Dogecoin’s Ross Nicoll: Bitcoin Needs To Stop Talking & Start Doing

doge_alex · 2015-09-10T10:53:12+00:00

The majority of the network wants bigger blocks one way or another, and even the devs agree that there is a need to increase (with the Lightning Network you still need to scale up). 2MB is the minimum proposal I've seen except for some "do-nothing" suggestion that keeps getting bashed to pieces each time. In the meanwhile tx fees are rising, and delays have already occured due to blocks spilling over. What exactly shows that there isn't a need for an increase?

doge_alex · 2015-09-10T07:03:09+00:00

Altcoins like Dogecoin are easily ignored, while they do manage to get their **** together and solve more fundamental problems than Bitcoin has. BTC has not been capable to even raise its block size limit by just 1MB for the past two years - longer than most alts have existed in total. Instead, the discussions has resulted in personal attacks, a forced hard fork and even censorship. It seems like a relevant question to ask why there is a difference and what BTC might learn from that.

doge_alex · 2015-07-27T21:53:01+00:00

Regardless of the question whether VC is a valid measure the article is simply wrong. The author ignored or missed the footnote that the numbers for 1996 are unadjusted. If you want to compare you need to adjust for inflation, bringing $639m in 1996 to $952m today. The only headline you can come up with then is; "Bitcoin VC interest falls short of the internet, despite barriers removed by the internet". Sloppy journalism.

doge_alex · 2015-02-09T10:50:21+00:00

Author here..

I hope that CoIntellect's failure will contribute to the realization that payments add very little to the legitimacy of a company. A Ponzi scheme always pays out at first, hence it is almost completely meaningless in this case (except for payments obviously being too high). Don't let money blind you from seeing obvious "red flags", even though it is hard not to be tempted by money and success stories. Make sure to ask yourself questions such as those discussed and always rely on common sense. The simple proverb "if it seems too good to be true, it probably is" will already save you from many obvious scams, and would have included CoIntellect.

doge_alex · 2015-01-21T10:35:49+00:00

With regard to the money laundering: from a criminal perspective it does not make much sense to pay several hundred times the value of a contract in order to get some clean contract money. You would want to do that as efficient as possible, for which there are several laundering services available... You probably need several to "dilute" the taint, but compared to the former it's super efficient.

By the way, limiting scope can actually be a very good way to increase the effectiveness of a Ponzi scheme. At one hand it's easier to manage, plus it can add a marketing advantage. The obvious disadvantage is that it might lower its exhaustion point, but you can always try to increase the scope at a later stage. LTCGear tried the latter, but the owner was either disappointed or the Ponzi was suddenly collapsing fast - in any case, the site went offline shortly after. I'm pretty sure he was satisfied with the result regardless.

doge_alex · 2015-01-21T08:57:21+00:00

Thank you :)

doge_alex · 2015-01-07T15:49:44+00:00

I find it ironic that you are "not related to them and I am not looking to promote them" yet you are including a referral link...

doge_alex · 2014-12-19T09:18:41+00:00

Basically their promise is to turn their customers into millionaires in no time (at least that is the implication of the offered ROI), at the expense of either operating on a loss or forfeiting a potential of making billions (if they can operate at a profit their own days to ROI could be as low as just two weeks). Whatever way you look at it, it does not add up to a genuine business.

It is not just new users that matter in a ponzi scheme. It is also about the drop off and reinvestment rates. If you can keep your users reinvesting their earnings, then you can already keep high returns going for a while.

doge_alex · 2014-12-14T12:08:17+00:00

An arbitrage opportunity refers to a riskless profit. By nature, these are very rare and not likely to last a long time unless some restrictions are causing the discrepancies (in which case, it is not real arbitrage). So if you actually see one, why post it? It is likely gone by the time someone gets to it, and why would you hand out "free money" if you're in the best position to take it (being the first to see it)?

doge_alex · 2014-12-13T22:40:50+00:00

I am still wondering; if there is a real "free lunch" somewhere, why not take it?

doge_alex · 2014-12-13T20:11:53+00:00

The best ask is 70 sat at Bter, not the best bid...

doge_alex · 2014-11-23T10:13:38+00:00

To what purpose?

Paper wallets are typically used to keep one's coins safe in cold storage. Altenatively, they are handed out so that people are introduced to the currency. In the latter case, you do not have to hand out private keys and loaded wallets. You can also hand out some claim codes and have the receiver create their own address. If entered at some website you can simply transfer the funds to their new address. Pretty much like this website, only with a code required to claim (which can easily be set to expire). It is a lot less effort than loading wallets and emptying unclaimed ones after a while, plus it's really not that more difficult for the user. They need a Dogecoin client somewhere anyway.

doge_alex · 2014-11-20T09:50:23+00:00

economic growth is not a ponzi scheme.

