Many project’s reserve fund is in the tokens of the project itself (or in another ccy such as BTC or ETH), right now the price drops are fresh, but if things persist, developers will look at their development fund in USD and conclude that they cannot complete their projects.
Have any projects been boxed yet? That would be very telling, because it would be a contraction of the space as a whole. Someone on here should try to keep track of that.
This is only possible if noone thinks anymore that Cardano is of value. Therefore this will not happen. But if the scheme goes on that the Cardano price follows Bitcoin, just multiplied by a factor of 2 and if Bitcoin takes another 50% drop, then maybe 1Ct per ADA is possible.
I see the actual prices as buying opportunities and will go on buying a little bit every month from my salary as long as these low prices maintain.
Yeah I suppose all of us who believe in the project will be picking up some coins regularly while this slump continues.
Sure it could happen.
I doubt you will ever go on Coin Market Cap and see $0.00, there will always be some nominal value.
Think of a rust-belt city that peaked back in the 80s, half the people have moved on, boarded up houses, no jobs. Property still has some value, it’s not free, but it’s very very cheap and yet nobody wants to buy it.
A failed project would be similar, the brains have left, forum is half empty, money has dried up, no new development… I can think of a few projects, but I won’t name names. Look at coins with a market cap under 10M, some used to be a big deal.
and 0.005, 0.004, 0.002, 0.001, 0.0001
I can see you are a true believer “as long as these low prices maintain” – for you it is a question of when not if the prices will go sky high again.
And you might be right - buying when everyone else is selling is how people become millionaires, and also how people lose their entire investment.
You’re right. But “sky high” is not necessary. For me it’s fine if the price grows with growing everyday value of Cardano. The moon is too crowded already.
Only if you put everything in one basket. I don’t do that.
My model has crashed. Still trying to understand where the deficiency is. Iv’ve heard of a couple of things and some others, that do not fit. For example,
If keys can be guessed then your money isn’t safe. If someone guessed your account number should they be able to have 5-10% of your savings or potentially all of it?
There is chatter about intentionally pushing the value down because of upcoming institutional investing. I don’t know how much of this is true.
There is chatter about the BCH hard fork. This makes sense to a degree. Volatility is baked in because someone can simply fork the open source code out there because they don’t like or agree with your ideas. That being said, the U.S. dollar cannot be former by just any group. What then makes any crypto valuable and stable if a group can take the code and “mint” their own digital coin? It makes sense that some potion of the code, such as Oroborus, should be proprietary. Linux is open source but even Red Hat and other vendors have a model based on proprietary code.
There has been talk of the recent crack down on ICOs by the various state AGs. I think this has some impact as it may generate fear of a coin being labeled a security. Coins should navigate slowly through these waters. It was always said that the board would be cleared and many coins would be wiped out. I think this is true and I think ETC has a huge liability here because of all of the ERC20 coins/ICOs that originated on ETH.
The last point of discussion I’ll bring up is the fact that the market is based off of the same money. No new money has been flowing in. This is impacted by the above as well as some other issues.
I’m tracking other discussions but it’s hard to give weight to them because traffic is a bit wild right now. Everyone is trying to understand what is happening and figure out if it is too late to exit. Here’s a thought, it is. At this point, the only people who can exit are those that were in at the beginning or before the ICO. We all are now a donor pool.
On the upside, BTC is gaining more acceptance but even with this. I am not certain of how long vendors accept the coin since they’d be on the losing end right now. I am buying the dip and only what I can give away because essentially that is what I’m doing. I think the market will swing up at some point in time it’s just a matter of when. We will all be hodling for a loooong time I imagine. And if not everyone hopefully hasn’t invested their life into a coin. Remember bet only what you can afford to lose.
On a last note, everyone expects these moonshots in Dec. I don’t. For my model, this occurs after Dec because of the holidays. The moonshot last year was based off of greed alone. Nothing more nothing less. The hype has since gone. Fundamentals play a bigger role and during the holidays, people want to buy tangible assets to give away. Who is going to give away a gift that is losing value and one that nothing or very little can be done with right now? Not many so the people buying are hodlers, speculators, and traders.
