Topic: Dollar-Backed Digital Currency Aims to Fix Bitcoin’s Volatility Dilemma - page 5. (Read 6809 times)
July 09, 2014, 05:23:17 PM
who the hell needs this...i can aswell just use the dollar. Brock Pierce involved doesnt make it more trustworthy either
July 09, 2014, 05:21:21 PM
Hell, no.
July 09, 2014, 05:02:35 PM
reminds me of DigiCash.
Similar to bitcoin in the 90's. Was centralized and went bankrupt.
Similar to bitcoin in the 90's. Was centralized and went bankrupt.
July 09, 2014, 04:05:34 PM
Had a feeling something like this will emerge eventually.
The question is, how much is it going to cost them to operate in the US and worldwide in term of licensing fee?
The question is, how much is it going to cost them to operate in the US and worldwide in term of licensing fee?
July 09, 2014, 04:02:53 PM
1. Realcoin is tied to the dollar, absolutely no profit can be made by investing in it.
Or indeed running it. How do I in the UK get in or out of this coin, presumably i have to pay fees. Like i would with my bank to hold $. I'm really not seeing the point of this, unless they make their fees less than the established money transfer businesses.
July 09, 2014, 03:46:15 PM
1. Realcoin is tied to the dollar, absolutely no profit can be made by investing in it.
2. It is 100% vulnerable because it can be attacked by the government anytime in which case it will drop to zero. This also means that it will be very tightly regulated.
3. Is it a good onramp and offramp? Maybe, but holding Realcoins is a no-go when there is a potential 0% profit vs 100% loss
2. It is 100% vulnerable because it can be attacked by the government anytime in which case it will drop to zero. This also means that it will be very tightly regulated.
3. Is it a good onramp and offramp? Maybe, but holding Realcoins is a no-go when there is a potential 0% profit vs 100% loss
July 09, 2014, 03:44:29 PM
You'd either have to manipulate the entire fiat currency..
Sort of like Wall Street did in 2008 when they systematically destroyed 40% of the wealth of the nation? Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. They can and will manipulate the dollar - they're doing it every day! In fact, that's the only reason that dead currency walking has any value at all! 
July 09, 2014, 03:35:12 PM
worst. idea. ever.
Yes, let's take out the principle of being "Trustless" Now we have to trust that somebody is actually backing it with dollars.. Because - you know, Trust - has proven so reliable with the national currencies. (Sarcastic).
And let's take out the part of crypto currencies that requires centralization - and tie it to the centralized Federal Reserve, because who needs all the "Peer to peer" prinicple about no centralization that can go corrupt.?
And let's forget about the principle of limited quantity that won't be hyper-inflated? Because we all have so much faith in the dollar not being over printed and tens off billions of new dollars just appearing each month. This is just the start. Why did people even bother shifting to a currencies with true principles if they are just going to reintroduce the same crap people don't want to use the dollar anymore?
Sounds like somebody is having a hard time shifting their paradigm.
You know what would be great? Let's get horses to pull our cars? YES! *sarcastic again*.
Yes, let's take out the principle of being "Trustless" Now we have to trust that somebody is actually backing it with dollars.. Because - you know, Trust - has proven so reliable with the national currencies. (Sarcastic).
And let's take out the part of crypto currencies that requires centralization - and tie it to the centralized Federal Reserve, because who needs all the "Peer to peer" prinicple about no centralization that can go corrupt.?
And let's forget about the principle of limited quantity that won't be hyper-inflated? Because we all have so much faith in the dollar not being over printed and tens off billions of new dollars just appearing each month. This is just the start. Why did people even bother shifting to a currencies with true principles if they are just going to reintroduce the same crap people don't want to use the dollar anymore?
Sounds like somebody is having a hard time shifting their paradigm.
You know what would be great? Let's get horses to pull our cars? YES! *sarcastic again*.
July 09, 2014, 03:30:01 PM
Agree with most of the sentiment expressed above. This is a totally misguided idea.
Cross-posting from: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7758201
Cross-posting from: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7758201
If someone is "backing" a crypto-currency with something else, then that someone is the centralized entity in control of the currency's value.
Why on earth would you want to take something that's designed to be centralized (as all "backing" arrangements must be by definition) and make it far more difficult to use in practice by layering a decentralized blockchain-transaction ledger into it? That makes no sense.
We *tolerate* blockchains, with their mining algs, confirmation times, PoW/PoS issues, forking and convergence, etc, because we *think* that full decentralization is a net societal benefit *despite* the rather significant underlying transaction complexity that blockchains entail.
If you're doing something that's centralized by design, just use a centralized database!!! It's MUCH simpler.
Alas, I think the people behind Realcoin must necessarily succumb to one or both of the following:
1) They're just trying to exploit the current misguided euphoria over "separating the currency from the network" and "blockchain technology" in general.
2) They genuinely do not understand the purpose of a blockchain.
Why on earth would you want to take something that's designed to be centralized (as all "backing" arrangements must be by definition) and make it far more difficult to use in practice by layering a decentralized blockchain-transaction ledger into it? That makes no sense.
We *tolerate* blockchains, with their mining algs, confirmation times, PoW/PoS issues, forking and convergence, etc, because we *think* that full decentralization is a net societal benefit *despite* the rather significant underlying transaction complexity that blockchains entail.
If you're doing something that's centralized by design, just use a centralized database!!! It's MUCH simpler.
Alas, I think the people behind Realcoin must necessarily succumb to one or both of the following:
1) They're just trying to exploit the current misguided euphoria over "separating the currency from the network" and "blockchain technology" in general.
2) They genuinely do not understand the purpose of a blockchain.
July 09, 2014, 03:26:51 PM
another attempt to make some quick bucks. sad, that it is lead by some frontman of The Bitcoin Foundation.
July 09, 2014, 03:15:09 PM
Any and all competition is good. The best will win.
This isn't really competition, though. Call me a cynic, but it doesn't even sound like a currency, as such. More like a centralised derivative. If they can add and remove coins at will, it means they're in control of it. They can set all the rules. That's not a cryptocurrency and we shouldn't refer to it as one. If the banks seem keen to get involved, then you know it's a system designed to benefit banks and not one we should give an ounce of trust to. I hope it crashes and burns before anyone falls for it.
July 09, 2014, 02:25:13 PM
Any and all competition is good. The best will win.
July 09, 2014, 02:24:16 PM
Looks like Andreas is done with the Bitcoin Foundation. Good. Screw the Bitcoin Foundation.
"I can no longer have even the smallest association with the Bitcoin Foundation, because of the complete lack of transparency" https://twitter.com/aantonop/status/486926129409052672
"I can no longer have even the smallest association with the Bitcoin Foundation, because of the complete lack of transparency" https://twitter.com/aantonop/status/486926129409052672
July 09, 2014, 12:32:44 PM
This currency will be pumped hard and dumped even harder by the real players. Everyone else who buys a piece of it will get played.
Remember, I warned you.
Remember, I warned you.
Exactly how do you pump or dump a coin pegged to a fiat currency? You'd either have to manipulate the entire fiat currency or break the tie between the two. Do you understand that?
July 09, 2014, 12:24:47 PM
This currency will be pumped hard and dumped even harder by the real players. Everyone else who buys a piece of it will get played.
Remember, I warned you.
Remember, I warned you.
July 09, 2014, 12:13:42 PM
I guess this explains the interest in RealCoinWallet.com 
July 09, 2014, 12:06:37 PM
Is Bitcoin volatile? It all depends on your frame of reference. One could just as easily define bitcoin as the reference standard and talk about how volatile fiat currencies are compared to nice, stable bitcoin.
If folks like me are correct, and government overspending eventually leads to a hyperinflationary episode for major fiat currencies, then tying a cryptocurrency to fiat "for stability" will turn out to have been rather counter-productive.
If folks like me are correct, and government overspending eventually leads to a hyperinflationary episode for major fiat currencies, then tying a cryptocurrency to fiat "for stability" will turn out to have been rather counter-productive.
July 09, 2014, 11:10:26 AM
Well.... thanks for the laugh. I think many people fail to understand why BTC and it's plethora of (functional) babies exist. People are trying to leave the fiat system behind, to actually back one with fiat (IMO) actually increases the DCs' volatility and opens new avenues of exploitation. For a currency to have value, it usually needs to be backed by finite resources and in it's self be finite.
To back with fiat currency means to value it at the entire fiats' value. Which is diluted everyday as the printing presses never stop running.
Unless they introduce some radical means of limiting this, this will be a flash in the pan and doomed to fail. The evry idea of backing with fiat means opening yourself to national regulation, banking regulation and you can be accused of subversion of bankjing systems , so much can go wrong.
To back with fiat currency means to value it at the entire fiats' value. Which is diluted everyday as the printing presses never stop running.
Unless they introduce some radical means of limiting this, this will be a flash in the pan and doomed to fail. The evry idea of backing with fiat means opening yourself to national regulation, banking regulation and you can be accused of subversion of bankjing systems , so much can go wrong.
July 09, 2014, 10:51:03 AM
Sounds interesting. The realcoins will be easy to use in practice (if used in a lot of places). But will the transaction times be around 10 minutes? A credit/debit card transaction only takes a few seconds.
July 09, 2014, 10:36:17 AM
So it's going to be PayPal on the blockchain?
Jump to: