Topic: ETH = Game Over - page 9. (Read 40467 times)

I'm interested in crypto essentially only for one thing: anarchism: to take back the power that states have over people, and give it back to the people, as a function of their wealth, and not as a function of their political influence.  Smart contracts are very important in this endeavour, but after the DAO debacle, I understood the fundamental failure of ethereum: Turing completeness.  
The fact that ETH is even not immutable any more is even worse: how are you ever going to be able to implement distributed warfare through smart contracts if the chain is not immutable any more ?  This is probably just a financial toy in the hands of financial gamblers, and it is not a genuine crypto weapon.  It has little interest, apart to make money from ripping off others in a zero sum game, but it will not be disruptive, like the French revolution was.  Not very interesting.  I don't think distributed warfare is possible on ETH.  Think of the "London has fallen" movie, but organized with a smart contract, and not a single point of failure of the wealthy leader.  I think ETH doesn't have the muscle to handle this kind of stuff.  But I'm dreaming here.  This is still far away.

The above serves as more spinning of mining1.

Can you snap out of your attempt to suggest that all cryptos are equivalent and that ETH is the best of the alt cryptos?  Probably not.  You seem to be so intent on spinning the supposed success model of ETH that you are blinded by the dynamics of the big money involvement in it, to the extent that it exists and is hyped (used as marketing) by the ETH community.

Surely there is some decent developments going on in ETH, but in the end most of what is going on ETH can be absorbed into the backbone of BTC as a sidechain or some other variations, such as rootstock.  The extent to which big money is investing in ETH is likely overhyped, and likely they are going to have a lot of skepticism regarding how much to continue to invest into it when it is remains mutable, contradictory and more manipulated by some rather than others. 

Good luck with all that centralization and attempts at spinning it as being somehow equal to BTC or some kind of meaningful competitor to BTC.

You would be more believable mining1, if you did not appear to be spinning so much.. .and talking in absolutes. 

You seem to be contradicting yourself on an ongoing basis in your attempts to spin ETH as preferable to to ETC and to denigrate the substance behind the onboarding of folks into ETC. 

Of course, there are pumps, dumps and manipulations on both ends, which is not difficult to achieve in either market with such low marketcaps and also even lower liquidation and abilities to manipulate the price at various liquidation price setting points.

This whole dynamic of the ETH decision to hardfork, and ETC community's decision to take advantage of such stupid-ass decision of ETH to have thought that they could just quickly hardfork without really thinking through their rashness, will take a while to iron out.  Very quite likely that both ETH and ETC are going to be pumped and dumped for a couple more years, at least in order to attempt to figure out if their is some kind of resolution.. unless there is some kind of compromise that can be reached... such as ETH reversing the hardfork, which seems to have its own complications, at this point.

It is as much of a toy in hands of corporations as every other open source decentralized cryptocurrency. Difference is, it is the most developed and mature blockchain for smart contracts. If you think having giants interested in your decentralized blockchain is a bad thing, then i'm glad people like you exist. Weak minded people have to lose for others benefit, not everyone can be a victor.

For sure then, ethereum is not going to be a tool that helps putting an end to bank, corporate and state power, but will rather be a toy in their hands.  As such, as crypto, it failed, and became yet another financial toy in the hands of the powerful.  I suppose they must like the "stopping the unstoppable" aspect of ETH.  In other words, ETH is corporate crypto.  A kind of oxymoron.
Now, it is waiting for an exploit in such a big corporate ethereum application :-)

I dont think they care too much about what happens to ETC. It's obvious some people especially whales are manipulating it to gain some profit, a fact proven by the numerous pumps ETC had, while, in the same time, it was much below expanse or any ETH clone there is as far as development goes or smart contract capability, since there are no developers, no leadership, nothing. All they chew and repeat is "immutability" while supporting exploiters/thefts. I don't know if ETH foundation will sell nor i do care, it's theirs to do what they please with  / about it.

The Ethereum Foundation and the Vitalk has a lot of ETC. There is no news that they sell the ETC. Do you think they are confident in ETC?

