DAO

mvea

Mod updates: 1. The sponsor who paid to rent the banner decided to not use the space until their upcoming AMA, so there is no current banner, even though moons have been burned. There is a banner wiki that shows all past sponsors. 2. The higher prices for banners and AMAs have put off potential sponsors - this is the first month in a year that we have not booked out for AMAs. The price has been reduced by 50% since the last governance poll, but this has not generated interest so far. 2. There is a lot of work happening with developing a special membership bot that’s being tested and about to go live. 3. We are waiting for legal advice around a DAO so that we can start distribution soon.

SunDreamShineDay

DAO hack?

CointestMod

#Apecoin Con-Arguments Below is a Apecoin con-argument written by Nostalg33k. > # ApeCoin: A bad timing, a bad distribution, for a BadCoin > > ​ > > Apecoin is a coin created by YugaLabs, the BoredApeYachtClub people. In the following lines I'll explain how ApeCoin fails in three accounts. The first point of failure is temporal. The second point of failure is the distribution. And lastly the final point of failure is the use. In order to shield themselves from responsibility, YugaLabs shielded themselves with ApeCoin DAO which is an hypocritical move as we'll soon see. > > ​ > > 1) Let's launch during the big NFT Bubble. > > ApeCoin is a project built on the backbone of the hype of BAYC Nfts. Now I don't need to be a wizard nor a tech savvy to tell you that, launching Apecoin right when the hype bubble of NFT has burst and right when NFTs have become the laughing stock of normies was not the best move. That wouldn't be so bad if ApeCoin was distributed in a sane manner. > > 2) ApeCoin's distribution: Who will rugpull first ? > > 23% of the supply was given to Yugalab and 47% was given to the DAO as liquidity. If we take out the liquidity supply of the DAO out of the equation, YugaLabs have close to 50% of the voting power of the DAO. > > 14% was given to Venture Capitalists. So that's 85% of the supply locked away. As supporters of projects and speculators, you are playing with the 15% and just allow some strangers net worth to fluctuate wildly. > > 3) What is the point? > > ApeCoin has no point. Except a few bad games, and the promise of a metaverse, ApeCoin is useless. This fact makes it a venture not worth your time. > > ​ > > Conclusion: This coin is useless, exist only to create speculation and to trade but fails to be a good opportunity. Stay far from it. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Apecoin) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Apecoin Pro-Arguments Below is a Apecoin pro-argument written by noxtrifle. > ApeCoin is an ERC-20 token made by Yuga Labs, the company behind the sporadically successful Bored Ape Yacht Club NFT collection. It was created as a means to "empower and incentivize a decentralized community building at the forefront of web3" [\[CoinMarketCap\]](https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/apecoin-ape/). Though the NFT market is gradually declining in popularity, ApeCoin might just have a chance of survival. This is why: > > * **470,000,000 tokens, or $2,096,200,000 to be dedicated to the community** > * According to [their website](https://apecoin.com/about), over $2B (at current prices) will be released gradually through vesting periods to the treasury, which has the ultimate goal of funding community projects. > * Hence, the money will likely go towards innovating in the APE ecosystem, improving the blockchain, and funding the upcomingstaking system. > * **DAO Status** > * Also being a DAO currently worth over $1B, ApeCoin holds incredible power over the crypto sphere and has the capability to purchase & fund promising projects at will, making for a better experience for everyone. > * **Upcoming Staking System** > * With a staking system having been voted in with [AIP-21](https://messari.io/governor/proposal/33db0781-fcd1-4bdd-93f4-208fcc52246a) and AIP-22, it has been stipulated that [17.5% of the total supply](https://coinquora.com/apecoin-price-may-explode-with-aip-21-22-staking-update/) will be used (over three years) to fund the staking of ApeCoin. > * As such, it is highly likely that APE will increase in value as investors get drawn in by the upcoming staking system. > * **Celebrity Ownership** > * ApeCoin was airdropped to all BAYC holders, including several celebrities like Mark Cuban, Stephen Curry, Neymar, Serena Williams, Justin Bieber, and [many more.](https://boardroom.tv/bored-ape-nft-celebrity-owners/) > * Given that all these people are invested in APE, it is likely that ApeCoin will only rise in popularity. Just look at Dogecoin, and it was not backed by nearly as many people. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Apecoin) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

* Related Cointest topics: [Ethereum](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_ethereum), [NFT](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_nft), [DAO](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_dao. * Related subreddits: r/apecoins, r/NFT, r/NFTsMarketplace, r/BoredApeYachtClub. * Sort comments as controversial first by [clicking here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/1c5otds/apecoin_nears_alltime_low_as_bored_ape_ethereum/kzw5rtl/?sort=controversial). Doesn't work on mobile.

M4cHiin360

That's not what i'm saying. I'm just saying that sacrificing decentralisation or/and security for throughput is completely pointless and defeat the purpose of blockchain. 99% of the Dapp right now are completly useless and mostly centralised (this is not specific to Sol btw). "DAO" are stupid and don't work. The only thing we have going for is decentralisation of the consensus. Which Sol seems to have given up on

px403

This is one of my favorite things that ever happened on the Ethereum network. Best of all is when he used his Mangoes or whatever in the DAO to vote that the foundation forgive him and not press any charges.

tapunan

First, not so sure about this technology so didn't buy much. Just did DCA, then DAO hack happened to Eth5, got scared so I stopped.

daddy_bitcoins

Ethereum is a centralized project that first began with a massive 72 million ETH premine. Ethereum launched with 12 million ETH that was given to the developers and an additional 60 million ETH that they sold for BTC as a part of its "initial coin offering" during the presale. The Ethereum developers purposely misled investors by suggesting that there was merely a 12 million ETH premine and ignoring the 60 mi llion ETH that they sold during the presale, misleading total supply graphs in their prospectus. This is a serious concern and in due time we should expect the SEC to go after Ethereum developers and the Ethereum Foundation for creating and selling a non-compliant unregistered security (ETH is a security because it passes the [Howey Test](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/howey-test.asp)). [Here is a clip of the co-founder of Ethereum, Joseph Lubin, describing how they allowed whales to use multiple fake identities to buy as much ETH as they wanted during the Ethereum presale.](https://i.imgur.com/HpBR7C5.mp4) "A person can buy with any number of different identities. We may limit the unit size of a single sale to make it easier to disguise. So that nobody scares people with an enormous initial purchase. If you are a whale and you plan on investing several million US dollars worth, then you can do so with with multiple identities." [Now click here and listen to a few minutes of Bitcoin developer Jimmy Song talk about Ethereum and Vitalik.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T89gsJ2MsG8&t=47m24s) Jimmy worked directly with Vitalik from the beginning, back when Vitalik was still working on rootstock for Bitcoin. The Ethereum community has endorsed radical changes and pivots, trying to find narrative fit and the Ethereum leadership team is more willing to embrace alternations to the core objective of the protocol in their search for product market fit. They've literally tried world computer, dapps, crowdfunding, NFTs, DeFi, open finance, radical markets, store of value, and more. Ethereum is an aggregator of these narratives, trying each one out over the years in an attempt to seduce people that are uneducated about cryptocurrency. But there is no persistence of a singular narrative when it comes to Ethereum and they are still trying to find product market fit even after all this time. Ethereum is a pointless project that will lead to no efficiency because there is no censorship risk in code execution. What purpose does Ethereum solve if it comes with a horrible trade off of an extremely large attack surface and huge scaling problems? They also advertised immutability and unstoppable contracts that were then immediately reversed with multiple hard forks. Vitalik and many others in the Ethereum space are known scammers. Vitalik is not an idiot and he knew better than to pitch something as ridiculous as quantum mining to investors. Another example is pitching turing completeness as the valuable aspect of ETH, now pivoting away from that and saying it was never about turing completeness but "rich statefulness." \- [Gregory Maxwell: “Vitalik Buterin Ran A Quantum Computer Scam”](http://www.newsbtc.com/2016/08/17/gregory-maxwell-vitalik-buterin-ran-quantum-computer-scam/) \- [Quantum Computing and Bitcoin with Vitalik Buterin](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkUpZkeqhF4) \- [Vitalik’s Quantum Scam](https://medium.com/bitcoinerrorlog/vitaliks-quantum-quest-9e6af6570f23) Unlike Ethereum, Bitcoin's issuance rate and maximum supply are clearly defined and they will never change. Ethereum's inflation rate, maximum supply, and final algo are not even defined and people are investing in this. This is insane and it basically amounts to faith in Vitalik and his team. While at the same time newbies are misled into believing that Ethereum is decentralized. Meanwhile, Vitalik has full control over the whole project. Does anybody else here remember the DAO smart contract? Someone found a way to drain ETH and some of Vitalik's buddies lost a ton of ETH, so he rolled back the entire blockchain because Ethereum is centralized, Vitalik is the leader of it, and everyone in the Ethereum community agrees with him, so he can do whatever he wants with Ethereum. He chose to change the name of the real Ethereum blockchain to Ethereum Classic and calls his rolled back blockchain Ethereum. Not long ago ETH miners said they weren't going to follow Vitalik into adding a ponzi style transaction fee burn, so Vitalik, the leader of Ethereum, called their consensus a 51% attack and changed the rules. The fact that Ethereum has switched over to staking rewards also has serious tax implication in many countries where merely holding your ETH being staked will expose users to legal tax obligations. Exchanges for example must send a 1099-MISC to the IRS on behalf of any American user earning $600 in a year. Proof-of-Stake also makes it so the already rich whales control the network and will be collecting compounding interest to dump on the open market. Ethereum has already failed to scale as expected and so they have hard forked again and switched to a proof-of-stake consensus algorithm and started over from scratch (formerly referred to as Ethereum 2.0). This was easily done because Ethereum is centralized and everybody in the Ethereum community goes along with whatever their leader Vitalik says. I have no expectation that this new Ethereum will be any more successful than the previous Ethereum and this new Ethereum is still a centralized project that is controlled and ran by scammers. [Now Vitalik is already laying the groundwork for some more hype and suggesting a re-brand to Ethereum 3.0!](https://i.imgur.com/mxIzBYK.mp4) Ethereum scam part 1 - [Here we focus on the Ethereum token pre-sale which to anyone with any financial experience, is an obvious sale of an unlicensed unregistered security.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUUVlatCvp0) Ethereum scam part 2 - [Here we take a look at the value & business proposition of Decentralized Smart Contracts and why it's one of the dumbest ways to make your business more efficient.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCiHTJRbIf4) Ethereum scam part 3 - [The Ethereum scam part 3.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgFXqVpGDNg) https://medium.com/startup-grind/i-was-wrong-about-ethereum-804c9a906d36 \- [Ethereum and Ethereum Classic are scams and so are the developers that build on them](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxtVLjCxPDU) Institutional investors have no interest in ETH and this report titled ["An Institutional Investor's Take on Cryptoassets"](https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/john-pfeffer/An+Investor's+Take+on+Cryptoassets+v6.pdf) details why. This report even explains that when Ethereum's fees get too high and things don't go as planned, users will switch (and are switching) to use a different centralized cryptocurrency. You can already see this happening right now with all of the "ETH killers." That report also explains why institutional investors are interested in BTC. "The Ethereum blockchain growing 85 terabytes per year is totally fine. If you have even one person that just keeps buying like a hundred dollar hard drive like I think once every month then they can store it." ―Vitalik Buterin Source: https://i.imgur.com/1FZdLC5.mp4 Over 99% of altcoins were created to enrich their founders and over 99% of them have no future. None of them are as secure, as decentralized, or launched as fairly as Bitcoin. Satoshi created Bitcoin to allow online payments to be sent directly from one person to another without trust or permission from anyone else. Bitcoin had no premine, no developer fund, no developer tax, and no leader. Satoshi never sold, made no profit, got no fame for his real identity, removed himself from the project, and he gave a two month heads up before he launched Bitcoin. Bitcoin is decentralized and trustless with the full nodes in control of the protocol rules. And Bitcoin doesn't have a person, CEO, or company in charge of it or leading it. Satoshi took careful steps to make sure that the world would look back and observe that Bitcoin was launched fairly: * No premine (Satoshi didn’t grant himself any coins) * Gave a 2 month heads up before launching the network (no sudden release and no mining before release) * Coins had no value for 1.5 years so they circulated freely (it's not even possible for an altcoin to replicate this) * Satoshi never cashed out (unlike every other cryptocurrency founder)

