Git clone crypto

...

sudo apt-get install fish

>But if they use PoStake or similar it doesn't matter if others use it

>If a PoS coin has only 1 masternode, it doesn't matter, its fine

Hoooooly fucking shit you must be fucking trolling
If you are seriously that stupid I am so fucking sorry for you man

Also they can absolutely have decentralized systems while keeping the system within the existing power structure

So instead of random people running nodes, they'll just have corporations, governments, thinktanks, etc run nodes on their fork

not sure i get your point.
PoS networks use masternodes (or more accurately: incentive to host a masternode) to achieve decentralization

>decentralized

What part of that word is so fucking hard for you to understand?
The MAIN REASON that crypto is going to revolutionize the system is BECAUSE ITS DECENTRALIZED

Not because its run by governments, corporations, etc.
That is literally what we have right now you fucking dunce.

For PoW, it's important to have decentralization because you want to have a lot of widely and equally distributed hashing power to prevent 51% attacks

For PoS, if you control token distribution and trust the people you distribute to [which in this case would be other (((institutions))) ], you don't have to worry since you can't be attacked by anyone except the big `powers that be` which you already trust.

now you're just talking semantics.

let's call it democratic decentralization (anyone from anywhere being able to join the network as a node operator) and aristocratic decentralization (what you just described)

Centralized power will not allow us to win. There's no fucking way i can see it. How the fuck can industries which run bubbles measured in the quadrillions (derivatives) fall to a bunch of turbo-nerds?

I don't think I'm being fatalistic, i think this is realistic.

>aristocratic decentralization

This term does not exist in the real world

You absolutely CAN NOT have "decentralization" where only select people can participate.
That is the opposite of the word, and that makes it 100% centralized

so when we say "decentralization" is the key component of crypto, we are talking about democratic decent.

Institutions abhor the idea of systems where anyone can participate.

What are they going to do?
Fork ETH?
Okay then what, they fork every fucking single ERC20 token?

Okay then what?
All devs for all tokens and all crypto companies now begin development on the new forked chains?
And we, the consumers, are expected to use these new forked repos too?

They cant force millions of people to use their off-brand.

Current cryptos aren't really democratic anyway.

PoW with ASICs/FPGAs is inherently centralized.
PoW with GPUs is largely centralized.
PoW with CPUs is somewhat centralized.

PoS is on average as centralized as net worth is (e.g. a few people with a massive amount of wealth)

Don't get me wrong, it's far, far better than prior systems. But we have not yet achieved true decentralization.

It's very nice.
/Users/username/.config/fish/functions/fish_prompt.fish
[code]function fish_prompt
set_color $fish_color_cwd
echo -n (prompt_pwd)
set_color normal
echo -n ' > '
end[/code]

You never will. The hardware is bought with old money and as that is extremly centralised so will be crypto .

Best you can do is use the hype and get rich enough to survive but at the end of the day you still will never reach the top, just won't be at the absolute bottom of the barrel.

ETH isn't a great example since the use case for corporations isn't so clear cut. I'd rather use payment systems for an example.

First of all, they're not going to fork old tech. They'll fork the crypto with the best technology. That means right now (measuring by fast/cheap payments) - Stellar or Ripple

So they could buy (or i guess with Stellar, apply for a distribution for free) the token, and

>have to fork out anywhere from 7 to 9 figures
>have to worry about Whales crashing the market
>not have control over the codebase
>make a lot of other people rich
>but not have to worry about servers

Or they could

>form a collaboration with other institutions to decide who runs servers and coin distribution between them
>clone the codebase
>get all the tokens for free
>get control of the codebase
>not worry about whales
>laugh as they give the middle finger to the entire crypto movement

The GPL was designed to prevent institutions from profiting from the work of Free Software.

But in crypto, it's not enough.

We need a GPL for crypto that mandates a decentralized distribution of tokens for any crypto forked from the code.

And what about the devs?

They murder them?
They pay them off?
They hire new devs that aren't nearly as familiar with the code?
The devs that have produced this new, innovative technology are not going to go quietly.

And I highly doubt they just hop on board and start pushing out updates for ((them))

>what about the devs?
these are hundred billion dollar corporations that employ armies of computer scientists, architects, and software engineers.

The big ones already employ workforces larger than all the devs in crypto combined.

>murder them
and i thought i was paranoid, it's just business.

>The devs that have produced this new, innovative technology are not going to go quietly.
what are they going to fucking do?

Also the devs have no choice really. THE CODE IS OPEN SOURCE! They'll just integrate it into their corporate fork and the original coins cannot stop them.

Do you think crypto is only payment systems?

Have you looked into smart contracts?
Smart contracts will change the entire face of the planet.
No more going to a centralized third party to manage agreements, or contracts.

Crypto is so much bigger than Ripple or Stellar having rapid and low fee payments.

forgot to mention the absolute single largest use case in all of crypto

gambling

open source smart contracts means 99% of the worlds gambling will be converted to blockchain within 25 years.
mark my words. gamblers live and die by fractions of a %.

