can in fact be extended to be backed by other precious metals and even physical assets. According to the company, the gold is stored in custodial vaults at the Singapore Safe House, and 1 DGX will always equal 1 gram of gold.
Cryptocurrencies Backed by Assets
Not all cryptocurrencies backed by assets are stablecoins. For instance, the first oil-backed cryptocurrency was introduced by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro back in 2017. El Petro, although highly criticized, is supposedly the first cryptocurrency to be backed by oil thanks to the country’s huge oil and mineral reserves.
Petro is, however, not pegged to anything, and its value can increase or decrease at any given time.
Tokenization of Assets
Something that has become quite popular over the last few years is the tokenization of traditional stocks and assets. There are countless blockchain startups tokenizing almost anything to represent ownership.
The tokenization of assets brings numerous benefits like greater liquidity, more transparency, cheaper and faster transactions, and more accessibility. Tokenization itself is quite difficult to regulate, and all tokenization assets have to be compliant with the law, something that issuers struggle to achieve.
Conclusion
While traditional cryptocurrencies are not necessarily backed by anything physical, they still hold a lot of value solely based on supply and demand. This is the case with numerous other assets and even fiat money.
Cryptocurrencies have come a long way and there is a wide variety of them. Stablecoins are the most popular when it comes to asset-backed cryptocurrencies. They serve as an alternative to fiat money and bring a lot of liquidity to the market. There are definitely concerns as people question their stability, however, they have become an important factor in the market.
Additionally, other projects aside from stablecoins have implemented asset-backed cryptocurrencies. There are numerous cryptocurrencies out there backed by precious metals, physical assets, stocks, and even other cryptocurrencies. We are definitely going to see even more in the near future as they bring a lot more security to investors and the crypto space in general.

SwapSpace team is always ready for discussion. You can drop an email with your suggestions and questions to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Join our social networks: Twitter, Medium, Facebook, Telegram The best rates on https://swapspace.co/
submitted by SwapSpace_co to CryptoMarkets [link] [comments]

What are Bitcoin and Other Cryptocurrencies Backed By?

Bitcoin was created back in 2009 and became the first cryptocurrency ever designed. Cryptocurrencies have become increasingly popular in the last few years as they offer an efficient and decentralized way of transferring money.
Cryptocurrencies have always been an alternative to banks and fiat money. But why do they have any value at all and who dictates what they are worth? The value of Bitcoin is really calculated through supply and demand. The digital asset itself is backed by nothing more than perhaps the blockchain ledger.
Every single cryptocurrency uses a blockchain ledger, a system that records transactions between two or more parties in a verifiable and permanent way. This certainly adds value to Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. However, it is not what determines their price.

Why Things Have Value

Why does anything have any value at all? It has mostly because of supply and demand. Traditional currencies, for instance, are only backed by the government that issued them. Digital money, like Bitcoin, is not backed or linked to any physical reserves like gold and can certainly lose value due to different factors.
Cryptocurrencies have value because they require ‘work’ to exist. Cryptocurrencies are maintained thanks to the mining process, a process in which transactions are verified by different people. This process requires a certain amount of work, electricity, and money.

Key Factors That Affect The Value of Cryptocurrencies

Since most cryptocurrencies are not physically backed by anything, their value is determined through supply and demand based on a few important factors. One of the biggest advantages of cryptocurrencies is scarcity. The supply of most cryptocurrencies is fixed, and, unlike traditional currencies, no one can issue more than the maximum limit. This means that cryptocurrencies are deflationary by nature.
Another key factor that benefits cryptocurrencies is divisibility. Any cryptocurrency can be divided into smaller units. A simple change in Bitcoin’s code could allow the digital asset to be divided into infinitely smaller units at any time.
Additionally, transferring cryptocurrencies can be extremely fast and cheap compared to traditional methods. Fees are somewhat fixed no matter the amount you send, which means that theoretically you could send 1 million Bitcoins to someone and pay only a few dollars in fees (or even less).
In a way, one could say that Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies are backed by the public’s faith in them as they have realized that the current monetary system is not as robust as one might think.

Why Are Cryptocurrencies so Volatile Then?