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; SushiSwap's proposal to restructure its DAO and treasury, creating 'Sushi Labs' with significant autonomy and a financial package of 25 million SUSHI tokens (valued at roughly $38.5 million), has sparked community outrage. Over 62% voted in favor, but concerns about transparency, centralization, and potential manipulation of the voting process have been raised. The Sushi governance team's use of a multisig wallet to vote, contributing to a large portion of the 'Yay' votes, has particularly drawn criticism for undermining the project's decentralization ethos. Allegations of vote manipulation and the potential for a hostile takeover have escalated tensions within the community. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

Livid-Marketing5784

I would advise anyone remotely interested in [Prom.io](http://Prom.io) to try and join the ranks of Delegates. The first batch of Prom DAO delegates is gonna be chosen through a Delegate Campaign, going down on Prom's testnet right now. In this campaign vibe, everyone's invited to tackle tasks and rack up those Activity Points. Each task comes with its own points stash. The more points you stack up during the campaign hustle, the more $PROM tokens you'll snag for delegation. Tasks come in two flavors: main gigs and extra achievements. While you can stack up points by hitting the main tasks list, you can level up your game by snagging different achievements along the way. Each achievement comes with a special multiplier, ramping up your points game. Score more achievements, and watch that multiplier juice up the overall points tally.

CointestMod

#DEX Pro-Arguments Below is a DEX pro-argument written by Shippior. > A Decentralized Exchange, often abbreviated to DEX, is an exchange that does not belong to a central entity and all transactions happen on a blockchain. The three largest DEXs by [Total Value Locked](https://cointelegraph.com/explained/what-is-total-value-locked-tvl-in-crypto-and-why-does-it-matter) (TVL) are [Curve Finance](https://curve.fi/#/ethereum/swap), [Uniswap](https://uniswap.org/) and [PancakeSwap](https://pancakeswap.finance/). For a full list of DEXs see this [dashboard](https://defillama.com/protocols/Dexes). > > The largest difference between a CEX and a DEX is the way that liquidity is provided. Most CEXs use an [order book](https://learn.bybit.com/trading/order-book-explained-for-beginners/_ style ) for transactions. Most DEXs employ [Auto Mated Market Making](https://blog.0x.org/market-making-in-defi/) (AMM). These type of transactions are essential for operating an exchange with low liquidity. The supply and demand are matched by a protocol to prevent orders from not being fulfilled for a long time as there are generally less transaction offers available when there is lower liquidity. > > AMM works by users "lending" their crypto as collateral for others to trade. This is done by depositing tokens in a [liquidity pool](https://www.moonpay.com/learn/defi/what-are-liquidity-pools). Users are often provided incentive by the protocol to deposit their tokens by receiving a fixed interest rate on the crypto that they deposit. Therefore users who wanted to hold their crypto for the long term can actually put them in a pool via a smart contract to earn interest on this crypto without having to trade it whereas it would be collecting dust on an CEX. APRs are as high at 100%+ on larger DEXs like [Curve](https://curve.fi/#/ethereum/pools) and higher than 250% for smaller DEXs like [Crescent](https://app.crescent.network/farm). > > Trading fees of DEXs are mostly rather straightforward. Uniswap take a flat 0.3% trading fee, just like [Osmosis](https://osmosis.zone/) on each trade on top of the network transaction fee. Transaction fees can go as low as 0.02% for Curve Finance. These swap fees are provided to the people providing liquidity in the pool as an incentive for putting in their crypto. > > All trades made on a DEX are available as they can be found on the blockchain. Therefore it is possible to base your trading activity on the activities of other people. This also means that you can verify that your assets are where you think they are at all time. Your assets can not be lended to other people without you knowing of it and in most cases without you agreeing to it through the use of a smart contract. > > Compared to a CEX (with the exception of Coinbase) it is possible to own a part of the DEX. Many DEX have their own tokens. For example Curve Finance has [Curve DAO](https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/curve-dao-token/) and Uniswap has [UNI](https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/uniswap/). These tokens are used to pay for transaction fees on the DEX, they can be just held on to in the hope of them increasing in value but most important of all these tokens can be used to participate in governance. Everyone can put a proposal for improving a DEX, see the [Curve DAO](https://gov.curve.fi/) as an example for this, up for vote and everyone that owns the token of the DEX can vote (mostly 1 token = 1 vote) to determine how to go forward. Thus one can decide how to go forward to make the DEX even better. Something that is almost entirely impossible with a CEX. > > Privacy on a DEX is much better than on a CEX. On most DEXs no Know Your Customer (KYC) is required, a wallet that can not be linked to the person that is using it is sufficient. > > DEXs can have all assets on their platform that are available on the blockchain itself of made available through wrapped assets by [bridges](https://blog.liquid.com/blockchain-cross-chain-bridge). In theory the number of bridges that can be made between blockchains is infinite thereby the number of assets that can be listed on a DEX is also infinite. In reality though there are only bridges between the major blockchains available at the moment. This still provides plenty to chose from. According to Coinmarketcap there are currently [935 coins](https://www.coingecko.com/en/exchanges/uniswap#:~:text=Currently%2C%20there%20are%20938%20coins,a%2024h%20volume%20of%20%24319%2C357%2C719.14.) available to be traded on Uniswap and [3,223 coins](https://www.coingecko.com/en/exchanges/pancakeswap) on PancakeSwap. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_DEX) to find submissions for other topics.

Montana-Safari7

To the main sub r/cc. As soon as the DAO is completed, the next step is Moons distribution on the main sub, like we used to have before the sunset. The 0.01 distribution on r/ccmoons right now is just a test phase before the real distribution begins on r/cc. AMA/banner burns will be redistributed to the community for their comments again.

paulgnz

I don't know where you get $18,000 from. The community voted it in via the governance dashboard months ago. It was $8000 including two weeks top banner placement and giveaway costs. DAO Proposal [https://gov.xprnetwork.org/communities/6/proposals/65a19cd4d178bea22c3ca764](https://gov.xprnetwork.org/communities/6/proposals/65a19cd4d178bea22c3ca764)

SunliMin

"There are over 20,000 listed crypto projects and coins" While this is true, what I take issue with is that you're conflating crypto projects and coins to stocks. Many coins do emulate stocks, but many are in fact purely utility, and were not intended to be bought, sold or traded. That is just inherited from following the ERC20 standard, which is needed for compatibility with many tools. Those tools just include defi, which opens up the ability to invest. Of those 20,000 listed products, I genuinely believe about 50% are what you are describing, and the other 50% are just tokens that weren't intended on being traded. But then there's also the gray area, where the people didn't intend on it being traded, but intentionally went this way knowing that people would still, in fact, trade them. You can often times see the difference in the tokenomics too. You might have one DAO whose governance token takes into account a burn mechanism, a buy-back, staking, all these ways to try and make it deflationary in order to make it attractive to trade. And then you have other ones that do a constant, never ending airdrop based on active usage. The second one people in this sub would say "Its a total rug, look how inflationary it is! Only an idiot would invest!", meanwhile the tokenomics were such that it was never intended on being invested and its succeeding in doing what it was designed to do - to keep drip feeding the power users so those users had the most voting power in the system, since active voters are more meaningful to governance than tokens locked up in exchanges. People often need to take a step back and, before asking if someone is a good investment or not, first ask "Is this built to be a investment, or is this built to be a true utility that deeply integrates with the product?". Ironically, the more usages, the worst an investment is, until theres so many usages that it actually becomes deflationary again.

JESUS420_XXX_69

This is like that DAO all over again.

AvatarOfMomus

Not really, no. Those issues have been highlighted repeatedly, along with several further potential issues, but the community as a whole isn't really interested in gritty technical details that relate to *problems* as opposed to technical details, or even techno-babble, that generate "hype". This also doesn't even really get into the social engineering/power dynamic side of things. It's alluded to with the Etherium DAO hack, but basically right now if any of the major exchanges or Tether told almost any chain or token to "jump" they'd either be forced to ask "how high" or be shut out of a significant chunk of ecosystem. It also doesn't really discuss the potential for monied or powerful entities associated with one chain or token to disrupt potential up and coming competitors through these various attack vectors. In short, if someone made a meaningfully better competitor to Etherium or Bitcoin then miners and others invested in those tokens would be incentivized to disrupt the newcomer's network and ability to function, rather than see their investment devalued. There's also the small number of makers of mining hardware for Bitcoin, and a dozen other potential issues not mentioned in this.

CointestMod

#Nervos Network Con-Arguments Below is a Nervos Network con-argument written by a deleted user. > **CKB Cons** > > **Tokenomics** > > CKB has a primary issuance and a secondary issuance. For the primary issuance, every four years, 33.6 billion CKB will be halved; the first halving is anticipated in November 2023. For instance, the first four years are (33.6b/2) / 4 = 4.2 billion CKB annually. The secondary issue rate will always be 1.344 billion CKB annually, with the sum being divided in three ways: > > * Monetary reward for miners > * Payment to Nervos DAO investors > * Treasury resources (Burned) > > This means that the supply is uncapped(no max supply). > > **Lots of Competitors** > > The main competitors to Nervos Network are Wanchain, Polkadot, Cosmos. They are all networks that aim to create blockchain interoperability. For example, Wanchain is building a fully decentralized direct bridges that connect the many siloed blockchain networks around the world and promotes cross-chain interoperability which will accelerate blockchain adoption. So Nervos network is not alone in this game, and there are some competitors who are doing the same thing as them. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_nervos_network) to find submissions for other topics.

moldyjellybean

For anyone that thinks a DAO is decentralized, they just use the word decentralized but every DAO I’ve seen is Uber centralized. I’ve learned from the last time DAO is just a fancy term to trick people.

Archipelag0h

I think CKB is like almost 25 percent of tokens locked in the DAO?

Montana-Safari7

This is the way, but we need some overdue updates on the DAO and distribution.

Montana-Safari7

He brings up good points. We lost all the Reddit IPO momentum and our mods have gone dark mentioning any progress. A few bread crumbs here and there isn't asking a lot and it would keep folks excited. But they aren't providing any updates on distribution or the DAO.

GodofGods1

Entering the cryptocurrency space can indeed feel overwhelming, especially with mixed opinions on investment strategies, the viability of day trading, and the future of various altcoins. However, the "cryptoverse" is vast and encompasses more than just trading. Here are several areas you can focus on to get ahead of the curve in 2024: 1. Blockchain Technology and Smart Contracts Understanding the underlying technology of cryptocurrencies—blockchain—and its applications, including smart contracts, is foundational. This knowledge can help you assess the potential and viability of different cryptocurrencies and blockchain projects. Platforms like Ethereum have broadened the application of blockchain technology far beyond simple transactions, enabling decentralized finance (DeFi), non-fungible tokens (NFTs), and more. 2. Decentralized Finance (DeFi) DeFi represents a shift from traditional, centralized financial systems to peer-to-peer finance enabled by decentralized technologies built on Ethereum and other blockchains. Learning about DeFi protocols, yield farming, liquidity mining, and staking could offer insights into generating returns through mechanisms other than trading or holding. 3. Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) NFTs have emerged as a significant component of the crypto ecosystem, touching art, gaming, entertainment, and digital ownership. Understanding NFTs, including how they work, their market dynamics, and their utility, could reveal unique opportunities, especially in digital art, collectibles, and virtual real estate. 4. Cryptocurrency and Blockchain Security As the cryptoverse expands, so does the sophistication of threats against it. Learning about security, including wallet security, smart contract auditing, and the principles of decentralized networks, can not only protect your investments but also open doors to careers in blockchain security. 5. Regulatory Environment Staying informed about the regulatory landscape of cryptocurrencies in various jurisdictions can provide a strategic advantage, especially for identifying both risks and opportunities early. Regulations can significantly impact the viability and success of crypto projects. 6. Emerging Trends and Technologies Keeping an eye on emerging trends, such as the development of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), Layer 2 scaling solutions, and interoperability projects, can help you identify the next big opportunity before it becomes mainstream. 7. Coding and Development If you're inclined towards technical skills, learning to code smart contracts or developing on blockchain platforms can open up significant opportunities. Familiarity with Solidity (for Ethereum), Rust (for Solana), or other blockchain-specific languages can be particularly valuable. Participate in Communities Engage with crypto communities on platforms like Twitter, Reddit, and Discord. These communities are often the first to know about new projects, technologies, and opportunities within the crypto space. How to Approach Learning: * Start with Fundamentals: Understand the basics of blockchain technology, how different cryptocurrencies operate, and what makes them unique. * Diversify Your Knowledge: Don't just focus on one aspect of crypto. The field is vast and interconnected; understanding multiple facets will provide a more comprehensive view. * Practical Experience: Consider setting up a wallet, using small amounts to experiment with transactions, staking, or even participating in a DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization). Hands-on experience is invaluable. * Continuous Learning: The crypto space evolves rapidly. Stay informed through reputable news sources, podcasts, and educational platforms. By focusing on these areas, you can develop a well-rounded understanding of the cryptoverse, positioning yourself to identify and capitalize on opportunities beyond simple trading or investing in the major cryptocurrencies.

GoodSamoSamo

You can fixate on the past all you want, but won’t serve you well. It’s like having faded ETH in the early days because of the DAO hack.

CointestMod

#DEX Pro-Arguments Below is a DEX pro-argument written by Shippior. > A Decentralized Exchange, often abbreviated to DEX, is an exchange that does not belong to a central entity and all transactions happen on a blockchain. The three largest DEXs by [Total Value Locked](https://cointelegraph.com/explained/what-is-total-value-locked-tvl-in-crypto-and-why-does-it-matter) (TVL) are [Curve Finance](https://curve.fi/#/ethereum/swap), [Uniswap](https://uniswap.org/) and [PancakeSwap](https://pancakeswap.finance/). For a full list of DEXs see this [dashboard](https://defillama.com/protocols/Dexes). > > The largest difference between a CEX and a DEX is the way that liquidity is provided. Most CEXs use an [order book](https://learn.bybit.com/trading/order-book-explained-for-beginners/_ style ) for transactions. Most DEXs employ [Auto Mated Market Making](https://blog.0x.org/market-making-in-defi/) (AMM). These type of transactions are essential for operating an exchange with low liquidity. The supply and demand are matched by a protocol to prevent orders from not being fulfilled for a long time as there are generally less transaction offers available when there is lower liquidity. > > AMM works by users "lending" their crypto as collateral for others to trade. This is done by depositing tokens in a [liquidity pool](https://www.moonpay.com/learn/defi/what-are-liquidity-pools). Users are often provided incentive by the protocol to deposit their tokens by receiving a fixed interest rate on the crypto that they deposit. Therefore users who wanted to hold their crypto for the long term can actually put them in a pool via a smart contract to earn interest on this crypto without having to trade it whereas it would be collecting dust on an CEX. APRs are as high at 100%+ on larger DEXs like [Curve](https://curve.fi/#/ethereum/pools) and higher than 250% for smaller DEXs like [Crescent](https://app.crescent.network/farm). > > Trading fees of DEXs are mostly rather straightforward. Uniswap take a flat 0.3% trading fee, just like [Osmosis](https://osmosis.zone/) on each trade on top of the network transaction fee. Transaction fees can go as low as 0.02% for Curve Finance. These swap fees are provided to the people providing liquidity in the pool as an incentive for putting in their crypto. > > All trades made on a DEX are available as they can be found on the blockchain. Therefore it is possible to base your trading activity on the activities of other people. This also means that you can verify that your assets are where you think they are at all time. Your assets can not be lended to other people without you knowing of it and in most cases without you agreeing to it through the use of a smart contract. > > Compared to a CEX (with the exception of Coinbase) it is possible to own a part of the DEX. Many DEX have their own tokens. For example Curve Finance has [Curve DAO](https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/curve-dao-token/) and Uniswap has [UNI](https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/uniswap/). These tokens are used to pay for transaction fees on the DEX, they can be just held on to in the hope of them increasing in value but most important of all these tokens can be used to participate in governance. Everyone can put a proposal for improving a DEX, see the [Curve DAO](https://gov.curve.fi/) as an example for this, up for vote and everyone that owns the token of the DEX can vote (mostly 1 token = 1 vote) to determine how to go forward. Thus one can decide how to go forward to make the DEX even better. Something that is almost entirely impossible with a CEX. > > Privacy on a DEX is much better than on a CEX. On most DEXs no Know Your Customer (KYC) is required, a wallet that can not be linked to the person that is using it is sufficient. > > DEXs can have all assets on their platform that are available on the blockchain itself of made available through wrapped assets by [bridges](https://blog.liquid.com/blockchain-cross-chain-bridge). In theory the number of bridges that can be made between blockchains is infinite thereby the number of assets that can be listed on a DEX is also infinite. In reality though there are only bridges between the major blockchains available at the moment. This still provides plenty to chose from. According to Coinmarketcap there are currently [935 coins](https://www.coingecko.com/en/exchanges/uniswap#:~:text=Currently%2C%20there%20are%20938%20coins,a%2024h%20volume%20of%20%24319%2C357%2C719.14.) available to be traded on Uniswap and [3,223 coins](https://www.coingecko.com/en/exchanges/pancakeswap) on PancakeSwap. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_DEX) to find submissions for other topics.