I'm well aware of smartcontracts, and I think they are revolutionary. There's several use-cases currently evolving side-by side

>Cryptocurrency for transactions
>CryptoStoreOfValue for StoreOfValue (BTC is an awful currency)
>Smart Contracts & DAOs
>Supply Chain/Logistics tracking (Walton, VEN[maybe?], some others)
>Tokenization of assets (JNT, probably others)

But the name of the market is cryptoCURRENCY. So i use that example

Also i would not underestimate the size of the market for this

You are thinking about this the wrong way user.

Why would institutions want to use cryptocurrency other than to sell products to customers in return for said cryptocurrency.

Blockchain on the other hand has commercial applications and could easily be used as a payment network between different organisations ie ripple, but if they want to make their own they are free to do so.

If some company says "to do business with us you must use our own token" then people will still convert from BTC and ETH to this token.

Many of the benefits of crypto are peer-to-peer, so an institution will have no effect.

The problem is that institutions don't really care about transactions with Joe Normie

They care about transactions with other institutions.
And it's far cheaper for them to do the proposed above than to use the existing system - especially as they really don't see any gain from the decentralized nature of cryptos.

lets assume that all big companies use in house blockchain for transactions.

that still leaves every single other use case for crypto to be decentralized.
smart contracts, gambling, tokenization of assets, store of value, etc.

Even disregarding payment systems, the use case for this technology is easily valued in the multi trillions in 10 years.

Gambling is also interesting. Maybe i should pick up some FUN again.

Once there are solutions for the oracle problem i'm sure we will see blockchain based sports betting.

Hmm, you have a good point.

Perhaps I will diversify a bit more out of cryptocurrencies and more into that realm.

I guess it is finally time to evaluate if ChainLink is worth investing in.

Right yeah that's why all the knights just quit with the armour, horses, jousting, tournaments, chivalry, feudalism, nobility and shit and just picked up guns and kept running shit right?
You can't defend yourself against an innovation which negates your fundamental value. Even if you just copy it, you just negate that value yourself.

oh wow so all JP morgan had to do this whole time was fork bitcoin into JPcoin and then tell everyone to sell bitcoin and hop on over to JPcoin? dang. I have a few calls to make brb...

If you think banks or institutions would ever use bitcoin as a method of payment in this day and age you really, REALLY need to read up on crypto technology of the last 9 years

>Smart contracts will change the entire face of the planet.

> what are they going to fucking do?
Compete and undercut the slow and weighted down centralised institutions with trillions in sovereign debt and stratified structures the result of a hundred years of untested nepotistic domination.
You think they can't lose, actually they can't win. Anything they do which diverges from the market optimal strategy gives their opposition a foothold to exploit, and states and central banks pursuing a market optimal strategy is like expecting sparrows to charge machine gun nests with suicide vests. It is utterly contrary to the nature of the beast.

It seriously makes me happy that some people truly cant even fathom how much of a game changer smart contracts are.

Smart contracts are taking agreements, that before we had to rely on trust and guns to back, and making them immutable.
Smart contracts mean that you don't have to rely on pajeet to hold up his end, or even Mr. Shekel head of big bank.
You put the conditions in code, and that code is executed to the very last line.

To underestimate how beneficial not having to trust other humans can be, is fucking hilarious.

how autistic do you have to be to read my post and think I'm being serious? i know you guys cant pick up visual cues but jesus christ

>this

Trustless is the true value of blockchain.

You're actually correct OP.

But you cannot copy network effect or fair coin distributions. That's why BTC has the largest claim to value.

I agree, but don't underestimate the oracle problem, nor the risk of code vulnerabilities.

Fuck, between the DAO and that multi-sig wallet, the losses already are probably measured in the billions.

BTC hardly is the most fair distribution. It was just first, that's the only reason it's #1

It's the ask jeeves of the space.

The oracle problem is overblown.
If you want data from the outside world just query some APIs and take the average response. It will be good enough for 99% of use cases. Code vulnerabilities will be almost nonexistent once the formal verification tools for Ethereum get improved. Also the parity wallet bug will probably be reversed as part of the next hard fork.

>next hard fork
What? I don't follow ETH close enough i guess, they have a PLANNED hard fork that will address it?

Or is that just added into a needed fork for things like Casper/Plasma?

If they decide to do it they would include it a hardfork that had already been planned, Constantinople

BTC started as literally worthless. The largest holders today were those who recognized the technology for what it was and helped get it off the ground by writing software, running nodes, using it in commerce, and establishing markets.

Today coins are started by "teams" with known identities. These "team" holds onto the majority of the coins while the rest are sold to the retarded public in an "ICO".

You'll never replicate BTC's coin distribution, ever.

The fact that you can so easily copy-paste other projects just bolsters BTC's position. If some shitcoin solves scalability it's far more likely this tech will be used by bitcoin before the entire market en masse switches over to some dodgy ICO pile of shit with "developers" holding onto 20% of the coins from the get-go.