In comparison to traditional currencies and even stocks, cryptocurrencies are far more volatile, meaning that the current price of any given crypto can change drastically in hours. It’s quite common to see Bitcoin’s price go up or down 5-10% within a few days. In fact, even in periods of low volatility, most cryptocurrencies still experience price moves of up to 1-2%, which is considered extremely high in traditional markets.
The explanation, however, is quite simple. Cryptocurrencies, in general, lack the liquidity that the rest of the markets enjoy. According to statistics from Statista, the average daily turnover in the global foreign exchange market was around $6.5 trillion daily. The cryptocurrency market, on average, sees around $80 billion in daily trading volume, and according to various sources, a lot of the volume is actually fake.
The problem with illiquidity is that someone who wants to sell or buy a huge amount of Bitcoin or any cryptocurrency will simply ‘eat’ all the orders in the order book of the exchange, catapulting the price up or crashing it. That is the only reason why cryptocurrencies, in general, are extremely volatile.

Some Cryptocurrencies Are Actually Backed by Things

There are, however, some cryptocurrencies that are backed by gold, assets, and even fiat money. Tether (USDT) became the most popular cryptocurrency backed by fiat, later known as a ‘stablecoin’.

Stablecoins

A stablecoin is designed to always be worth $1.00 by maintaining 1 dollar in some sort of reserve. The first stablecoin to become widely popular was Tether, however, there was a lot of controversy surrounding it. Most of the criticism came from the fact that Tether Limited was unable to prove they actually have the funds to cover all the Tether issued.
Additionally, on 30 April 2019, Tether Limited’s lawyer actually admitted that each coin is only backed by $0.74 in cash.
Currently, there are over a dozen stablecoins that are backed by fiat, commodities, and even cryptocurrencies. TrueUSD is similar to Tether but it is considered to be one of the most reliable stablecoins currently as the company behind it has been extremely transparent and conducted an independent audit back in March 2019.
A more complex stablecoin is Dai, which is backed by Ethereum and pegged to the dollar. The system behind Dai basically locks Ethereum in a public contract. If the value of Dai distances too far from $1, the system will make use of the contract to stabilize it back. There is, however, a small problem: Dai is not entirely decentralized as the technology behind it is being monitored by the Maker Foundation.
DigixDAO is another stablecoin and it’s backed by bars of actual gold. It is an ERC-20 token created back in 2014. The digital asset is entirely decentralized and autonomous and can in fact be extended to be backed by other precious metals and even physical assets. According to the company, the gold is stored in custodial vaults at the Singapore Safe House, and 1 DGX will always equal 1 gram of gold.

Cryptocurrencies Backed by Assets

Not all cryptocurrencies backed by assets are stablecoins. For instance, the first oil-backed cryptocurrency was introduced by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro back in 2017. El Petro, although highly criticized, is supposedly the first cryptocurrency to be backed by oil thanks to the country’s huge oil and mineral reserves.
Petro is, however, not pegged to anything, and its value can increase or decrease at any given time.

Tokenization of Assets

Something that has become quite popular over the last few years is the tokenization of traditional stocks and assets. There are countless blockchain startups tokenizing almost anything to represent ownership.
The tokenization of assets brings numerous benefits like greater liquidity, more transparency, cheaper and faster transactions, and more accessibility. Tokenization itself is quite difficult to regulate, and all tokenization assets have to be compliant with the law, something that issuers struggle to achieve.

Conclusion

While traditional cryptocurrencies are not necessarily backed by anything physical, they still hold a lot of value solely based on supply and demand. This is the case with numerous other assets and even fiat money.
Cryptocurrencies have come a long way and there is a wide variety of them. Stablecoins are the most popular when it comes to asset-backed cryptocurrencies. They serve as an alternative to fiat money and bring a lot of liquidity to the market. There are definitely concerns as people question their stability, however, they have become an important factor in the market.
Additionally, other projects aside from stablecoins have implemented asset-backed cryptocurrencies. There are numerous cryptocurrencies out there backed by precious metals, physical assets, stocks, and even other cryptocurrencies. We are definitely going to see even more in the near future as they bring a lot more security to investors and the crypto space in general.

