/biz/ - Business & Finance

This except don't believe in the cryptos of today

What about PoS?

>>16758733
Okay, but what's your opinion on BSV?
No sperging please, I'm asking with genuine curiosity.

>>16758733
>2.5 years

>>16758733
>I enjoyed the middle/late boom, and then had to endure 2 years of bear market. I'm out.

Right before the next boom lmao. Cya.

>>16758733
>NOOOOOO YOU CANNOT WASTE ENERGY FOR MINING BITCOIN
charge his (lifetime) highly polluting Tesla using coal generated electricity
the absolute state of gretards

>>16758750
PnD scam
Does it have anything to offer? What makes it different?
When /biz/ shills something, I know how that will end. Remember digibyte, coinbeans, 0x,...
>>16758743
I basically think we will use cryptos in the future. But we will use Libra. Money laundering will be done with Monero.
Bitcoiln doesn't have anything to offer, beyond scarcity; and smart contracts are not useful because they are deterministic.
>>16758748
Better in theory. LMAO, at first when I heard about POS I was like "WTF is this? scam", but my views have changed.
>>16758782
I was around here when BTC was <1k

>>16758748
What about FAS?

>>16758827
It doesn't matter what I think; what matters is what I see other people think.
I believe the "greetard" movement will be the main oponent of POW/Bitcoin, and I don't think POW can win.

>>16758870
>I don't think POW can win
you cannot force the entire world population to avoid using the energy they are paying for

>>16758813
Don't get me wrong.
I belive prices will rise; and we might see another bullrun.
But I don't believe this will end well for Bitcoin; I don't think BTC will be around here in 10 years. This time is different: The enemy of BTC will not be bankers (they probably bought the dip plentifully), but environmentalists.

>>16758895

since when in history have environmentalists ever been able to stop greedy people from fucking up the planet

>>16758895
BTC doesn’t care about environmentalists
It’s a lost battle

>>16758905
>>16758904
>>16758893
How dare you!

>>16758895
>environmentalists
The total resource expenditure of international banking and trust assurance systems is a few orders of magnitude higher than bitcoin. Envirotards will get steamrolled.

>>16758748
PoS is socialism at best and oligarchy at worst (if it even works, which we don't really know yet) and doesn't have the same degree of security that PoW does. Face it gretafags, PoW is the future of decentralized consensus

>>16758905
commies were very strong, you know...

>>16758939
POS without inflation is neither. It is a network that exists because it's valuable to use. Nano is one such network.

>>16758963
Nano doesn’t work

>>16758972
Nano has more daily transactions than eth and still more nodes online now than ever.
https://blocktivity.info/

>>16758939
>>16758938
>>16758905
So, might I ask you? Do you actually believe in Bitcoin? We have had this discussions in this board a hundred times... I have already read this...

>>16758733
I'm really curious what the accounting for crypto currencies will look like in the future. I mean, it's basically inevitable that companies and banks Will adopt it into their asset base, but I'm curious how it will be accounted for under GAAP and IFRS.

>>16758982
How can it have so many transactions with such a low market cap. Are people just sending around pennies to each other all day

>>16758938
this, plus everything seems to ignore the hard reality
>the only feasible bitcoin attack requires a crazy amount of energy
hey gretards, still sure you want to attack it?

>>16758988
I believe in bitcoin insofar as I believe in digital gold. I think a better cryptocurrency will come in the next year or two that actually scales properly and therefore can be used by millions of people without high fees and long block times. It also must use PoW in my opinion. That is the future of digital payments.

>>16758963
First of all, Nano is not true PoS, it is DPoS, same thing as EOS (and don't even get me started on that bullshit). I dislike pure PoS for several reasons, the main ones being subjectivity (which Buterin concedes is an inevitable part of social consensus) and the other being the fact that a malicious actor expends zero energy to attack the network. You see this as a good thing but it's a weakness from a security and incentive design standpoint because an attacker who controls a large percentage of the coins can double spend and do other fucky things like fork the network without expending any extra money, whereas an attack on bitcoin has the capital expenditure to purchase the equipment and the operating expenditure whicb is money. There is also something economically sound about converting energy, which is a very fundamental form of value, into Bitcoin, but that's a discussion for another time.

>>16759108
>whicb is money
Meant which is energy (that costs money)

>>16758853
image for ants

>>16758733
I don't see a future for crypto either but I only blame Blockstream for holding back BTC and basically ruining the whole thing. Bitcoin had a shot and just a handful of people shat all over it.

>>16759134
>2
It’s not too late. Buy some BSV

>>16759165
already have......just in case