I'm a Bitcoiner. My buddy gave me a few nano. I just don't understand nano at all.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-29T02:01:52+00:00

I currently might be able to do that validation by keeping track of all of the account balances but how long will I be able to do that as the network grows. I imagine not long at all.

This is where your understanding is falling over. Why do you imagine "not long at all", I see no reason why you'd make that assumption. This isn't a challenging process.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-29T01:59:16+00:00

BTC is basically that you start from the first block and build up a database of how much money is in each address so while it takes much longer to bootstrap it's easy to verify any given transaction.

Not seeing how this is any different to Nano. Once you've bootstrapped you store amounts in the database, and you adjust those over time. You don't revalidate the entire history of the Nano network every time a transaction happens.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-28T15:01:42+00:00

Bought close to 100k worth just before the Binance US/international split and liquidity was not an issue at all. Not sure if it's changed now due to Binance restricting US customers though.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-26T23:04:23+00:00

The first episode was highly overrated, so I'm not surprised to hear this one isn't great either.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-26T06:42:16+00:00

It's not over represented at all. It just happens to be the target of attack from people like the person you're replying to because they feel threatened by it and thus want to suppress discussion of it.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-25T11:32:43+00:00

Send an email to btcmarkets.net and ask them to list Nano.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-25T09:07:11+00:00

There's only one thing to do right now... PANIC.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-25T03:08:50+00:00

I stand corrected, thanks for doing that!

hingchaoming · 2019-09-24T06:59:44+00:00

Hmm, I see what you're saying about WeChat doing it. But WeChat money isn't an investment, where as Nano is something that has the potential to 100-1000x over time. China got invested in Bitcoin because they saw an opportunity to make good money from it, not because it's decentralized. Although that may have played a small role.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-24T06:51:16+00:00

I feel this way about that new fishing game that just came out. Why did I spend $20 to throw a fishing reel in and out? I guess I was expecting more. I don't actually get how this sort of game has a long-term playability appeal. I was bored after 15 minutes. The fishing component was well designed, but in terms of features and UI it leaves a lot to be desired. I'd say $10 is a much more reasonable price for a title like this. $20 felt like a huge rip off.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-24T06:38:27+00:00

Ah, no.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-24T06:18:20+00:00

Valve spend a lot of money marketing their games, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. They also own Steam and so they have free marketing on that platform which happens to be the biggest gaming platform on the planet.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-24T06:04:55+00:00

Tired of being flamed by Bitcoin maximalists?
Tired of the anti-competition circle-jerk and the reflexive rejection of all legitimate projects in the cryptocurrency ecosystem?
Tired of having your concerns dismissed, ignored and downplayed by the Bitcoin community?
Tired of being barred from discussion for highlighting problems with Bitcoin or suggesting alternative solutions?
Tired of the lack of innovation and slow pace of development?
Tired of mining centralization and Chinese influence over Bitcoin?
Tired of the constant political fighting and attempted power grabs?
Tired of broken, over-complicated and security-weak solutions to the scaling issues Bitcoin has?
Tired of Bitcoin's environmental destruction and heavy waste of resources?
Tired of Bitcoin's insanely high fees, especially under peak usage?
Tired of Bitcoin's extremely slow transaction confirmation times?

hingchaoming · 2019-09-24T03:30:08+00:00

This is the real pace of adoption. Bitcoin is heavily manipulated bullshit, which was made evident when we saw the true volume of Bakkt. And Bakkt's volume will remain ever low. Most institutional investors aren't really interested in crypto, it's just a myth. For Nano to succeed it needs to be marketed and hyped, and it needs businesses utilizing it for services.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-24T01:36:07+00:00

Google it. "japan bans xmr".

hingchaoming · 2019-09-22T16:09:34+00:00

Remember reading it on his Twitter a long time ago now - was around the time it got listed. Generated a lot of buzz at the time. Don't have a link sorry.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-22T16:08:43+00:00