SwapSpace team is always ready for discussion. You can drop an email with your suggestions and questions to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Join our social networks: Twitter, Medium, Facebook The best rates on https://swapspace.co/
submitted by SwapSpace_co to SwapSpace [link] [comments]

I believe.

be-lief: noun
  1. an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.
  2. trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.
I bought my first 0.25 BTC on February 28, 2014 at $555.40 per coin, I’ve bought coins as high as $657.75, and now I’ve bought coins under $250 (maybe I’ll even pick up some more).
Bitcoin, to date, has not had a good return for me, currently I’m down 33% when compared to dollars, and that is OK.
It was the technology itself that pulled me in, it is truly fascinating.
I have a tech background, but knew next to nothing of economics and cryptography when I jumped on this train.
I’ve learned a thing or two since then, I’ve launched a crypto focused website that includes a price index, p2pool mining super node, and some interesting blockchain data.
I have 2 exciting (for me, not necessarily Bitcoin as a whole) projects I’m working on that will be rolled out in the coming weeks.
I’ve spent a lot of time here, on bitcointalk, and on twitter.
I feel like I have become part of the positive side of this yin and yang machine.
Bottom line is I LOVE THIS STUFF. Bitcoin is exciting.
I believe Bitcoin is a Black Swan event in process, the second in my lifetime after the rise of the Internet and global instant communication.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory
Here is a short list of reasons why I believe:
  1. Bitcoin is the first major innovation in a global system of exchange that is outside the control of the wealthy elite.
  2. For hundreds of years money has been controlled by those in positions of power, and that power is often obtained and maintained by the barrel of a gun, bitcoin can reduce violence, but it may get worse before it gets better.
  3. Bitcoin removes the need for superfluous third parties completely in many cases.
  4. Bitcoin provides access to a global monetary system for anyone with a cell phone (bank the unbanked).
  5. Bitcoin is a push technology, the existing pull technology behind credit cards and modern banking is inherently flawed.
  6. Bitcoin is decentralized, as long as we keep it that way.
  7. Bitcoin is trust-less.
  8. Bitcoin is border-less.
  9. Bitcoin has a limited supply, it can not be fractionally lent out, but is infinitely divisible.
  10. The pace of innovation within bitcoin is staggering.
If you are like me, an evangelist, you get it and probably want to add to this list, feel free.
If you are a detractor, that's fine, most of us evangelists started out that way. You can shout the sky is falling from the rooftops if you want, that is your right.
If you are new to bitcoin I’d encourage you to learn and make up your own mind as to which side of the coin you fall on. I’ve spent over 10 months studying and participating in bitcoin, I do not regret a minute of it, and I still have much to learn and explore.
Bitcoin is truth in money. It is or it is not, there is no in between. I believe bitcoin will succeed spectacularly, and if I’m wrong it will certainly fail.
In 2140 when the last coin is mined there will either be millions of transactions per day, or none at all.
“This [Bitcoin] is some powerful machinery.” Hal Finney December 11th, 2010
"The design supports a tremendous variety of possible transaction types that I designed years ago. Escrow transactions, bonded contracts, third party arbitration, multi-party signature, etc. If Bitcoin catches on in a big way, these are things we'll want to explore in the future, but they all had to be designed at the beginning to make sure they would be possible later.” Satoshi June 17, 2010
"Sorry to be a wet blanket. Writing a description for this thing for general audiences is bloody hard. There’s nothing to relate it to.” Satoshi July 5, 2010
submitted by CoinCadence to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin as Gold reserve to AltCoins

