Topic: VERITASEUM DISCUSSION THREAD - page 107. (Read 251011 times)

Our patent apps predate the Goldman apps, and the Goldman apps cover less area.

I guess i should've ended my post with /s 

His first sentence is implying something completely else

"Game over for veritaseum."

With statements like that no one can be a legend. He is not tweeting to be so abrupt. If he would say I wonder how VERI will combat this patent or How will handle potential infringement or How will this patent affect VERI then his statement would be completely un-FUD. As such is 100 % FUD.

First post for Jeremy, no FUD at all, he's a legend in the crypto field.

In crypto patent doesn't work how you can can make it effective in decentralized project. Only noobs will care about this kind of new nothing will happen to this project if you think this trick would be nice to buy cheap than it will be useless.

I am convinced you are talking nonsense throughout.

Panic. Panic. Panic. Lets flee this sinking ship. VERI is dead!!! All crypto currencies are dead. Get real. There are millions of patents and significant part of them are infringing each other. Besides very similar patent was already granted to Reggie and his team.

And if it comes to worse have you perhaps heard of possible settlements among affected parties? Reggie can (if needed) simply sign an agreement with them. Having a patent does not give you right to charge unreasonable amount of money from others. So stop spreading FUD because it is not needed.

P.S. If you are really set on spreading this then do not forget to reach out to many on bitcointalk forums for all existing cryptos and assets out there. And to make it sure include slack channels, youtube, twitter as well.

Game over for veritaseum. Goldman Sachs received a patent that will put them in a position of infrigement.

http://www.coindesk.com/goldman-sachs-granted-setlcoin-cryptocurrency-patent/

Cheers mate. Got dip at 0.011 and 0.012 and bought some. Whales are amazing beasts. Which ICO is on that they are selling right now en masse?

I think you have difficulty understanding the difference between value and turnover.

You can value something without having to trade it.

Anyone wanting to get into PPT theres a whale who keeps dropping in on Etherdelta all nite, letting them go for 0.01400 to 0.01350 at 10,000 PPT a time. They get ate up and he's gone for like 30 minutes or longer then pop's back in. 0.01400 = 2.80 each. I just loaded up my 2nd batch this week.

Clif High on PPT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsELYKj835Q

Cliff on PPT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7dXr_gaD8U

If ETH is used just as gas for Veritas, then sure its market cap can exceed ETH's.

Does Mercatox make the BTC:VERI exchange without going thru ETH?
That is, Mercatox does not accept your BTC, exchange BTC for ETH, then exchange ETH for VERI, and give you your VERI?
In other words, Mercatox (and the USD/VERI exchange that you set up) simply accept your BTC (or USD) and gives you VERI without selling BTC (or USD) for ETH and then selling ETH for VERI?
Can you see the process here?
One of them takes just 1 process in a single transaction.
The other takes 3 processes in a single transaction.
If the exchanges can do 1 process per transaction (no 2 internal processes hidden from view), then yes, Veritas' market cap can exceed eth's and go on to compete with bitcoin's.
I can see the possibility, but ethereum's smart contract network would (I speculate) need to incorporate other cryptocurrencies (not erc20 tokens, but standalone cryptocurrencies) into its smart contract structure.
This would require the need for 2 (or more) different blockchains to be able to communicate with each other (using a super protocol) for any transaction between the different cryptocurrencies.
The different blockchains need to be somewhat linked to maintain an overall trustless network, or else we would have to rely on 3rd-party trust.
And if so, is such smart contract structure/super protocol (to include other cryptocurrencies) being done now by ethereum developers?
If not, then I suspect Veritas' market cap (along with other ERC20 tokens' market caps) will remain capped by eth's market cap.

Edit:
At the moment, the price of Veritas is very dependent on eth because we only have ETH:VERI to refer to when trading it.
We don't have BTC:VERI without taking into consideration BTC:ETH and ETH:VERI first.
This may create the confusion to the intellectually uninitiated to interpret my comment to mean that Veritas' value is based on eth, and not on Veritas' business model, but that's not what I mean.
If we take out eth from the equation, how will the market determine the price of Veritas relative to other standalone cryptocurrencies like bitcoin, dash, etc?
If we don't have ETH to refer to, how do we determine BTC:VERI?
We don't.

And of course, Veritas' market cap can still compete with bitcoin's, but only after the flippening whereby ethereum's market cap far exceeds bitcoin's.
Then we can see Veritas' market cap exceed bitcoin's, but not ethereum's.
Because as I keep saying, a fish cannot grow larger than its aquarium.
And if you want to use highway + vehicles as example.... a vehicle cannot grow larger than the highway its on.
You can be smart alec and argue how the vehicle can be innovative/efficient/etc, but you are just missing the point entirely.

I wasn't talking about volume flowrate.
I think you have difficulty understanding.
Please re-read my comments over and over again until you understand, thanks.

Edit:
I feel sad I have all this silly token TRK, all 100 of them.
I want to sell all of them at 30 cents each for $30 total.
I want to know how many ETH can I get from the sale.

I didn't see this video on Veritaseum from Mike
He contacted Reggie

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVNwzuctlSA&spfreload=10

Also one of my all time favorites starts at like 20m last for 3 min the section Talks about Veri and Rockefeller wealth. It's almost like he's implying VERI holders

https://youtu.be/qezrH2c5N3c?t=20m26s

There's another Clif video where he and Bix and Jsnip discuss Veri that's my other one
https://youtu.be/xtkRDshL2zY?t=31m47s



Guys also don't be fooled into selling on EtherDelta. What i've seen is someone who has some Veri wants to buy cheap. They start walking the bids down, selling back and forth to themselves, loading with small amounts.  So if you want to pick off a few cheap coins from them.  I've seen bots do this on PPT as well. They try and hide, but you will see a bunch of 1.0 sells each getting cheaper and cheaper. They hope you see a lower price and panic sell, and boom there goes your fortune.