AmericanScream

> I make a website to keep a daily log of personal information. I use ICP and I push it all up onto the Internet Computer, and the only way to access it is with my private key. I can make the same web site and push the data up to it using secure FTP that has equally good protection. Plus, I don't pay per transaction or per byte of storage or per hit on the web site. >The entire application lives on ICP (only blockchain that can do this) since it can handle web requests (the only blockchain that can do this too). So you've added extra layers of bureaucracy. Why should the servicing of the web site need to be "on-chain?" That's neither efficient, nor practical. > It can talk to web2 APIs if I used other services on my site (the only blockchain that do this as well). Ok, but my app can do that two, and faster and more efficiently because it's not going through an extra layer of bloated code. > I do not have to worry about my credentials being stolen because there are none You just said you access something with your private key. That's your "credentials." Now you say you have no credentials? That makes no sense. >or someone breaking through a firewall, or malware, or antivirus, or my hosting company accessing it, or any other intrusion attempt. 1. You cannot guarantee the infrastructure is "hack proof" - that's the first thing any credible IT guy will admit. There is no such thing as a 100% safe system. So right away, your testimony is suspect. Each and every day, otherwise secure systems are found to contain vulnerabilities. Encryption algorhythms that were thought to be "hack proof" years ago, are now known to be insecure. No respectable security guy would make such a bold statement. 2. You just admitted you use private keys to access your instance. If someone gets custody of that private key, they have your credentials and can access your stuff. So basically what you're describing is any basic cryptographic login system. It's nothing special. You simply assume your credentials won't be known by anybody else and ergo, the system is secure, but that "nirvana fallacy" can also be employed by any other system and the end result is exactly the same. If nobody knows my ftp/ssh password, then the system is "secure" (provided there are no vulnerabilities that neither of us know about, which is item #1 i was talking about). >Nobody can get into the site on ICP. The protocol guarantees it is tamperproof and unstoppable. No changes can be made except by me. Again, the Nirvana Fallacy. The same thing applies to me and my ftp password. if I'm the only one who knows it, nobody else can get in. Same difference. >I use AWS instead or your web hosting company. I have to worry about (and pay for) everything I just listed above. AWS is not a good example because of their metered pricing. I have hosting where I pay a flat rate per month for x amount of resources. I'm not charged based on traffic. I suspect ICP uses a more predatory metered system like AWS. >Is that specific enough? And why would I pay more to use your web hosting company and open myself up to the risks? There is no risk in my system, that you also don't have in yours. Saying otherwise is a LIE. You are simply claiming your software has no bugs and is perfect. And that's a stupid thing to say, about any software system. >Do you think I should use your services to host my website instead? Why? Well, for starters, my services are not entangled with a ponzi scheme. There is no shady DAO that manages policy. It's just me. You want to know what the policies are, they're in writing. If policies change and you don't like them, you're free to move elsewhere -- same as with any other system, but my system is focused around providing essential services for my clients. Whereas your system is centered around creating some kind of "use case" that will make the developers filthy rich when they dump their tokens. ICP has two competing charters that don't work well together. They can't decide if they're a pump-and-dump crypto token scheme, or an Internet hosting company.

jekpopulous2

The simplest example of an RWA is Maker DAO's DSR (DAI Saving's Rate). sDAI is backed by tokenized assets like US treasury bonds. The bonds earn money off-chain and and it goes to sDAI holders. There are plenty of other examples but I think that's the easiest to wrap your head around. Other major protocols tokenizing off-chain assets would include stuff like Ondo, Pendle and Mantra. There are even entire chains being built for RWA's like Canto, XDC, and Polymesh. They're all approaching it from different angles but worth looking into if you're going down the rabbithole.

AmericanScream

> This is a solution comparable to AWS without all the AWS baggage. ROFL... no it isn't. It's another layer of abstraction that we don't need. I challenge you to enumerate a single specific thing that ICP does that is useful for a typical person. Anything you can cite, I can cite an existing app that is better, faster, and cheaper. Most people don't use AWS anyway. They use services that run on top of AWS. And in all likelihood ICP would probably run on top of AWS as well, which makes all your arguments even more ironic. >You don't know what you're arguing against when it comes to the Internet Computer. You aren't knowledgeable enough about ICP. As a software developer you should be balls deep in this technology. Stop making vague claims about ICP that are incapable of being tested and qualified. If you think you've got something good, name something very specific and tell us what makes it better, faster and cheaper than existing alternatives. AWS is hardly an ideal pick for the best hosting platform. >we have two platforms for where we can build. ICP and AWS. That's bullshit. I run a web hosting company. I build apps on my own servers that have nothing to do with AWS. There are many systems that are better choices than AWS. I'm no fan of Amazon's predatory pricing, and i'd be even more suspicious of any entity that wants to compete with their model. >On AWS I give over my credit card, I sign up to agree to everything they want, and I'm at their mercy at all times accepting the platform risk. What "risk" is that? Extreme reliability? Straightforward pricing? Industry best performance? WTF does ICP offer that's better? And I hate AWS, but I am certain ICP is just an inferior copy. >On ICP I get some cycles, get the SDK, deploy my site to the Internet Computer. The entire stack living on top of the chain and only my key can get access to that canister software to make changes. I don't need a firewall or anti-virus. There's no credentials to leak. There's no back door in to put malicious code into my app. Only I can get into my app. Every single ICP holder would have to pass the vote with a majority to take my canister website offline. ROFL. You're just talking about one tiny element of your app, not the entire application, because if you can run anything online using code, that code is potentially vulnerable, so you're making misleading statements about the "security" of this model. i'm a software engineer so you can't snowjob me. Sorry. >Even more secure is if that application is under the control of a DAO and the protocol itself. No one has direct access to change that application. The DAO must vote and the vote must pass, then the updates are done by the protocol. DAOs... yea, another bullshit concept. How do you vote with DAOs? Based on tokens... therefore whoever has the most tokens has the most control. You have the same megalomaniacal potential with ICP as you might with any other centralized app, you just mask it behind a DAO and pretend voting tokens can't be monopolized. Again, you're not fooling me. I know better. >There's never been any other software development method as secure as this. Period. Yea... vague claims... that upon further examination fall apart. I just told you there's no way you can make your apps 100% foolproof. >You have no idea what you're arguing against here. yea I do... you guys can't answer the ultimate crypto question. You can't name a single specific, non-criminal thing that this tech is better at than non-blockchain tech. And simply pronouncing "no other software development method is as secure as this" is just a statement, accompanied by absolutely zero proof.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Vana, a San Francisco-based startup, launched the Reddit Data DAO (r/datadao) to allow Reddit users to control and monetize their personal data. Users can contribute their Reddit data to the DAO, earn rewards, and vote on how to use the collective data, such as renting it to AI companies for model training. This initiative offers an alternative to Reddit selling user data directly, potentially redirecting profits from Reddit to the users themselves. Vana raised $18 million in funding in 2022 and aims to empower users to have control over their data and the models they help create. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

nomorebonks

> Why do I want to have to pay using digital tokens to use services that I can otherwise use for free already? You don't. I told you that. You don't understand how ICP works. This is not like any blockchain you are railing against. This is a solution comparable to AWS without all the AWS baggage. >All of those are poor, inferior copies of existing apps. Did you try them? They're just like any web2 experience. And they aren't harvesting my data, they are more secure than any current web2 site, and my sign ins are vastly more secure than my sign ins to any web2 platform. There is no username and password to hack. I don't have to worry about it. >And, as I said before, blockchain is not in any way "invulnerable" to hacking You don't know what you're arguing against when it comes to the Internet Computer. You aren't knowledgeable enough about ICP. As a software developer you should be balls deep in this technology. Ignoring all the talk about Bezos, and criminals, and tokens - we have two platforms for where we can build. ICP and AWS. On AWS I give over my credit card, I sign up to agree to everything they want, and I'm at their mercy at all times accepting the platform risk. I'm building on the current web2 stack which is vulnerable to new attacks every day. Malware, virus, hacks, back doors, leaked credentials, etc. It *never* ends, and will *never* stop. If they don't like my website content they shut me down. On ICP I get some cycles, get the SDK, deploy my site to the Internet Computer. The entire stack living on top of the chain and only my key can get access to that site. I don't need a firewall or anti-virus. There's no credentials to leak. There's no back door in to put malicious code into my app. Only I can get into my app. Period. Every single ICP holder would have to pass the vote with a majority to take my canister website offline. Even *more* secure is if that application is under the control of a DAO and the protocol itself. *No one* has direct access to change that application. The DAO must vote and the vote must pass, then the updates are done by the protocol. *There is no other way to make changes to this application*. This is very much an improvement over the security of the web2 stack. **There's never been any other software development method as secure as this. Period. ** It's more secure, **cheaper** (you're wrong about this), no-strings attached method of putting your applications directly onto the internet. You have no idea what you're arguing against here. There's no grift going on. The team building the Internet Computer are some of the top in their field in the world. Ex-IBM, Google, Ben "The L in BLS" Lynn worked on it, the inventor of WASM was part of this team, ETH Zurich members. You truly do not know what is going on and it would be in your benefit to learn about what ICP is. You will absolutely be hearing about it.