So I have this idea which I haven't seen anywhere else, and wanted to share it to see if it makes sense or not.
My understanding is that bitcoin has some issues with transaction speed (and/or transaction cost) which causes people to worry about its ability to go mainstream and establish itself as a core global currency. What if instead of expecting bitcoin to be as practical as USD, EUR, GBP etc, we actually thought of it more like the Gold of crypto?
Back when we tied our national currencies to gold, the paper notes were meant to be literally redeemable for gold (or silver, or coin, etc). The currency was tied to a guaranteed asset.
Paper is much easier to carry around than gold. It is much more divisible (infinitely so) than gold. It is more practical in virtually every way possible - it just has no value outside of the promise it carries. It promises to be worth gold. So as long as people believe gold has value, the paper has value. And whether gold is convenient for handling transactions or not is irrelevant.
So why not use Bitcoin the same way?
We need to program a specific "AltCoin-In-A-Box" program which anyone could easily run and create their own AltCoin.
It would work like this:
During setup of the new AltCoin, the new blockchain programmatically ties itself to a bitcoin wallet, which we will call "Fort Knox". An exchange rate is chosen, for example, 1BTC = 1000 ProgenyCoins, and the setup is complete.
An interface is then made available which allows people to buy your newly created ProgenyCoins from the "Federal Reserve" of ProgenyCoin-istan. Register your intent to buy (provide bitcoin address where BTC are coming from, and ProgenyCoins address where your ProgenyCoins will go), then send 1BTC to "Fort Knox" and await the (slow, painful, horrific) BTC transaction to be confirmed.
As soon as the BTC transaction is confirmed, "The Federal Reserve" sends you 1000 ProgenyCoins. "The Federal Reserve" can produce as many of these coins as it needs to meet the BTC deposit in Fort Knox, and will only pay out ProgenyCoins for that reason. Similarly, sending ProgenyCoins to "The Federal Reserve" will allow you to withdraw BTC to a BTC wallet of your choosing.
Buying ProgenyCoins from the fed on this brand spanking new tiny blockchain which is optimised for rapid, free transactions has now given you a practical local currency to use in everyday transactions which doesn't require the bitcoin chain, but still benefits from all of the value held in the bitcoin chain. If bitcoin rises in value, so too will the value of your ProgenyCoins. And since all of these new progeny coins are being created by locking BTC up in "Fort Knoxes" all over the planet, the value of BTC is likely to increase to match the increased demand and lost supply.
Basically, the parent BTC blockchain is spawning lightweight, mostly-independent, children chains to do the transaction work for it. Hence the progeny reference. Obviously.
Considerations and Risks
  1. By making the original code for this concept a well established opensource piece of software, the "AltCoin-In-A-Box" certificate of BTC redeemability will guarantee the value of every new ProgenyCoin you encounter. Presumably the "AltCoin-In-A-Box" software could also include a generic platform which will handle all such coin-wallets in one place.
  2. Each new coin will need to gain enough nodes/miners to ensure security against attacks before people can be confident trusting them to not steal their money. Perhaps an international organisation can help provide early stage node hosting for a fee paid by the originator of the currency? (I haven't really put any thought into the incentivisation for 'mining' - I guess transactions would need a miner fee to ensure people did run full nodes?)
  3. Many more I haven't thought of, I am sure.
Thoughts?
submitted by Aegist to btc [link] [comments]

11 Questions for Storj Community

(I originally emailed [email protected] but nobody is reading that.)
I’ve been following Storj for most of the year, but with so many competing efforts over the year that overlap in functionality - such as Bitcloud, Filecoin, MaidSafe, Datacoin - it has been difficult to keep up. (Although, this is information problem is something Blockology plans to organize). Similarly I did not know there would be a burn period, or which development team was strong enough to be trusted.
I've just read the white paper and have a few questions:
1) StorjX or Storjcoin or StorjcoinX - the white paper mentioned several alt coin blockchains used for holding metadata. What happened there, and what blockchain is StorjX currently using. In some forum threads I’ve seen people using an asset on counterparty, which is currently only writing to bitcoin’s blockchain. So is there a Storj asset on counterparty? The paper doesn’t go into detail about this and neither does the website, and trudging through forums on bitcointalk and storjtalk is not practical.
2) StorjX mining or burn period or open market. I see that the Storj asset has an exchange rate and is trading on poloniex and maybe other places. But I don’t know anything about that asset. Is it a blockchain unit with X amounts of units being minted at an interval, is it some proof of whatever coin with premine, etc. I got that hint that it was burned and the total amount in circulation now is the amount there will ever be, which of course causes controversy with mining speculators because of premine distrust.
Now, less boring stuff, onto the technical stuff:
3) I read in the white paper, during data retrieval, that farmers have to pay the fee to send data back to the client requesting it. What if the farmer does not have funds to pay this, then the client cannot retrieve their shards? A solution would be to make all farmers have a reserve of Storj to participate in the network at all, they cannot pass an audit without 10000 Storj, for instance. (Masternodes in Darkcoin’s Darksend infrastructure maintain a DRK reserves as well)
4) What is the cost of storing/retrieving anything, right now? I get that the “market determines this” but practically Storj blockchain units are probably infinitely divisible, so shard’s metadata can be written with .0000001 Storj for instance.
5) Where can I browse shard metadata in the test blockchains, or current blockchains. I would like to look at various transactions.
6) How much Storj can a farmer make? I get that ‘the market determines this’ but the market is opaque right now. For instance, my local infrastructure is 50mbps upload, 200mbps download, and 2 terabytes of SSDs. With any illustrative example of profit/loss under a scenario, then an investment into greater infrastructure could be rationalized.
7) How is information about the infrastructure broadcast? How do clients or other nodes or the network know that I have 50 up , 200 down, 2 TB SSDs. Something something auditing software? Please elaborate on this aspect
8) What is a heartbeat? Is that like a ping? Maybe I only skimmed that part of the white paper but this remains not obvious to me.
9) Is there an official roadmap for challenges to be addressed? I would like to see it and who can I talk to about various efforts.
10) Link to open source efforts?
11) Speed of file retrieval? I saw that there are websites being hosted on Storj already, but I don’t know what performance I should expect or the challenges to better performance.
The timing for Storj is great, as Bitcasa - a centralized zero knowledge storage system - basically just imploded and there is no alternative.
submitted by 1blockologist to storj [link] [comments]

Progress Report #0: The Mod So Far

Hello everyone. If you don't know already, I'm LuxLoser, lead developer for Hearts of Durasteel, a Star Wars mod for Hearts of Iron IV. This first progress report is to convey the general state of the mod and basic information. I will also be adding posts for the available leaks/declassified documents from the Discord, and the next progress report will come once the map is fully created, at least visually.
THE MAP
The map of Durasteel is a major component, as this isn't just an alternate history mod. Instead, it takes the map of Earth as we know it chucks it out, instead giving you a full map of the Star Wars Galaxy. "But how?" you might ask.
Well, the first thing we have done is create planets. They will be flat, 2-D items, representative of the planet as a whole. Think of it as a top-down view of a flattened globe, and the march of troops around the planet represents control of a certain region, of the southern hemisphere, of the large sea, of the mines, etc. The small provinces within the planets mean that planets aren't just one time battles but at times lengthy campaigns. Events during battles will also help make up for the limitations we have in depicting interstellar ground warfare. Planets that have no importance or are inhospitable and not valuable won't be depicted. Instead it is 'major' world displayed, not a star system. Various moons and satellites, however, are displayed near the planet, and important systems within the same system are placed close to one another.
Here is a look at the map layout, though it is, of course, constantly being updated. And here is an example of a planet and moon.
When we first started testing this idea in practice, the map looked like this. From there we did more refinement and ended up with this. You'll notice it very much looks like a bunch of islands in a very open sea. Technically, that's what it will always be, but we want to simulate the idea of a simplified map of space. We are still refining it, but the biggest things we tackled were: 1. the reflection of clouds, 2. waves and sea texture, 3. a space background. The reflection issue was easy enough, and we were able to figure out how to put in a background (admittedly still darkened and desaturated) not long after. But the issue of waves persisted. However, not long ago, we hit a break through and were able to remove the waves.
Here is the physical map as it exists presently. Here is a look at Coruscant and its moons and 'orbit tile'. And finally, here is a close up of Alderaan and a look at the stand-in "planetary ocean", which is blue mountains. We're still looking into improving the look.
We still have on the map agenda: 1. The sun. There is a light glare on the 'ocean' we are looking into disabling. 2. Improving the color of the background 3. Creating a proper, detailed space background with fairly accurate stars and easy to see hyperlanes 4. Improving planetary ocean look 5. Improving the height map to remove the rough look of the 'islands'
NATIONS
A lot less to cover here as I just want to clarify a few things. Firstly, we are not going for a plan of “every planet a tag.” Instead, while we do have plans for a number of tags, the approach is to have at game start, a large nation in the form of the Galactic Republic. The Republic will not be entirely united, with regions moving away from the Republic shown as separate puppets. This is a sort of narrative tool, as it shows that while some regions within the Republic have their own agendas, they believe in the Republic and respect its government. Near the Republic will be the CIS, focused on Serenno led by Dooku, at this point a growing movement that rejects the Republic government. The corporate states that he is enticing will be shown as moving away until the Battle of Geonosis comes and lines are drawn in the sand. The CIS will swell and the war will begin. The Neutral Systems will spawn not long after, refusing to accept either side of the conflict as their sovereign. Alongside all of this will be the Hutts and the Chiss. The former will be a large but fractured group, each of the leader of the Cartel having their own demesne. And the Chiss will be sitting in isolation, content on tackling their own issues. So, at the start there will be only a few nations available.
Why? Well the reason this mod is being made with Hearts of Iron IV is the unique way in which the event chains and the focus trees can be used to tell a story for a nation. Our objective is in taking Star Wars and allowing the player to craft their story. Fewer tags, more paths, more branches to the stories. Some of those stories will include switching to a different tag of a new nation, others will not. That the story is logical, sensible, and that the ways it affects the galaxy are cohesive is what will be important. Because Star Wars isn’t just some science fiction setting. It’s a Space Opera, a dramatic saga of heroes and villains, of the rise and fall of nations, of legends and myths, of prophecy and legacy. While we want to give the player choice, we have to be careful not to give total freedom. The massive conspiracies, intertwining stories, the presence of the Force, and the overarching themes of Star Wars mean that you can’t just be a rogue agent. There will be consequences, events that transpire because of things beyond your control. I want each playthrough to feel like it has a narrative, a story told in an unconventional medium. When you click “Senator Amidala dies!” I want it to be a little more than just an event that changes your focus tree and gives you some political power loss. I want the events that unfold, the war that ensues, the future that is written to feel like it was destined, not just random occurrences bumping into each other. That was a bit of an avant-garde rant there, but hopefully you’ll know what I mean as things progress.