Lets say Ethereum blockchain contains a total (and current) supply of 10 ETH.

Somebody creates a smart contract that generates 100 tokens called 'trikToken' (TRK).

ETH trades at $1 per unit.
TRK trades at 30 cents per token.

ETH marketcap = $10
TRK marketcap = $30

TRK marketcap has exceeded ETH marketcap.

Market value is what 2 parties are willing to buy and sell something for. Just because VERI is priced in ETH does not mean that it always has to be purchased with ETH. In fact, Mercatox lets you buy with BTC. And I could offer you fiat for your VERI and I could even setup a USD/VERI exchange. After much consideration, I see no reason why the market cap of VERI couldn't exceed the market cap of ETH on a lasting basis.

Dorky.

Your analogies with cars, highways and oil are endearing but slightly off target I'm afraid.

Go back and think again - this time ditch all notions of volume flowrates and go with exchange rates instead. You might get somewhere then  

Do you realize your argument is 100% in support of my argument?
Ultimately the vehicles will evolve within this public infrastructure, and not beyond it.

Do you realize your argument is similar in another way that ERC20 tokens' total market cap is capped by eth's market cap?

Edit:
If any vehicle wants to evolve independent of any public infrastructure, it needs to be made independent of such infrastructure.

The value of vehicles utilizing public infrastructure is NOT tied to the extant of that infrastructure. It can increase as the infrastructure expands, and the key contributor of value of the vehicles is how they utilize the rules of the road. There may be weight limits for bridges, and height limits for tunnels.

The utility of a vehicle will have to match the infrastructure. Innovation of vehicles and those who implement them is where the value determination is found. Closing a road for repairs does not instantly devalue all vehicles. Conversely opening a new road does not instantly increase the value of all vehicles. So the marginal value in expansion of the infrastructure is to be found in how vehicles utilize the rules of the road, and the innovation in vehicle design. Building a new road that I never travel on does not bring me benefit, it is an option. Whereas passing a law that allows all vehicles to travel at 90 MPH could be of immediate benefit to me, anywhere. It is the laws that all players utilize that allows the creation of vehicles that benefit those who own them.

The ERC20 tokens do not have leverage. Neither does the ethereum blockchain employs any leverage. You referred to the credit market that employs leverage where it exceeds the money supply as an example to imply all the ERC20 tokens are similar, i.e. their aggregate market cap can exceed ethereum's market cap, thus making an unequal comparison. Yes, their value is derived from their own independent business model. Nevertheless, as long as they are accessible only directly through eth and eth alone, then their market cap remain limited by ethereum's market cap. No, I never said the ERC20 tokens' values are derived from ethereum's blockchain/network/market cap. I meant  that their market cap is capped by ethereum's market cap. If ethereum's market cap is $20bil and Veritas' (and other ERC20 tokens) market cap is $30bil and nobody can exchange Veritas into any other cryptocurrency without going directly through eth first, then tell me how will the market be able to satisfy all the demand for liquidity.

Edit:
I never said the ERC20 tokens need any leverage to exceed ethereum's market cap. I only said they need to be traded OFF/AWAY FROM the ethereum blockchain. Trading off/away from the ethereum blockchain doesn't necessarily mean they must employ leverage. The blockchain itself wasn't constructed to include leverage, in my opinion. You need to understand this, I brought up leverage not because I believe ERC20 tokens need/don't need leverage. I brought up leverage because you used the credit market as a flawed example of why ERC20 tokens' market cap can exceed eth's market cap. If you didn't use the credit market as a bad example, I would not mentioned leverage. Without leverage, there would be no credit market for you to refer to because such market would not exist.
I never said the ERC20 market cap transmits directly to the value of eth.

Edit 2:
If the ethereum network is a super highway and the ERC20 tokens are the vehicles, and the super highway is limited to just $20bil 20km in length while the vehicles keep growing in number to $30bil 30 million units, then we will either build a way much larger super highway or we will experience a massive traffic jam. Unless the vehicles can be transformed into airborne units that can fly off this 20km-limit super highway. It doesn't matter what car we drive, be it Rolls Royce or a used car, the current condition will result in traffic jam.

At the moment, if I am a car dealer, I need to sell my cars by driving it to the customers' locations and I need oil barrels as gas for the transportation. And I have to accept oil barrels from my customers as payment for my cars. If I want to get USD, I need to get the oil barrels first before I can get any USD. If I want to be paid USD directly for my cars, I cannot. I must accept oil barrels first and foremost before I can get any USD. I am growing bigger and bigger. Soon I will sell a billion cars and the last thing I want is to be paid trillions of barrels of oil. Why the fuck would I need so many barrels of oil for? I am not an oil refiner. I am just a car dealer. I only need enough oil barrels for gas/transportation to send my cars to the customers and that's it. I don't want the trouble of refining the trillions of oil barrels in order to get my USD. Why is this so simple to see and understand and yet some continue to fail to see this?

And the worst case is not that I am compelled to accept trillions of oil barrels as payment for my billions of cars. The worst case is that there is only 1 trillion of oil barrels available for everyone. After a record sales of a billion cars, I will grow even bigger to sell a trillion cars. How the fuck will my payment work out with just 1 trillion oil barrels available? I am already accepting a trillion oil barrels for a billion of my cars. Soon will I be forced to accept a trillion oil barrels for a trillion of my cars?

For the less intellectually initiated, my cars refer to the ERC20 tokens, oil barrels refer to eth, the number of oil barrels available refer to eth's market cap, the limited amount of oil barrels available refer to the limiting factor of eth market cap.