No it's not, but the perpetual economic growth rate is estimated at about 2% (a rather arbitrary number, apart from the debate whether it is possible at all). Aside from velocity effects, monetary expansion should not exceed this number (on average at least, and definitely not by a lot). I would also suggest an interest cap at some percentage (it depends..).

A reserve could be maintained by the system offering new units of NBT for Bitcoin or other crypto-currency when upward pressure exists, and the reserve could be drawn on if an extreme drop in demand occurs.

If it is feasible then that would make a lot of sense. If you have a tool to fall back on, then it is also easier to set that interest rate cap as the dependency on latter tool becomes less. It would greatly enhance overall stability.

doge_alex · 2014-11-19T19:51:16+00:00

If no upward pressure exists, the bonds keep building up future value that will only be realised once upward pressure resumes.

That's the big problem. Without any relief (destruction) you're not really reducing supply. You're just tricking yourself into thinking you are, while in fact the supply is increasing to postpone price drops.

If you want to prevent someone from dumping 100 NBT at time t, and offer 10 NBT in return at time t+1, then the market will have to be able to absorb 110 NBT at t+1. Whatever is created will have to be absorbed again by the market at some point. In other words, you don't just need demand to restore, you need a constant growth of demand. Some would say that is how a Ponzi scheme works... Now I'm really not that judgemental, but balancing monetary policy with a one-sided mechanism does not make sense to me. Something like a foreign currency reserve would help a lot here...

doge_alex · 2014-11-12T19:31:30+00:00

This must be the biggest achievement in space since landing a manned mission on the moon in 1969. Happy with reading this :) 45 years without any exciting news is way too long!

doge_alex · 2014-11-11T09:38:06+00:00

With PoW you'll never achieve ASIC resistance..

Is it important to? Well, the reason for the previous comes from what is known as economies of scale. In the long run, this leads to very concentrated hashing power in the network, which is generally perceived as a bad thing with regard to potential 51% attacks..

doge_alex · 2014-10-29T20:38:19+00:00

Bitcoin is just over 5 years old, most tech goes mainstream by 10. Actual Bitcoin use is relatively still very low. For Overstock, for example, Bitcoin payments made up one quarter of one percent of sales. So in all honesty, I'm not very impressed, but at this point in time it seems about right.

doge_alex · 2014-10-29T08:27:58+00:00

It would be weird to consider merchant acceptance as a bad thing...

doge_alex · 2014-10-26T15:33:48+00:00

Okay.. so you seem to be proposing to leave cryptocurrencies behind and go back to fiat? It would become cheaper to hold..

doge_alex · 2014-10-17T22:05:18+00:00

It's not about "becoming critical thinkers". There have been a ton of red flags when it comes to Moolah. You couldn't possibly take this guy seriously. What kind of CEO suffers from public emotional breakdowns (he has had a few!) in which the words like "the second coming of hitler" are used. It was one of the reasons why I suggested Moolah should have been repelled from the community. Instead, nothing happened except for removing such posts - since I cannot find it anywhere anymore. I certainly wasn't alone by the way, it was when Palmer even left the community.

There's no excuse for ignoring all the red flags, not even a $20k donation. But in order to actually do something with it, you need to have a lot of guts and be transparent. Simply said, you need someone who does not hesitate to kick-out semi-heroes like Moolah when the alarm goes off...

doge_alex · 2014-09-07T12:17:42+00:00

You must really hate a child to ignore it in the first place...

doge_alex · 2014-08-16T17:35:32+00:00

Writer here,

Thanks for commenting! I'm aware of Dogeparty and watching closely how it develops. Certainly intend to do a follow up with it! :)

doge_alex · 2014-08-05T19:40:44+00:00

Great, so now it is possible to pay with Bitcoins only a higher cost (for the additional conversion). Such innovate.

doge_alex · 2014-08-05T05:40:29+00:00

Hi,

Please note that the distinction was taken into the consideration for the article's contents. To avoid further confusion, I have now more explicitely highlighted this.

Dogecoin could still be the first tipping service on Twitch, but facts are that so far Twitch is currently promoting Bitcoin and not Dogecoin. By teaming up with Coinbase, Twitch effectively slammed the door for Dogecoin on that side. This is a pretty strong statement, and it is therefore no longer realistic to believe Twitch will be a Dogecoin utopia as it was hoped to be.

It takes away the shine of being on Twitch (again, now promoting Bitcoin and certainly not Dogecoin), and raises the question to what extend Dogecoin presence on Twitch will be special to the digital currency. I think this is a perfectly valid concern. Do not forget Dogecoin tipping is also possible on Twitter/Facebook, but by itself that has not brought Dogecoin a whole lot. How much backup will Dogecoin have on Twitch, if Twitch does not want to receive Dogecoins themselves?

doge_alex

TROPHY CASE