But the question you might still have on tags is, “Well what about later on?” And that is more than fair. Ultimately there will be a number of tags, but mostly regional, with a few planets collected together around regional leaders. Forming each will take specific circumstances. So why not every world a tag? Well it also helps to demonstrate my personal view on how an interstellar nation functions on a greater scale. Namely, some systems are effectively “swept under the rug”. Due to the distance from major trade routes, economic capacity, population disparity, and military size, the neighbors of larger worlds are going to rally behind regional leaders, due in part to being just unable to stand alone. Worlds like Alderaan and Corellia, while having separate representatives than their neighboring systems, would have such sway and hegemony that the only reason their neighbors wouldn’t vote with them as a block is personal politics, and even that is more like one region being more liberal than another within one state and so electing a different party to the shared delegation than the others. But if the Republic were to just be dissolved, Alderaan’s neighbors, despite political differences, would be forced to work together, and work with Alderaan, to survive. This is partly due to the needs of a population accustomed to an economy where resources are practically infinite due to the shared resources of so many worlds in the galaxy. Unless a planet wanted to become an austere hermit kingdom, they have to work with more powerful neighbors. The materials used for infrastructure, the energy sources, the technological grids, the economic sectors, everything on a planet would be accustomed to what was available on the galactic market as a whole. Doonitum is common is some areas, but may be utterly unavailable on a planet. However, their security fleet is still made with doontium hulls, despite the metal not existing on their worlds. So unless they want their planet invaded and crushed, they need a doontium trade to survive.
The other component leading to regional leadership is how space travel works in Star Wars. Hyperspace Routes, planned paths of transit, and the perils of ‘rough space’ via nebulas and asteroid belts and so on, means it’s almost like Earth before air travel. If you’re far from a main route, ships will need to go through perilous, uncharted regions. Even before making that journey, if you’re an isolated world far from any routes, ships are first going to jump to the nearest planet close to a safe Hyperspace route. Imagine you’re a town near Florence in 13th Century Italy. Traders go to Florence on the main road before trying to reach you, and if it’s too much risk, you’re better off sending your own traders into Florence before they return. Say you’re on a minor road, one that branches off of the southern road to Florence. You want goods from north of Florence? Then you’re reliant on Florentine traders bringing it. And when war comes? You’ll need the Florentine army to hold off invaders. And so, despite disliking Florence, having your own culture, traditions, and political views, your town is under the jurisdiction of the Florentine city-state. Replace Florence with Corellia and Corellian and you see that due to the nature of hyper-space transit and the constrictions of moving through space itself, history has almost become cyclical for these minor worlds. Not to mention that as this situation persists, Corellian culture, ideals, and people would seep in, until what you have most in common with other minor world near Corellia is just Corellian you all are!
On a less philosophical or artistic note, let’s be honest. You really want to try to manage a game where you’re the faction leader of 50 minor nations, all with their own AIs? It would be a nightmare, especially when the war starts and each AI tries to command its own troops. And a major city on a planet falls? Rather than just lose some war score you can regain as your troops on the moons or nearby work to reclaim it, you instead get “THE WELSH UNION HAS CAPITULATED,” giving your enemies free reign in the territory, a huge hit to score, and the cession of control of worlds despite losing little on them.
IDEOLOGIES
This will be getting a separate post soon as well.
Durasteel presently has 11 set ideologies, with a 12th being in discussion in the form of “Grayism”, or “Neutralist”, meaning a state under the control of Gray Jedi. However, this is not yet set. Some of these ideologies, like New Order, the sides of the Force, and to some degree Akaan’adocrat, come from Star Wars canon or from Legends. But Star Wars has always been vague on its politics, leaving to us flexibility and creativity in developing coherent ideologies for gameplay.
Each ideology in the image has a definition but I want to elaborate on that definition here.
RESOURCES
Lastly, we have also begun implementing new resources into the mod. None of these are made up, though some lean more into Legends, as that continuity provides more detail in terms of military supplies. These are as follows, and in order on the screen:
Alright well that’s most of what I wanted to address in this report, giving everyone an awareness of where the mod is at in terms of development. Hopefully we can have more regular Progress Reports, but with University, work, and other projects that devs are involved with, we’re trying our best to move as quick as we can. Thank you all for your support.
Vode An!
submitted by LuxLoser to HeartsOfDurasteel [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Intro for Intelligent Investors: Part 3 Is Bitcoin divisible... and if so, how? Bitcoin Rig Mining Logo 3 - YouTube bitcoin hack BitCoin Debunked in 2 Minutes A Scam That Will Collapse