KingDeroThaFirst

Fuck it time to shill. Buy badger DAO, elastos, and rarible then thank me later 🫡

AmericanScream

> Show me another way to build tamperproof software - you can’t unless you’re on top of blockchain. This is begging the question. It's a logical fallacy. You claim blockchain is "tamperproof" but that's a lie. I address that false claim [in this part of my documentary](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tspGVbmMmVA&t=3369s) >Every system you have right now is vulnerable to hacking and exists to only enrich those in control. More begging the question and conspiracy theories. AS IF crypto doesn't exist to "enrich those in control?" The whole crypto scheme is designed to make early adopters rich. It's hardly a benevolent concept. And, as I said before, blockchain is not in any way "invulnerable" to hacking. If you have enough resources, you can take control of any blockchain. I address this [in this part of my doc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tspGVbmMmVA&t=2557s). >Stop promoting big tech solutions. Try OpenChat, taggr, DSCVR, nuance - all built on blockchain. All comparable to a web2 aws solution. No Bezos in control. You do not know what’s possible. All of those are poor, inferior copies of existing apps. Why do I want to have to pay using digital tokens to use services that I can otherwise use for free already? Bezos isn't hassling me. What benefit do I get trading one person behind a system, for a loose coalition of scammers, drug dealers and human traffickers instead? >And just to be clear: these are full stack solutions on chain. 100% on chain. Not just aws software and a token somewhere in the background. And just to be clear: all those blockchain systems are parasites on existing systems that run faster, cheaper, more efficiently, use less resources and are more reliable. So, your attempt to "Bezos" me into using your more expensive, slower, inferior solution, is unconvincing. The problem with oligarchs won't be solved by crypto. That's a political/legal/governmental problem. And crypto just compounds that problem with its even more egregious wealth distribution. So again, none of your technology solves any real world problems, and instead, just makes everything worse. There are "Bezos" in the Internet Computer Project. They have a DAO that's token based IIRC.. so whoever controls the most tokens, has the most influence over the future of the network. It's not any better than Bezos, Musk or Zuckerberg -- in fact worse, because in the world of crypto, you guys claim you don't need government or existing law - whoever has the most tokens wields the most influence and there's no easy way to fix that. Can you see by now how the whole system is fundamentally flawed? >I’m also a software developer - this is the next stage of software development. Proof not all software developers have the same level of awareness.

bioelectromagnetic

DAI mo bettah. Multi-collateralized by cryptocurrencies and run by a DAO. Why you USDC USDT. Why do? 🤷🏻‍♂️ DAI

MaximumStudent1839

Either this is not a real DAO or it is definitely not legal at the Federal level. A DAO membership is permissionless. There is no way to prevent North Korean hackers getting memberships and receiving DAO benefits disbursed on the blockchain. Legalizing DAO is effectively legalizing the entity lists to invest into US assets.

R4ID

> Haha Bitconnect was never a cryptocurrency you'd be alone in defending that position. >Controlling what code everyone runs on a decentralized network is not possible you fool. which is what my argument is because THAT would make it centralized.... Remember how above you wanted examples of centralization and I gave you this one and now you're agreeing with me and my position? > Your magical devs who control a cryptocurrency the way Blockstream and BTC Core devs control BTC consensus is the exception rather than the rule. Try and get a BiP passed without Core. Hell There's plenty of BiP that actually improve Bitcoin but because Core dont support have never passed. Silvio Micali's BiP turns Literal waste generated by the system into profit without touching the security model. It would be like if you went to a corn farmer and asked if you could buy the husks from his corn he harvests to turn into ethanol, and instead because of Core they choose to instead Burn the husks instead of profiting more. > And forks like ETC and BCH show what happens when people try to play god with the code. you think ETC exists because someone wanted to play god with the code... yikes. it exists because of the DAO hack. not because someone wanted to change Eth lol. >Because solving the double spend problem is only one of the goals of decentralized cryptocurrency. which doesnt answer the question i put before you. Once again you ignore things when you're clearly wrong.

Emergency-Gene-3

All those participating in the DAO gets to vote on the proposals listing the removal of bad nodes.

KingDeroThaFirst

Sounds like you did pretty good regardless, I would definitely pick up some rarible, I’m hoping it ticks back up to at least $30 im holding a decent bag. I’m also holding Badger DAO and elastos and they been doing pretty well also, ELA is up 50% over the last day and Badger went up 96% two weeks ago and they’re both low supply tokens . I’m hoping for a 10x I need to get a real jumpstart I’m life. If I make some good gains I’ll definitely buy some bitcoin to hedge my account. I mainly been focused on allocating low supply tokens to optimize gains.

KeepBitcoinFree_org

ETH changed the blockchain to reverse the DAO hack, something that should never happen to an immutable blockchain. ETH is a mutable chain with no supply cap.

Maxx3141

They openly communicated the formation of a DAO for a while now - it should be obvious no single person can just distribute this kind of money, even TMD alone holds 300k USD right now, this is no joke if you face legal consequences afterwards. No one kept anything secret.

KingDeroThaFirst

I been buying low token supply DAO tokens since last year and been positively green for the most part. I feel like I made more gains doing this then buying memecoins hoping for them to rocket.

KingDeroThaFirst

They’re low cap and low supply token, ideally this is what people should be buying to add value to the token but memecoins has stole the shine. Hopefully DAO tokens get more attraction.

KingDeroThaFirst

Imma need a nice 20x to get my life a well needed jumpstart. I’m placing my gamble all on badger DAO, elastos, rarible, and any other low token supply tokens to hopefully optimize gains in a short time frame(1-2 years) hopefully this bull run be nice to me.

KingDeroThaFirst

Why is no one buying DAO tokens their literally low supply 🤦🏽‍♂️

KingDeroThaFirst

So we’re just going to forget that Badger DAO went up 92% just two weeks ago and rarible did a 163% in march. DAOs are starting to show off major movements in the crypto market.

CointestMod

#Nervos Network Con-Arguments Below is a Nervos Network con-argument written by a deleted user. > **CKB Cons** > > **Tokenomics** > > CKB has a primary issuance and a secondary issuance. For the primary issuance, every four years, 33.6 billion CKB will be halved; the first halving is anticipated in November 2023. For instance, the first four years are (33.6b/2) / 4 = 4.2 billion CKB annually. The secondary issue rate will always be 1.344 billion CKB annually, with the sum being divided in three ways: > > * Monetary reward for miners > * Payment to Nervos DAO investors > * Treasury resources (Burned) > > This means that the supply is uncapped(no max supply). > > **Lots of Competitors** > > The main competitors to Nervos Network are Wanchain, Polkadot, Cosmos. They are all networks that aim to create blockchain interoperability. For example, Wanchain is building a fully decentralized direct bridges that connect the many siloed blockchain networks around the world and promotes cross-chain interoperability which will accelerate blockchain adoption. So Nervos network is not alone in this game, and there are some competitors who are doing the same thing as them. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_nervos_network) to find submissions for other topics.

KingDeroThaFirst

Because most DAO tokens actually have low token supply and utility like badger DAO, rarible, and elastos , which some meme coiners try to get their shitcoin to aspire to by trusting in coin burns forgetting theirs 100s of wallets with billions of the coins they buy and are gonna get shit on when the time comes to sell the top.

Njaa

> This is when there was only a small subset of people in bitcoin period. Yes, both this incident and the Ethereum DAO fork happened very early in each project. > That’s a little bit different to what happened with the dao from my understanding. One was a poorly written smart contract the other a critical protocol bug that completely broke the software. Exactly where the bug was located shouldn't matter. The fact that one was unilateral and the other was based on several weeks of community discussion should. > There’s a bit of a difference between trusting energy to give you the next block and trusting people with a lot of stake in the network via tokens owned. It skews the game theory. How? In either case you trust that capital is a deterrent. > If someone tried the hashing algorithm could be changed rendering the attack useless and extremely expensive. What would happen if eth had its validators are captured by nefarious actors with a lot of money? How would that be dealt with? That's one of the most beautiful pieces of PoS. In PoW, if miners turn out to be rotten, you can change the hashing algorithm, but this has several problems: 1) If the rotten miners were well financed, they'll just take over the new much smaller hashrate on the new algorithm. 2) You punish good actors and bad actors equally. The bad actors would reinvest in the new algo because they're not financially motivated in the first place. Why would the good actors reinvest? In PoS you don't have these issues. If Ethereum is attacked, you simply slash the stake of the offending party. For example, if some validators equivocate, and pretend like a transaction is finalized, but then roll it back in order to double spend, they simply lose their funds. Their betrayal is provable, since there has to exist two conflicting signed messages from the same validator. Due to this way of recovering, it is also exponentially more expensive to attack PoS than PoW, since for every single attempted double spend, you lose all your funds.