You are coming off as a kind of ETH pumper, and you are the one who seems to be dreaming when you seem to be confusing various pumping attempts with some kind of utility that ETH may be able to provide that bitcoin cannot provide (or at least may be riding on the tails of the security of bitcoin).

I was asserting my assessment of the situation, and yeah, likely I am not following all the ETH pumping and endorsements as closely as you seem to be. 

Regarding my supposed over investment in ETC.  I did buy some ETC soon after the fork, and I never did buy any ETH - yet nonetheless, the quantity of my ETC investment remains at less than 1% of my whole crypto holdings and the other 99% is in BTC or otherwise related to BTC.  I doubt that my ETC investment has much of any influence on my comments about ETH, but you are correct with any implication that I am invested in BTC and not in ETH.  

Based on my earlier comment, did you want to suggest that I may be overinvested in BTC?  Seems like a whole other irrelevant claim, but you can make it if you like.  On the other hand, when folks begin to go into full scale ETH advocacy, I begin to believe that they likely have a considerable investment into ETH and are likely drinking quite a bit of the ETH pump koolaide... nonetheless, hopefully in the coming years, we will see how some of this is going to play out, and in a few years, we will likely see some changes in the market caps of these various competing and complementary crypto technologies.

You must be either stupid or too invested into failed ETC. There are literally hundreds of projects being build on ethereum, and alot of positive news lately. Go read reddit. Even the giant thomson reuters supports ethereum for a while now.
It's really hard to argue what i just said when giants like apple (asked to remove ETC from jaxx), microsoft, thomson reuters, santander bank as sponsor, openly support ethereum. When thomson reuters put a huge billboard panel on their building you know something is really moving. Some of the shitloads of positive news.
https://twitter.com/CryptoCompare/status/773526471293960192
https://twitter.com/GeorgeAHallam/status/774330620973617154
https://news.bitcoin.com/visa-test-blockchain-payments/
http://themerkle.com/the-pitts-family-circus-is-the-first-ever-film-crowdfunded-with-ethereum/
These are just examples, there are many more. So yeah, keep dreaming.

I doubt that I understand the dynamics well enough to speculate about how able each chain is to become unique from the other.  I do consider both coins to be kind of shit coins; however, ETC seems to be more valuable in terms of attempting to get away from centralized and manipulated systems, so in the longer term, I see the prices of the two approaching parity (even if they attempt to distinguish from each other), and maybe even ETC could surpass the value of ETH - yet I don't have any real understanding whether ETC would go up before ETH comes down or if both of them go down... yet I still have the sense that they are going to always remain somewhat connected because they are almost the same thing with ETC merely attempting to remain a decentralized version of ETH.

Those two coins could coexist for long time to come. If the ETC gets good developers and big company support, it could also survive.

That is an interesting idea thinking of ETC of diluting ETH and making the price go down. There is some truth in that comment only because ETH can be split and the user can receive an equivalent amount of ETC. But what would happen if they fix it and let the two chains diverge. Would you still view ETC as a dilution of ETH?

You are right my friend. Both coons are now stable in the market and I think they both have a future and its not yet game over for ETH.

Those dumping theories are retarded, especially if you are assuming that the "hacker"may want to make money.  Accordingly, if there are any dumps those would likely be incremental in order to preserve the value somewhat, while dumping.

The interesting thing is that both chains are being able to remain with some stability in the market.
But I'm not sure if both can succeed in the long term.

The hacker does not like the Etheruem concept any way. So he will dump the ETC in many ways to make good profit out of it without problem.

The ETC is existing at the moment. But it might not exist after the DAO hacker start dumping the ETC in the nar future.

Yeah, let's talk about ETH as if it were living in a vacuum, and this little diluting coin, called ETC, did not exist.   

I guess all eyes are on when the devs start jumping ship.

Your life is pretty good if you use the ETH as one place to invest (trading), and I think that ETH will not be game over. Because the ETH has its own uniqueness and they also have a foundation strong enough to survive in the market altcoin. So if you still doubt, then you can use the ETH for short term