/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.4370013]

why is it dying /biz?

[Anonymous No.4370067]

Traders realized that tech really doesn't matter so they went back to BTC.

[Anonymous No.4370073]

Because I bought today
Duck my life first bch now this

[Anonymous No.4370165]

>>4370013
>down 4%
>"dying"

never change /biz/

[Anonymous No.4370179]

>>4370067
Technology really does matter. Which is why anyone who understands asic resistance is a lie never bought this to begin with and as others are figuring it out they're unloading too.

[Anonymous No.4370183]

>>4370073
Quack quack

[Anonymous No.4370193]

1: As mentioned earlier in the thread, tech superiority doesn't matter that much for adoption so long as it barely works (like BTC).
2: If tech mattered, there are better stores of value and tokens of payment than VTC. Ethereum is better and it's not even trying to be a payment or store of value. When it goes proof of stake, VTC is even farther behind as a POW shitcoin that will eventually suffer from the same miner (pool owner) power consolidation and politics as BTC and BCH suffers from.

[Anonymous No.4370235]

>>4370193
>VTC is even farther behind as a POW shitcoin that will eventually suffer from the same miner (pool owner) power consolidation and politics as BTC and BCH suffers from.

yeah but asic resistance is it's whole point.

[Anonymous No.4370257]

>Down 3000 sats
>"dying"

[Anonymous No.4370259]

>>4370235
Mining pools create the same problem of power centralization, and the incentives to mine in pools is still there whenever a coin gets big enough for small scale solo mining to not be worth it.

[Anonymous No.4370281]

They'll be announcing future partners tomorrow in an interview with CryptoNews. I'm pretty sure price will go up after that so hold for now.

[Anonymous No.4370295]

>>4370259
right, and at that point it falls on the community that supports/holds the coin to offset that, which can be done by regulation by those who support it and mine it.

[Anonymous No.4370394]

>>4370295
A community shouldn't be relied on to offset issues with the incentives that come from how a coin technically is and the game theory implications of that. It's fragile and unrealistic.

The right incentive structure for decentralization needs to be inherent in how the currency works.

[Anonymous No.4370938]

>>4370394
The community is intertwined with the currency. They aren't relied upon for policing it, but rather faith in the vertcoin and thereby the value of it coincide with decentralization. The selling point of asic resistance is that you are leveling the playing field, and promises of forks in the future help strengthen that trust that the value will stay that way. Whether the dev team sticks with this roadmap will have a large effect on the value of VTC.

The game theory applications of Bitcoin and Bitcoin cash are exactly what this would prevent. The owners of vertcoin would be individuals who have a need to preserve the decentralized nature. Let's take the prisoners dilemna as an example. In this case the prisoners would be individuals who each hold half of an ecryption key for a wallet of Vertcoin (representing possible divisions in the Vertcoin community). Your opinion is that the two could work against each other to gain advantages. However, by doing this, the other prisoner would destroy their side of the encryption key in retaliation (losing faith in the currency), because the whole trust in the currency is based on being "the peoples coin". By this logic, they (and the community) will then work together regardless and not rat (or gain unfair advantages) on the other person because they want to preserve their wealth. Sure, it's not a perfect system, and it will come down to the dev team and how they react to issues in the future.

[Anonymous No.4371715]

>>4370165
Fucking this, still up over 30% for the week and almost 170% for the month. Go ahead and sell me your coins Mr Weak Hands