Lastly, I’m glad the shift now is to Japan. Africa was a horrible call. Crypto requires computers and bandwidth. This experience is nice in developed countries but in rural Africa and areas where people are unbanked, well this just isn’t a great idea. Ask yourself this, do you think Google, Amazon, Facebook, Sony, Samsung, Tesla, GM, Mercedes, Apple, Twitter, Reddit, or any other major (let’s just consider Fortune 500) companies would have been as successful if they focused on Africa as its main driving market or one of its main focuses? The focus should be on gaining acceptance in the US, China, EMEAR and only with the major economies. Once acceptance and use is in place, the unbanked in Africa can benefit. The thing is crypto requires tech and tech costs money. Tech advances all the time which requires even more money. Tech also requires updates as well. I’m fairly certain the Daedalus doesn’t work on a 386. Hardware wallets also cost money. I doubt that many people in Africa are buying ledgers. The main focus should reflect the countries where users are buying and consuming the products required or part of the crypto-sphere. I’m sure you buy a lot of food in Africa for the cost of a Nano or Trezor. Focusing on Japan is good. I’m sympathetic to the needs of the unbanked but staring in developed markets and economies is a better approach imo.
That’s being said, I’m buying the dip. Im waiting for the bump next year. There is no more hype so we should wait for the regulatory market to provide guidance. When that happens and if money flows in, then we will see some huge gains. I’ll try modeling this as well but it’s going to take a month or so.
One last thing.
THIS IS NOT FINANCIAL ADVICE. I am not a financial advisor. Any information I have provided is purely for entertainment purposes. Readers should research any crypto investment and discuss this with their financial advisor. This is not financial advice. Any methods or models I reference are not backed by any government or financial institution.
M-Pesa is doing pretty well in Africa. Nothing wrong with also targeting developed nations too of course but underdeveloped nations is where the growth will be and they are wise to target it early in my opinion. One of my goals is to work on systems that make it easy and affordable to use crypto and blockchains. The developed world will have XRP to use.
I don’t think so. LBC is 90% probably scam, we have ZERO proof they found anything.
I just went to keys.lol, my dude, that is a total joke.
But how would you push the value down, other than by aggressively selling? Which would totally defeat the porpoise 
Agree - that’s a genuine risk for all crypto projects.
Maybe, but regulation has benefits too, makes crypto more attractive to institutional and retail money.
100% correct. In fact I think this is the main explanation for the decline and stagnation. As time passes, people are finding other uses for the money they have locked in crypto, and they are removing it from the market. At the same time no new money is entering the market.
Totally.
Yep. Starting in Africa always seemed like a long shot to me, I think they really need it, but it has to start in the developed world.
If it’s useful it will find it’s value. Crypto is a different type of money, it needs to do things the old money cannot do, then the value proposition will be clear.
I think they sell at the exchanges to drop the price but on the other hand buy much more OTC where the trades have no influence to market price. And I think this will go on until all big players are not hungry any more. Then the prices will rise and they will sell their coins at a much higher price to the retail investors who dropped everything during the crash and want to get in again.
And exactly therefore I think that the developing nations are the perfect place to start.
If keys can be guessed then your money isn’t safe.
Any key can be guessed, it’s just a matter of how likely it is that someone would guess it. Here’s a great video explaining that.
Looks like it was a way to trick people into loading malicious software by convincing them they could crack the private key…pretty funny.
On LBC. LBC 100% has been confirmed. I don’t know where you’re getting your facts. I am absolutely certain PERIOD. Trophies are definitive.
https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/trophies
I am aware of additonal data but cannot disclose. It is absolutely real.
Pushing the value down. This is done all the time. Please read up on trading strategies. You’re references are extremely basic in principle.
LBC as a scam is also BS. There is disclosure on the remotes execution within the code. If we’re going there then lets call out M$soft and everyone else that has remote execution in any aspect embedded within the code.
Ripple has definitive use. Some others, possibly. Ask yourself why Microsoft isn’t open source even though they have buggy BSD software. Ask yourself why IOS, Oracle and a host of others have proprietary software. If you follow an open source model, where is the proprietary tech? One company or group creates the software and another company picks it up and does not have to expend resources for R&D. The hard work has been done. Money saved then used on recruiting, etc.
@ Steve
Here is an easy way to think about this. One person trying to guess the lottery number is a lost cause. They could spend a lifetime and some trying to guess the lottery numbers if they had it every minute. Now when millions of people participate, someone seems to win. The same principle applies to crypto where only the seed governs ownership/access. If you have one billion people using a wallet, think of that as one billion lotteries. now get ten thousand players each with a computer that can guess 1 million combinations a day, either randomly or not. At some point, they will hit something and someone will lose out. Using a seed as the sole means of deterrence is a joke at best. Evenb if someone guessed my bank account and ABA routing number, they would not be able to take my funds. With crypto it is very possible. I’ve had to give out my account number in instances and the recipients could not take my funds. It’s not the same with crypto. Don’t believe me, send me your seed.
The point is, an additional means of security other than having such a large pool that the chances are extreme is insufficient even if someone is more likely to guess a password.
Imagine if a government has a computer that is so powerful, it can run 200 quadrillion calculations per second agonist a seed which does not change. What sense then does having a static value act as the single value to determine ownership?