Njaa

> The validator are what determine the real blockchains though right or at least decide what the next true blocks are? The validators have exactly the same role as miners have in Bitcoin. They put up capital to participate in a lottery, and the winners produce blocks. That's it. There's no "true history" component. No trust difference. Only difference is whether you use the capital to buy ASICs or if you use the capital to buy validators. > Pretty sure btc has never rolled back. Then you're simply wrong. For example, [block 74637](https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/block/74637) was mined at Aug 15, 2010 17:02:43 UTC. The subsequent blocks until Aug 15, 2010 23:53:59 UTC were rolled back unilaterally by a handful of people. Almost 7 hours of transactions lost in this one instance. > The fact that the chain can be rolled back is the problem That can't be "the problem", since it happened on a much larger scale in Bitcoin. It didn't even happen at all in Ethereum. Ethereum has not had a single rollback ever. In the DAO fork, they simply moved funds from a contract that had a bug to one that didn't - which isn't a rollback. > Definitely not immutable No blockchain is immutable, least of all Bitcoin. With enough stakers or miners, you can roll back any PoW or PoS network.

Njaa

Definitely a "No true Scotsman" type of thing. Bitcoin have had several rollbacks of far more transactions than Ethereum's DAO fork, which - by the way - wasn't even a rollback. > It just goes to show that a few people can change the protocol/blockchain however they want in practice. Completely ahistorical. The DAO fork was implemented by the nodes after several weeks of intense discussion and community polling. It had overwhelming support both among developers, holders and miners. Bitcoin's rollbacks, on the other hand, \*were\* implemented unilaterally by miners in a chatroom. > If a validator drops off the network it has to trust another validator to give it the true history. This is completely incoherent. The "true history" is provided by full nodes, just as in Bitcoin. You don't rely on validators to provide it, just as you don't have to rely on miners to provide "true history" in Bitcoin.

-mjneat

Ethereum never has been and never will be a truly decentralised system. If it was then it wouldn’t have been rolled back for the DAO shit show years ago. It just goes to show that a few people can change the protocol/blockchain however they want in practice. Proof of stake generally gives power to people most invested in the network therefore it isn’t trustless. If a validator drops off the network it has to trust another validator to give it the true history. There’s plenty of things that makes pos inferior to pow. This is a bit dated but should cover some of the basics https://www.lynalden.com/proof-of-stake/ I don’t follow Eth, never have so it may be a little dated but the crux of the arguments haven’t changed afaik. PoS is interesting but ultimately inferior.

KingDeroThaFirst

Buy DAO tokens.

Loose_Screw_

I dont think many people here were around during the DAO hard fork... especially the ones that bring it up constantly.

HBAR_10_DOLLARS

lol how risky was it way back in the day during the DAO hard fork

KingDeroThaFirst

Stop buying meme coins and just buy DAO tokens.

KingDeroThaFirst

Would make more sense if meme coin lovers just bought DAO tokens since they already have low supply

Objective_Digit

DAO hack hard fork.

Go1den_Ponyboy

1 Bitcoin = 1 Bitcoin. Each bitcoin is equal and is an amalgamation of all energy ever input into the system. Just because it took less energy 10 years ago to mine bitcoin doesn't mean that still needs to hold true. In 1848, it was much easier to mine gold in California than it is today, yet every ounce of gold is equally valuable (not taking numismatics into the equation). On top of that, that isn't even bitcoins fault or under it's control. That is market participation, incentives and competition at work within human beings. Bitcoin only needs one node and one miner to technically function (though obviously there are a lot of downfalls with this); anything beyond that is out of scope for bitcoin's code to run. To your point about 'tokenization'. Honestly, I'm a bitcoiner and never heard it termed that way and I agree, I'm not a fan of it either as I eluded to, but I do get where the other person was going with it at least. Regarding the DAO hack, the mere fact that it's possible for VB, JL and all the other ETH premine insiders to roll back the chain and sensor transactions is totally fair game to relate back to. People still bring up 51% attacks for Bitcoin and the sheer cooporation behind that is nearly (but not 0) impossible. Since ETH moving to POS it's made it much easier to accomplish these acts too. Sure, risks apply to both, but definitely not equally. Their decentralization are orders of magnitude different. I think I get what you mean, and I respectfully think it's either misguided, not looking at both equally or plain old wrong. Or maybe I'm still not getting it. Either way, I agree to disagree, I guess. Good luck, friend.

Loose_Screw_

I didn't think I'd have to explain. The amount of kW used creating a bitcoin is variable based on mining difficulty and miner efficiency. For the tokenised energy narrative to hold true, each bitcoin would need to represent a static amount of energy that never changes. When I say spent, I mean that usually when people say "tokenised", they're referring to a token on a chain representing a physical asset that still exists in the real world. In this case the energy is not redeemable after minting. For these 2 reasons I just think the term is silly. On the DAO hack point, I just wish people would stop harping on about a single event which happened when Ethereum was almost unrecognisable compared to the ecosystem and product it is today. I'm not an ETH maxi, I just find this comment to be really low effort FUD the longer we go without a 'DAO hack 2'. If ETH was getting hard forked to change balances all the time, I'd obviously be much more sympathetic to this talking point, but in 2024 this risk basically applies equally to ETH and BTC i.e. negligibly. Hope that explains what I mean.

Loose_Screw_

It's not tokenised energy, because the energy used to create it is variable and spent. The DAO hack was a long time ago, and is just as viable on BTC if all major actors agreed. It becomes less likely as more people participate in any given chain. Your points are weak.

knowledgelover94

If you write a contract, is that contract or the medium in which you write it *money*? No. Bitcoin is tokenized energy. The value of energy is obvious. If you look up the DAO hack with ethereum, it shows that the ethereum insiders were able to essentially reverse a transaction. Therefore ethereum and most other coins aren’t truly decentralized (at least not as much as bitcoin. Bitcoin was created 1st with an immaculate conception. No insiders. It’s captured the network effect.

Spmhealy_ADA

Keep eyes on NuNet. They are a computing+AI division of AGIX. Spawned from their DAO. They will be working with all 3 companies. 37mil MC. Up 30% today. Available via Cardano DEX.

Spmhealy_ADA

Keep an eye on NuNet Spawned from the Singularity DAO. Will be doing all the computing work for the new ASI coin teams (AGIX/FET/OCEAN) 37mil MC currently. Up 30% today. Available on Cardano Dex.

jpoptarts

so fully anonymous decentralized crypto (DAO, DEX, etc.) aren't really viable because of criminals?

defialpro

You’re completely off base here. That is all locked up in their DAO. They have no access to the funds. It’s the infrastructure main net.

KingDeroThaFirst

Elastos and Badger DAO 🧏🏽‍♂️

Laughingboy14

What do we think this will be? New Moons exchange listing? DAO AMA?

jbrev01

The smart contracts will unlock your collateral whenever you repay the USD loan you were given. Just repay the amount you borrowed, plus whatever interest gained, and your original collateral will be unlocked and released back to your wallet. If the price of BTC goes up, it's actually a good thing because you don't risk liquidation. If the price of BTC drops a lot, then you risk getting liquidated and would have to pay back early or deposit more BTC as collateral. That's only for Aave though. On ThorChain there is no risk of liquidation and no interest payments. You can repay in 30 years, or not at all. Your collateral will just be lost until the smart contract is ever repaid the USD loan. ThorChain is able to offer the 0% interest and no risk of liquidation because your BTC collateral is sold upon opening the smart contract loan. It gets traded automatically for Rune token which is ThorChain's base token that is used to make the rest of ThorChain operate. So your only risk is if ThorChain ever goes down, but even then the DAO would find a solution to get back operating and your collateral would still be available. With Aave, there's no risk because it's an ETH smart contract. No matter what happens to Aave, you will always be able to repay the loan and get your collateral back. But the downside to Aave is you risk liquidation if the prices drop too low, and there's an interest that's determined automatically by market demand. The people who put up the other side of the smart contract by lending out the USD stablecoin, are compensated with a small interest. But with either, there are no late fees, no due dates. Pay back at your leisure and get your collateral back.

ILoveDonutsaLot

GET protocol is currently doing a rebranding and is a legit project. They also have a working DAO which distributes tasks. It provides a event-ticketing solution on NFT technology, and millions of tickets for real events have been sold through the protocol.

jawni

Are you a golfer? You could join LinksDAO for .15 ETH. The DAO's initial primary goal was to buy and operate a golf course and that was recently accomplished with the purchase of Spey Bay. Spey Bay is currently being renovated and now we're discussing which US-based golf course we're going to expand to next. Being a member lets you take part in this discussion and vote on all the decisions, it also gives you access to a *ton* of deals on golf products and experiences, and exclusive discounts/access on memberships. https://www.fastcompany.com/90909564/links-dao-digital-communities-buy-real-world https://finance.yahoo.com/news/linksdao-online-community-bought-golf-212810608.html https://www.golfcoursearchitecture.net/content/links-golf-club-selects-clayton-devries-pont-to-renovate-spey-bay https://cointelegraph.com/news/linksdao-wins-bid-to-buy-its-first-golf-course-says-ceo

KingDeroThaFirst

Badger DAO already up 96% 🧏🏽‍♂️

KingDeroThaFirst

Look it up on coin market cap, hidden gem that’s finally following btc trend and the DAO is releasing ebtc, a protocol that let you borrow collateral on bitcoin. Also the tokenomics are top tier only 21 million tokens just like bitcoin and only 18.9 million in circulation. And this just the beginning. Shorts also been getting liquidated.

KingDeroThaFirst

Anyways, anyone seeing what Badger DAO token is doing.

KingDeroThaFirst

Badger DAO, only 21 million coins and has a actual working team, currently just did a 85% gain over the last 24 hours.

Njaa

> Well you’d have to agree, or you’d be booted. If you choose not to update, you are now on a different chain not ETH. See ETC, ETHPOW. This is incorrect. ETC and ETHPoW are continuations of the original chains without implementing the hard forks. If you kept mining without updating your node for the DAO fork, you'd be mining what is now called the ETC chain. > Otherwise you go with the non-EF approved fork that was abandoned by the entire dev team The Ethereum Foundation doesn't do development. Ethereum development is done by many different client teams, such as Geth, Reth, Nethermind, Erigon, Besu,, Prysm, Lighthouse, Teku, Nimbus and Lodestar.

socmjt

$egg on solana Eggy's Games has been releasing games for over 15 years. One of these was The Unfair Platformer, a game that was played by PewDiePie. Now they have released their own crypto token to use in their games both as reward and as utility token. What is Eggy's Games token? The founder of Eggys Games, Brad, has been a game developer for over 15 years. Pewdiepie has reviewed his games. Brad has launched his native token for the upcoming game on the Solana blockchain. This game will feature in-game mechanics such as play2earn and staking. Brad plans on launching a community DAO to dictate future plans also brad plans to engage the community through tournaments and competitions. Brad is fully doxxed and committed 100% to this project. Liquidity is burnt. Let’s all get egg-sited and support him through this journey. https://eggysgames.com https://twitter.com/EggysGames https://www.dextools.io/app/en/solana/pair-explorer/59HNah4tyiLDjmh5HqZJh6j4ra29czqP87kpf9qpLvHr?t=1711305423492

Brilliant-Economy898

OPEN ecosystem, previously known as GET Protocol They are crypto dinosaurs, started in Amsterdam in 2016, raised ETH in an ICO, and started building the guardrails for on-chain ticketing. Alongside their protocol, they created a ticketing company called GUTS Tickets which became a preferred ticketeer for a major venue in the Netherlands. They were meant as a showcase for the white-label solution but grew to the top of ticket companies in the Netherlands (and it's an insanely crowded landscape for such a small country). The solution includes everything, from the website to the app, to the event organizer tools. Next to that, they have the Digital Twin solution which is an API to use the same NFT ticketing engine as the White Label and more or less the starting point for existing ticketing that wants more data about their ticketing life cycle up to NFTs and web3 entries. To date, they have 20+ integrators in several countries around the world for both the White Label as well as the Digital Twin integrators. They are, for example, working with one of the largest ticketing companies in the Netherlands and the Dutch GP to share in-app unique track collectables and add additional benefits to them. The GET token is used to power the ticketing. Integrators need to buy GET from the open market to be able to ticket events. The GET is locked for the entire event life cycle and gets distributed upon ticket scanning at the event. Portion flows to the DAO (currently containing ~6,25M in GET tokens), a big chunk to the GET Foundation, and a chunk to GET stakers (~33% of circulating supply stakes). The token has a fixed supply. Now, why am I only telling you now? Well.. they have been building and building, survived the black Swan event (COVID lockdowns for 2 years globally), outpacing literally hundreds of NFT Ticketing projects, raised ~5M in the bearest of times last year, and are now ready to push the narrative big time. In the following weeks, • ⁠GET will rebrand (with the help of the MC/Beam team) • ⁠Open token migration • ⁠List on a big CEX • ⁠Reveal the on-chain ticketing coalition with major industry partners • ⁠Reveal new major contracts • ⁠Perform web3-focused marketing for the first time in its existence It still has only a 40M market cap and it has been flying under the radar for a long long time.

kyozu8

OPEN ecosystem, previously known as GET Protocol They are crypto dinosaurs, started in Amsterdam in 2016, raised ETH in an ICO, and started building the guardrails for on-chain ticketing. Alongside their protocol, they created a ticketing company called GUTS Tickets which became a preferred ticketeer for a major venue in the Netherlands. They were meant as a showcase for the white-label solution but grew to the top of ticket companies in the Netherlands (and it's an insanely crowded landscape for such a small country). The solution includes everything, from the website to the app, to the event organizer tools. Next to that, they have the Digital Twin solution which is an API to use the same NFT ticketing engine as the White Label and more or less the starting point for existing ticketing that wants more data about their ticketing life cycle up to NFTs and web3 entries. To date, they have 20+ integrators in several countries around the world for both the White Label as well as the Digital Twin integrators. They are, for example, working with one of the largest ticketing companies in the Netherlands and the Dutch GP to share in-app unique track collectables and add additional benefits to them. The GET token is used to power the ticketing. Integrators need to buy GET from the open market to be able to ticket events. The GET is locked for the entire event life cycle and gets distributed upon ticket scanning at the event. Portion flows to the DAO (currently containing ~6,25M in GET tokens), a big chunk to the GET Foundation, and a chunk to GET stakers (~33% of circulating supply stakes). The token has a fixed supply. Now, why am I only telling you now? Well.. they have been building and building, survived the black Swan event (COVID lockdowns for 2 years globally), outpacing literally hundreds of NFT Ticketing projects, raised ~5M in the bearest of times last year, and are now ready to push the narrative big time. In the following weeks, - GET will rebrand (with the help of the MC/Beam team) - Open token migration - List on a big CEX - Reveal the on-chain ticketing coalition with major industry partners - Reveal new major contracts - Perform web3-focused marketing for the first time in its existence It still has only a 40M market cap and it has been flying under the radar for a long long time.

CointestMod

#DEX Pro-Arguments Below is a DEX pro-argument written by Shippior. > A Decentralized Exchange, often abbreviated to DEX, is an exchange that does not belong to a central entity and all transactions happen on a blockchain. The three largest DEXs by [Total Value Locked](https://cointelegraph.com/explained/what-is-total-value-locked-tvl-in-crypto-and-why-does-it-matter) (TVL) are [Curve Finance](https://curve.fi/#/ethereum/swap), [Uniswap](https://uniswap.org/) and [PancakeSwap](https://pancakeswap.finance/). For a full list of DEXs see this [dashboard](https://defillama.com/protocols/Dexes). > > The largest difference between a CEX and a DEX is the way that liquidity is provided. Most CEXs use an [order book](https://learn.bybit.com/trading/order-book-explained-for-beginners/_ style ) for transactions. Most DEXs employ [Auto Mated Market Making](https://blog.0x.org/market-making-in-defi/) (AMM). These type of transactions are essential for operating an exchange with low liquidity. The supply and demand are matched by a protocol to prevent orders from not being fulfilled for a long time as there are generally less transaction offers available when there is lower liquidity. > > AMM works by users "lending" their crypto as collateral for others to trade. This is done by depositing tokens in a [liquidity pool](https://www.moonpay.com/learn/defi/what-are-liquidity-pools). Users are often provided incentive by the protocol to deposit their tokens by receiving a fixed interest rate on the crypto that they deposit. Therefore users who wanted to hold their crypto for the long term can actually put them in a pool via a smart contract to earn interest on this crypto without having to trade it whereas it would be collecting dust on an CEX. APRs are as high at 100%+ on larger DEXs like [Curve](https://curve.fi/#/ethereum/pools) and higher than 250% for smaller DEXs like [Crescent](https://app.crescent.network/farm). > > Trading fees of DEXs are mostly rather straightforward. Uniswap take a flat 0.3% trading fee, just like [Osmosis](https://osmosis.zone/) on each trade on top of the network transaction fee. Transaction fees can go as low as 0.02% for Curve Finance. These swap fees are provided to the people providing liquidity in the pool as an incentive for putting in their crypto. > > All trades made on a DEX are available as they can be found on the blockchain. Therefore it is possible to base your trading activity on the activities of other people. This also means that you can verify that your assets are where you think they are at all time. Your assets can not be lended to other people without you knowing of it and in most cases without you agreeing to it through the use of a smart contract. > > Compared to a CEX (with the exception of Coinbase) it is possible to own a part of the DEX. Many DEX have their own tokens. For example Curve Finance has [Curve DAO](https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/curve-dao-token/) and Uniswap has [UNI](https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/uniswap/). These tokens are used to pay for transaction fees on the DEX, they can be just held on to in the hope of them increasing in value but most important of all these tokens can be used to participate in governance. Everyone can put a proposal for improving a DEX, see the [Curve DAO](https://gov.curve.fi/) as an example for this, up for vote and everyone that owns the token of the DEX can vote (mostly 1 token = 1 vote) to determine how to go forward. Thus one can decide how to go forward to make the DEX even better. Something that is almost entirely impossible with a CEX. > > Privacy on a DEX is much better than on a CEX. On most DEXs no Know Your Customer (KYC) is required, a wallet that can not be linked to the person that is using it is sufficient. > > DEXs can have all assets on their platform that are available on the blockchain itself of made available through wrapped assets by [bridges](https://blog.liquid.com/blockchain-cross-chain-bridge). In theory the number of bridges that can be made between blockchains is infinite thereby the number of assets that can be listed on a DEX is also infinite. In reality though there are only bridges between the major blockchains available at the moment. This still provides plenty to chose from. According to Coinmarketcap there are currently [935 coins](https://www.coingecko.com/en/exchanges/uniswap#:~:text=Currently%2C%20there%20are%20938%20coins,a%2024h%20volume%20of%20%24319%2C357%2C719.14.) available to be traded on Uniswap and [3,223 coins](https://www.coingecko.com/en/exchanges/pancakeswap) on PancakeSwap. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_DEX) to find submissions for other topics.

KingDeroThaFirst

Not sure but I hope your holding Badger DAO or elastos, yes this is a shill.

KingDeroThaFirst

Badger DAO, elastos, rarible

pink_tshirt

So, I built a web3 app for a client. It's using Magic Wallet to connect. It's kind of like a DAO. Most users dont even know what crypto is. Their wallets are just topped up with some matic to submit TXs. The UI is pretty seamless.