Even though bitcoin is infinitely divisible, the supply of bitcoin relative to its demand still determines its value. Continued use of bitcoin will only increase demand against fixed supply and its value will rise accordingly. Infinite divisibility does not change the fact that bitcoin under its designed mining algorithm is more valuable to hold for its constantly increasing value than for its ... Gold is almost infinity divisible. You can divide it up to the atomic scale. There is 5.2x10^32 atoms of gold in the world... In fact there are more atoms of gold in the world than satoshis (the smallest unit of the bitcoin). Because a satoshi is ... Not infinitely, the amount is stored as a 64-bit integer. Every coin is stored on the Bitcoin Blockchain as a 64-bit integer count of Satoshis. The software defines 1 Bitcoin as 100 million Satoshis. If the Bitcoin community, some time in a future century, decided that the smallest division of a Bitcoin needs to be 100 billion per Bitcoin, this ... However, since Bitcoin is essentially infinitely divisible (meaning users can transfer as little as 0.00000001 bitcoins), this counters the scalability argument. It’s believed that Bitcoin was designed to become a deflationary currency to combat the government’s use of inflation as a hidden taxation to redistribute earned wealth. The currency is effectively infinitely divisible. This means that the precise amount doesn't really matter as you can divide it into whatever you can agree with another party, it’s just so long as the limit remains fixed. Previous. Can you trace a Bitcoin address? Next. Can I buy half a Bitcoin? How do I get Bitcoin? Learn about earning, trading, buying and mining. Bitcoin as digital gold. A ...

[index] [41582] [45533] [5697] [50319] [4159] [34701] [11603] [14935] [20443] [24817]

Bitcoin Intro for Intelligent Investors: Part 3

Bitcoine has been Blocked by The Chinese Government. BitCoin Is Not a limited resource. It is infinitely divisible and therefore infinitely expandable. Difficulty is a value used to show how hard is it to find a hash that will be lower than target defined by system. The Bitcoin network has a global block difficulty. Valid blocks must have a hash ... www.bitcoinrigmining.com Hash: 1) A unique identifier of a Bitcoin transaction. 2) A mathematical function that Bitcoin miners perform on blocks to make the ... bitcoin hack http://tinyurl.com/lmkuhcs bitcoin hack Bitcoin is money based on mathematics. Bitcoin’s mathematical design is open and transparent. Anyone in ... Hashflare is the easiest way to mine Bitcoin, Litecoin, Ethereum and Dash https://hashflare.io/r/14610B6 Diversify your strategy with Genesis Mining https://...

#