What if a country such as North Korea had even a downgraded version of this type of computer. What if China leveraged their Supercomputer to see if it was possible to hack double SHA256? Do you honestly believe that’s this isn’t hackable? I for one don’t. For me, simply having a seed to determine ownership is a problem.
Easy there tiger. I don’t see anything on that page that is definitive.
I mean they might have found another private key to an existing address, sure. But they might also just be publishing their private key, that they created, to the address they created.
If you can actually show me a collision - two different private keys to the same bitcoin address - then and only then will LBC be 100% confirmed.
Watch the video that Steve pointed out its a good one that specifically mentions how much computing power would be required (spoiler alert more than exists on earth) regardless quantum computers would pose a threat which is why the IOHK guys are working on quantum resistance.
A bitcoin private key is 256 bits, which is 2^256 different keys. The chances of finding one by guessing keys, even if there are billions of wallets, would never happen in the lifetime of the universe. Watch the video, it does a great job of explaining this.
One person trying to guess the lottery number is a lost cause. They could spend a lifetime and some trying to guess the lottery numbers if they had it every minute. Now when millions of people participate, someone seems to win.
I did a quick Google search and the chances of winning the lottery are 1 in only 45 million, that doesn’t even come close to 2^256, you can’t compare them. If 45 million people play the lottery then of course one person will win on average every time.
Evenb if someone guessed my bank account and ABA routing number, they would not be able to take my funds. With crypto it is very possible. I’ve had to give out my account number in instances and the recipients could not take my funds. It’s not the same with crypto. Don’t believe me, send me your seed.
I wouldn’t give you my seed, I’d give you my public address, that’s the account number equivalent. It also can’t be used to take your funds.
simply having a seed to determine ownership is a problem
What would you use otherwise? Everything is just information that could be brute-forced, the trick is to make it so unlikely that it never happens.
Awesome answer. I came to this space as a skeptic. I did my homework and realized a few things:
That your wallet is perhaps more secure than your account at any Bank, and much more secure than your credit/debit card.
Your name, DOB, SSN, and address is all you need to open a bank account online. Guess what? All of that is available online after the equifax hack.
Credit/debit card fraud is so easy, it’s laughable. Because only your credit card and your address is sufficient to charge your card.
In the course of the year you expose your cc number every time you buy something. Every time you do, you are increasing the chances of fraud.
Banks and cc companies have made it easy for consumers to resolve these issues through insurance protection and disputing fraudulent charges online.
I won’t lie, it is convenient, but NOT free. You pay for it through interest rates and fees.
What’s more important, banking separates you from your own assets. You have no control over your funds. You are at the mercy of banks every time you want to use your funds or transfer your funds. Banks always watch your moves, they call the shots on where and how you spend your money (think about it; you can’t buy crypto with cc but you can buy casino chips!).
They determine how long it takes for you to send your funds (ACH takes days and swift takes weeks). In short they own your access to funds and by extension they pretty much own you.
Now compare that with still early crypto technology. It takes minutes to hours to send money to anyone in the world.
Your funds are more secure than in any bank. That’s just facts, even the most powerful computer would need 10 thousand years or more of brute forcing to guess one wallet.
Your transaction fees are peanuts compared to banking fees.
You own your funds. You have complete control over them and no one can force you to surrender that control.
In the developed world that’s less of an issue because we have laws, checks and balances, etc but boy does it make a world of difference in developing world. Banks in the developing countries can take your money and freeze your accounts. They are less stable and as a result more risky. Governments can seize your assets especially if you are challenging them as a political candidate (Khodorkovsky in Russia is a great example).
In short you are pretty much fcuked the moment you grow big enough to threaten the totalitarian regimes.
From an economic perspective open crypto networks are cost disruptive… to a degree that no current economic structures can compete with them on cost and security—the two very important factors in banking.
My belief is that banking will be forced into using sovereign based crypto networks. There is just no other way for them.
Finally, open crypto networks empower individuals. By circumventing the censorship power of abusive governments they give individuals the power to make their own economic choices.
To earn their trust the governments will be forced to behave responsibly towards their citizens.
Like I said. I cannot t disclose. It is possible and this is absolute. So easy there tiger yourself.
Going to a location in person cannot be brute forced. You cannot brute force my front door lock. Forced entry means the person is physically there and easier to deal with wouldn’t you agree? What hacker would risk going into a persons house to hack something where they potentially could get shot? That being said, a hardware wallet that requires some form of physical connection and action to be used. Then even if someone had possession of it, they would be required to have the passcode plus physical component. What exactly it is, I don’t know. We do have this type of tech in the marketplace as well as in use in the govt sector.