*clones crypto*
Okay everypeep, mine our 'nu' crypto!
Everypeep?
peeps?

Most ICOs the team only holds a small % of the coins.

Most BTC are held by the mining industry. That's not decentralized.

>hurr only institutions are important
have you considered taking a moment to consider why? because up until 2009, they held a defacto monopoly on what could be used as currency
now that bitcoin (and others) exist, nothing stops anyone from using cryptos to buy and sell from each other. if anything, seeing as the black market part of the economy rises every day due to increasing taxes, the few cryptos at the top stand to fill a niche there
besides that, a blockchain is just a database. there's little point cloning a public blockchain if you want to run it in a closed circle. in fact ethereum private chains have been a thing for a couple of years now

MUH SMURT CUNTRCTS

Keep bag holding LINK.

Smart contracts are very interesting but only viable for blockchain assets. Their most interesting use-case is trustless casino games and prediction markets. They're never going to be used for real-life agreements. Most of real-life is centralized. A decentralized system is only as decentralized as its weakest (most centralized) link. Sure, you might be able to use oracles to relay the winner of the super bowl or the winner of a national election but you're not going to be able to accurately measure whether business A is holding up its end of the deal to business B or person X is holding up his rental agreement to person Y.

So, trustless dice games and (large) sports betting. Prediction markets. Oh yeah, and ponzi schemes.

>what is insurance

Read above. They don't care about normal people

They still have the money, so they're still important

20% is "small"?

You also have no idea how many the team *actually* holds. I can dump 100 BTC into the ICO since those 100 BTC eventually get back to me anyway. And now I've secured 40% of the total supply.

You cannot do insurance on smart contracts. It's not decentralized.

>hmm pay to use an existing service, or copy and develop your own by hiring developers

Flight insurance?
Bond insurance?
Shipping insurance?
Tuition insurance?
Vehicle insurance?
Weather insurance?

Do you want another 12 examples?

Wow, great job, You can list different types of insurance. And not a single one is decentralized.

>vehicle insurance

Alright. Go ahead and tell me how "muh smrt cntrcts" are going to be used to offer me car insurance.

This should be great.

The payment here is measured in billions.

>What are sensors
You must be baiting me acting stupid

You build a smart car, with self driving capabilities.
You can't comprehend that a car that can literally drive itself would also have onboard sensors to detect damage?

These damage indicators are relayed to a smart contract, which determines the amount of damage caused, the speed of the car, the location of the incident, etc.

Would you like me to explain the rest of the examples?

what i don't get is why any major institution would pay to get a deal with crypto currencies - so far there isn't a single service that provides anything useful

on top of that why not make their own?

there is no future for crypto currencies unless they get real adoption which i suspect they won't anytime soon - even then it likely to be a "your country coin"

>everyone who entered recently doesn't give a flying fuck about anything except profit and speculation, and they'll freak the fuck out if the Big Money doesn't go into their choices
I'll be honest here and say that while I'm new to it and I came for the profit, I'm learning more, and starting to swing towards the ideological side of things. That's probably just my nature though. I wouldn't have invested if I thought it was a get rich quick scheme and nothing more.

Great to hear. I'm trying to teach the normies at work who invested to understand this is how the market works, and about why it exists (as well as how the market parallels, e.g. quadrillion dollar derivatives bubble) are far worse

congrats you are among the 2% ... here's your medal, now sit in a corner and with this shitshow run its course

>the winner of a national election
Is there a coin working on an actually viable electronic voting system yet?

Super serious.

I'm seriously considering starting up a homebrew miner, not for the profit of it, but to support certain coins/networks I believe in.
Stupid idea?

I'm invested in a lot of shit coins, and a few blue chips. When I believe in something, I don't fake it, I want to come along for the ride, even if I'm late to the game.

Entirely possible cars of the future will be built with damage sensors. Entirely possible insurance companies will use that data to assess claims.

But those sensors are NOT decentralized. They might break or malfunction. There may be external factors involved in the accident. Fraud. Tampering.

You can't just send the data to a smart contract.

What benefit does connecting them to "smart contracts" have in the first place?

Instant payments? Yeah, because that's definitely something insurance companies of the future can't figure out...

No and it's a retarded idea. Fuck off brainlet.

>What benefit does connecting them to "smart contracts" have in the first place?

Decreasing man hours, primarily.
If you can get something done 90% of the time with a LOT less human work required, then you will.

I agree there will be cases that require special attention, but as of today literally every single case requires special human interaction.
If they can automate the majority of claims and save millions of dollars in man hours, they will

Not just man-hours. Reducing Counter-party risk is probably a bigger reason

Are you fucking stupid? It's a brilliant idea to use blockchain for vote integrity. It almost seems like one of the most perfect applications of the technology.

I admit that I don't know everything there is to know about blockchain tech, but it seems to me it could be used for voting quite effectively, use as many ad-homs as you want, but tell me how I'm wrong?

HST

THANK YOU