KingDeroThaFirst

I wish I knew. But if crypto has taught me anything, liquidity equals power. Theirs some whales that trying to push that baby to 0.001, could take years so I’m not wasting my time on it when theirs tokens like badger DAO doing 75% gains in a day while also being up 110% for the year so far.

KingDeroThaFirst

Little to none. I Pat myself on the back everyday that I made that change. Badger DAO is my best performer, I been buying since $4 and it’s currently at $8.90. I bought Ordi token at $8 and now it’s 65 with a recent ath of $90, wished I bought more.

KingDeroThaFirst

I hope you scooped some badger DAO at least I eee price target of 25-50

Crypto_Grug

Veshit. Seriously Vechain is the biggest joke project in the top 50. Piece of shit dips harder than anyone and is down 85% from the ATH. Still holding cause technically still net positive. Just sucks when I see stupid meme coins pumping and I’m holding some joke of a utility coin that would be truly a miracle to break .10 during this bull run. Also devs are killing their own fucking token by focusing on creating a DAO and other dumb shit. Building out an ecosystem that doesn’t need to exist. Should easily be around .10 cents atm but this turd is never gonna take off again.

Da_Wild_West

Solana and ethereum are my worst peformers and Curve DAO token and DOGE are my best performers

Ferdo306

They don't have to be dicks about it And it's not like they're exclusively saying alts are shitcoins cause they underperformed BTC long term They claim that BTC as a p2p/SOV is the only use case in crypto They totally ignore what ethereum has achieved technology and adoption wise by repeating the that ETH had ICO which must mean it's a security and the DAO hack/fork which must mean it's centralised The fact that you can use ethereum in countless more ways than bitcoin gets totally ignored

kbielefe

There are some interesting DAO models already. You can pretty much encode the rules you want. Imagine instead of electing one representative for everything every two to four years, you can change who you delegate your vote to at any time, or have different delegates for different topics.

MinimalGravitas

Would you be able to concentrate on writing articles if you had never had the opportunity to pet a dog? Of course not. We need to form a DAO to get this author a puppy.

Vedaykin

Yeah, I am part of a DAO and do private crypto stuff. It cost me about 800hrs to fully code/program/automate everything for tax reporting. Getting all tx and filtering for value and deducting fees is a sick task. Koinly didn’t work very well for me and I had to put so much work into it that I just gave up. Having four digits txs for a report and doing it by hand is not feasible IMO.

DingDangDiddlyDangit

Actually u/noncognitive is right. This investigation has to do with the DAO hack years ago not its status as a security. There are ties of the ETH foundation to the hack and theft.

BigDeezerrr

I've been holding ETH since late 2016 and am thinking of selling for Bitcoin. I just cannot see how ETH isn't a security. The Ethereum Foundation is essentially a company with a salaried dev team and product roadmap for Ethereum. There was a pre-mine for the founders and they intervened during the DAO hack to return ETH. I think the move to PoS was a HUGE mistake as well since it now provide native yield. It seems more centralized and risky to me now than it ever has.

jps_

As others have pointed out, a contract upgrade is equivalent to a hard fork - and some might argue - less involved. To my mind, it's not the inability to fall back on social consensus that L2's suffer. But instead it's the external social consensus that is thrust upon them. Which, in my opinion, is worse. This can manifest in two ways. The first might be where the underlying L1 determines that an L2 is toxic or undesirable, and then a-la-DAO, forks it out. The power of an external society to overrule the internal consensus might be low risk, for sure, but is not zero. The second and more likely situation is the uncontrollable influence of other L2, or the L1 on which it rests. For example, the absolute cost for participants in an L2 to execute transactions depends on the price of the L1 token and gas costs. And it also depends on network congestion and latency of the whole L1. Thus, its cost structures and constraints are extrinsic to the social consensus. These two effects guarantee a proliferation of Alt-L1 - particularly with the presence of multiple viable bridges.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The article compares Arbius and Bittensor, two projects aimed at decentralizing AI through blockchain technology. Arbius introduces a Proof-of-AI-Compute algorithm to validate and reward AI model computations without a central authority, focusing on reproducible computation and rewarding solvers with AIUS tokens. Bittensor, on the other hand, decentralizes incentive distribution through a network of networks approach, using subnets and a Root Network for governance and incentive mechanisms. Both projects aim to democratize AI access and innovation, but they differ in their approach to tokenomics, governance, and infrastructure. Arbius operates on Ethereum's Layer 2 solution, Arbitrum Nova, for reduced fees and enhanced scalability, while Bittensor uses its own Layer 1 blockchain developed with the Polkadot SDK. Governance in Arbius is designed to be DAO-based from the outset, whereas Bittensor starts with a centralized foundation aiming to transition to community ownership. The comparison highlights the unique value propositions and visions of both projects in fostering a decentralized AI ecosystem. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

noncognitive

> A small group of people forked ETH to fix the big DAO hack. Currently only very large computers can run ETH validators False and false

thatsamiam

Satoshi and early contributors mined the coins well after the whitepaper had been released. The coins were not granted to Satoshi and early contributors. There is video of Vitalik (founder of ETH) specifically raising money (BTC) using premined ETH in order to fund development of Ethereum. Satoshi never raised any money to make bitcoin. He never offered premined BTC to investors. His 1m coins are all accounted for. Someone donated $3800 for the project in return for nothing. At that time, anyone the world was able to run a miner and mine bitcoin for themselves. CFTC made a mistake that will probably be corrected one way or another. A small group of people forked ETH to fix the big DAO hack. Currently only very large computers can run ETH validators... It is proof of stake block chain which means those with the most ETH can control the protocol. Suppose Blackrock gains control of 60% of ETH. What are the possible implications? With BTC those with more coin do not have more power than those with less coins. This is a critical distinction between ETH and BTC. The are many ways in which Gensler can argue against ETH being a commodity. There are many reasons why the ETF can be denied and/or indefinitely postponed by lawsuits.

exmachinalibertas

I'm glad this book is written and out there at least. Michael Marquardt* succeded in rewriting the history of Bitcoin by throwing his weight around as the owner/mod of the two most popular Bitcoin discussion forums, r\/bitcoin and bitcointalk.org. It was just astounding to watch all the gaslighting in real time coming from every direction. It truly was a bloodbath for several months. And then in the space of a few weeks, Segwit2X activated Segwit, Core backed out of the 2X part, Luke proclaimed his 12% of miners and 15% of users were somehow the real reason segwit got activated, Theymos banned all blocksize discussion, and poof! just like that, history was re-written. Nobody on r\/bitcoin wanted to talk about blocksize any more... but of course that's because they were all banned if they did. And suddenly r\/bitcoin had always been opposed to big blocks, just like we've always been at war with Eastasia. History seems to forget that [Theymos's post](https://old.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3h9cq4/its_time_for_a_break_about_the_recent_mess/) was downvoted into oblivion, because even small blockers thought the debate was worthwhile, but King Theymos declared "If 90% of /r\/Bitcoin users find these policies to be intolerable, then I want these 90% of /r\/Bitcoin users to leave." He single-handedly fractured the crypto community and [defrauded community members](https://forum.bitcoin.com/post32869.html#p32869) out of money donated towards maintaining the bitcointalk forum. All of this has basically been lost to the annuls of time, because you were banned on all the popular crypto forums for bringing any of it up. Just like how Ethereum folks have completely forgotten that Ethereum used to be the coin where "code was law" right up until the DAO hack fork and suddenly community and consensus was really fucking important. Thankfully, that no longer seems to be the case any more, at least for hacks. (Ethereum hard forks frequently, but no more have been forks in order to mitigate hacks.) Well, history may forget all the bullshit that has happened, but some of us have been here from the beginning and still remember. And I for one am glad it's being documented in format that is likely to be archived even after reddit collapses under its own weight of stupidity. ---- \* This is not doxxing Theymos. His name is literally on his PGP key, and reddit [already decided using his name wasn't doxxing](https://twitter.com/lopp/status/833069303691874304?lang=en) since his name appeared in [the New York Times](https://archive.is/M1lAG)

Psykotixx

lol certainly not. Avoiding security status in the SEC was suspect at best. Despite launching the exact same way many accused coins did. ETH foundation has done a lot of shady shit all the way back to the DAO hack. Calling me a Clown? You are investing in “currencies” thinking inflation is nonsense. Gtfo.

Kintsugy_Dylan

I believing giving decentralized technologies the air they need to flourish is the most important issue at this critical juncture, because they will ultimately force governments to restructure to become more symbiotic with people and assets, moving away from the centralized, parasitic relationship they have enjoyed for some time with predictable results. I arrived here by expanding Bitcoin’s ideals, whose ramifications go far beyond decentralized finance and diminishing our reliance on centralized institutions and intermediaries. Due to this, I also believe RFK Jr. is the best choice for the American people, especially considering that for better or worse, the direction our nation takes echo throughout the rest of the world. If you’d like to read more of my thoughts on the matter to better understand my view that the acceptance of Bitcoin by the US government is of paramount importance, you can read my essay, ‘[Decentralization and Destiny, the Promethean Paradigm of the Digital Age](https://medium.com/coinmonks/decentralization-and-destiny-the-promethean-paradigm-of-the-digital-age-709375e7316b).’ To dive further, you can also see a more personal letter I wrote to my Congressman, French Hill, in preparation for an online town hall I attended with my local DAO, ‘Preserving American Innovation: [Why Blockchain Regulation Needs Rethinking](https://medium.com/@Kintsugy/an-open-letter-to-french-hill-cfa3ca609c66).’

meeleen223

But their value is growing in part because earning is returning and is currently being tested in r/CryptoCurrencyMoons as legal wrapper is being set up in form of DAO LLC