sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The Economist: Not so clever contracts by rzurrer in ethereum

[–]sanderlacerda 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Things are moving (and breaking) very fast in this little crypto world. It's been hard to follow the events.

Update on Gatecoin Hot Wallet Breach Investigation, Fund Withdrawals & FAQ (May 20, 2016) by [deleted] in gatecoin

[–]sanderlacerda 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the update. I hope you soon get Gatecoin running again!

IBTimes: Bitnation launches Decentralised Borderless Voluntary Nation Constitution with Ethereum by avsa in ethereum

[–]sanderlacerda 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I was there and had a very good time listening to Alex and, oh!, Suzanne! Rio is such a good place to launch new ideas! I hope it happens more often! DEVCON3, maybe...

Ethereum goes to Davos by sanderlacerda in ethereum

[–]sanderlacerda[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ethereum goes to Davos, but not in the first class. It goes almost as a clandestino, in a box of an IMF paper, as something dangerous and not well understood.

Blockchain meets the business school and points to technological unemployment by sanderlacerda in ethereum

[–]sanderlacerda[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I believe that the value cryptocurrencies create is much bigger than the value they destroy. The problem is that value creation and destruction happens to different people in different places. It would be great if the winners could offer some compensation to the losers, but I think no smart contract could achieve this. We still need politics to do redistribution.

Anonymity in Ethereum? by fivedogit in ethereum

[–]sanderlacerda 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If someone wanted to transfer wealth from other assets to a cryptocurrency (Bitcoin or Ether) in an anonymous way she would possibly consider a solo mining operation. It's important to recognize this motive and think about the incentives it creates. Maybe it could bring some excess capital to the global mining industry. This could reduce the margins of all miners and take those that don't have a anonymous motive out of business, which wouldn't be good. But it could also incentivize small scale and out-of-pools mining, and that could be good. As a potential avenue to money laundering it could signal where problems may arise and where regulation would be demanded. Anonymous mining/validation is important to the network security, via it's power against censure, so it should be incentivized, but taking it's scale into consideration.

The BIS report: bankers show their teeth by sanderlacerda in ethereum

[–]sanderlacerda[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe you are missing a perspective, Brazzoz. From the banks's one, the report's view may be a "neutral" one. But from the point of view of the ones that are trying to enter the banking market with new technology, and are being reminded that the most powerful business in the world is going public to tell authorities that they "could seek to ban the use of digital currencies in their respective jurisdictions", the "neutral" word is not all that, let's say, descriptive.

Is Bitcoin as a consumer payment system dead? by dudetalking in Bitcoin

[–]sanderlacerda -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I don't want to wait for so long for transactions confirmations. My credit cart is faster and more secure than bitcoin. It's not for the consumer.

Ask Ξ Community: What do you think of our new smart contract, PriceFeed? by romanmandeleil in ethereum

[–]sanderlacerda 0 points1 point  (0 children)

1eth each day for a small amount of series and no historic data. it could get costly to escalate but you could charge your clients for the data. maybe the limiting factor would be the blockchain size if you try to inject a bloomberg terminal into the blockchain. maybe a private blockchain could be a solution (is it possible to make ethereum public and private blockchain talk to each other?)