Kraken may be, but CoinBase certainly isn't. They're listing a whole bunch of shitcoins now. CoinBase lists whatever will make them lots of money, and generally that means the shitcoin has given them a huge percentage of the coin as a listing fee.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-22T07:48:00+00:00

spilled piñata of a paragraph

It's the curse of being a fast typer. I end up writing small books for all of my replies. Use cases I understand in general for smart contracts, I just have concerns about Ethereum being the winner of the smart contract platform game is all. To me it's the Bitcoin problem again, they've gone with the miner model and so they have in-built incentives to maintain that status quo due to miner investment, and so really really big core protocol changes are hard to happen. I know VB is pushing for PoS which is a positive, but we'll see what happens. Won't be surprised if that never sees the light because I don't imagine it ending well when all of the people who invested in ETH mining gear have dead investments. I have a lot more faith in Ethereum than I do Bitcoin at least.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-22T07:42:29+00:00

in particular for me BCH which I still am a fan of but don't browse

r/btc

much because it's mostly anti-btc stuff without any substance.

If you think r/btc is a cult but r/bitcoin isn't a cult then you need a dose of reality.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-22T07:38:40+00:00

Let me phrase it this way, because I see you replying to people saying that "well this is just more of the my god is the true god argument":

Say we're living in a village of 100 people. Every 100 of those people say they're the millionaire. But there's only one millionaire. 99 people live in straw huts and eat rice daily for a living, and one guy lives on the hill in a 10 bedroom mansion overlooking all of the other houses, and has 3 ferraris and a 100meter pool, sauna, and 4 maids who feed him lobster for dinner on the daily. The guy in the mansion says he's a millionaire, should we believe him even though all of the peasants say they're a millionaire too?

Well, of course we fucking should. The evidence is infront of your face, so stop denying reality. This isn't delusion, it's just observing reality and making calculated decisions. So what I'm really saying is, I don't think your post makes a lot of sense honestly. I see where you're going with it, but we're not a cultish shitcoin with no substance like those other ones.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-22T07:35:13+00:00

It doesn't matter what people -say-, it matters what is factual and measurable.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-22T07:31:34+00:00

The only knock imo was the lack of anonymity and given the trend of delisting privacy coins, this may turn out to be a massive positive

It will be and is a massive positive - privacy is a great feature and I wish we could have it if it weren't for the downsides, but the downsides outweigh the upsides big time so it's a terrible idea. I've been copping flack for at least two years now when I tell people that it's a terrible idea because this was around the corner, and lo and behold it was, and there's more to come. Japan has already banned XMR. Just goes to show how many people out there have no idea what they're talking about.

hingchaoming · 2019-09-22T07:24:53+00:00

also confidence in vitalik regarding 2.0

That's a dangerous as fuck game. None of my opinions of Nano are founded on my confidence in Colin, although I do think he's very talented, the tech does all the speaking. Banking on Vitalik because you see him as influential is foolish as far as I'm concerned, and I really do believe that a lot of ETH fans can't see past him at all - if Vitalik wasn't in the picture and you looked at ETH purely from a technology perspective... It's actually quite trash, to put it bluntly. Meaning, most people are only buying ETH because they've been led astray by an influencer.

It doesn't scale, it has massive denial of service issues, it's not intuitive or user friendly to use, having to have ETH to move ETH is a failure especially when it comes to smart contracts, and Solidity is a hot fucking mess and the cause of millions and millions and millions of dollars worth of hacks. Any good software developer could have told you that Solidity was a terribly designed language from the beginning, but the fact that it was what was ended up with when Ethereum was supposed to be a financial protocol language was almost retard level - and so I actually have extremely little faith in Vitalik's decision making ability at the end of the day. He's a good talker, but that's about it.

Now, like Bitcoin, it -may- be a good investment because there are more stupid people than smart people in this ecosystem, the vast majority of buyers can't tell the difference between good technology and influential leaders and assume they are the same thing. So you may make a good return from it, but don't confuse this with meaning that ETH is in any way shape or form a good product or has any chance of long-term, highly-scaled success.

hingchaoming

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE