Topic: VERITASEUM DISCUSSION THREAD - page 108. (Read 251011 times)

A blockchain asset is no more "leverage free" than 19th century signal box. What do think exchange tokens are ?

Anyway, you're confusing the concept of "leverage" with that of exchange rates between independently traded assets. An Ethereum meta token (such as the ERC-20 token) does not derive its value from being backed by the Ether blockchain token. It derives it from an independent business model. The aggregate marketcap of all those tokens combined can therefore easily exceed that of Ether itself without there being any 'leverage' involved. Nor does their marketcap transmit directly back to the value of Ether (though it may do so indirectly).

Ethereum is needed for gas, and access to the distributed blockchain. The financial industry has spent a lot of money building private competing blockchains. The duplicated effort to maintain these separate platforms is an unneeded cost, and exposes the financial industry to a whole host of security implications through security through obscurity. Reggie's work to build Veritaseum will be built upon public access to the blockchain. This is a competitive edge. Just like the walled gardens of AOL, and other early online providers could not withstand the onslaught of the open internet.

Your Porsche Panamera, Mercedes-Benz S-Class, or BMW 7-Series all drive on the same road as a Kia or Fiat. The infrastructure is not a determination of the vehicle's value. The infrastructure guarantees only the rules of the road.

For public infrastructure and I am comparing Veritaseum to the National Highway system, these expected rules are what allow businesses to operate upon them, individual drivers to make their livelihood by commuting and, pleasure seekers to take weekend sight-seeing drives.

All of what we expect from the highway infrastructure, is what allows business and commerce to thrive. We are together building the distributed blockchain system. This endeavor began with bitcoin and continues through ethereum to new tokens like VERI.

Veritaseum is moving fast and the deals they make with legacy institutions strengthen both parties and allow them both to thrive in this emerging economy. The barriers to entry are remarkably low still and your future self will smile knowing you were a part of such a momentous moment in history!

By your warped and twisted logic, you fail to see the difference between blockchain network that is leverage-free from the conventional debt economy that is fully leveraged.
Like comparing apples to oranges.
Besides, the credit market that you refer to is the source of all economic problems.
Please give a better argument next time, thanks.

By that warped logic, the credit market of a nation could never exceed the base money supply.

In fact it exceeds it many times. (Because slightly more sophisticated concepts than goldfish and tanks apply).

We wait for the good news from all this. And everything gets good again. But is not there a best solution regarding this?

Won't Reggies plans to align with stock exchanges solve this problem? I mean, if we can get VERI with dollars and other fiat currencies, that would practically mean ETH is only needed for gas? Or am I seeing this the wrong way?

Thanks to all the replies to my previous comment.

Yes, I also believe Veritas' market cap can still exceed ethereum's market cap for only a brief while before adjusting lower below eth's as this is would be an "overbought" condition.
Currently we can get Veritas only thru eth alone.
Eth is currently used both as a form of "currency" and gas, and I see a conflict there.
If somehow eth is used purely just as gas, then Veritas' market cap can exceed eth's.
This we will need to see the Ethereum group of developers' roadmap ahead.
Vitalik Buterin himself said eth is not an investment (I would assume he meant not an investment as currency).
So maybe ethereum will eventually be just used for gas.
Nevertheless, I would take Vitalik's advice seriously (that eth is not a good investment), he seems to be a very honest man to me.

No not a pump and dump. Dev is updating the Code and also Masternodes are coming.
Actualy news is that Dev Team got a new IBM DEV.

Kool. I am glad that it worked out well for you. Am guessing pump and dump? I don't have nerves for this.

Thanks man.... I made nice Profits... Scorecoin raises over 200% last night

This is also correct and you are right. This condition can probably last couple of hours perhaps a day or two but not weeks, months or years.

I partially disagree. The VERI market cap could *temporarily* exceed ETH's market cap as you have individual holders of each deciding to exchange very small fractions of total supply. However, such a condition would probably not be long term sustainable as you would point out, eventually the supply of ETH would run out to buy VERI, but on a small individual trader basis I think that condition could exist for some time.

You are correct. If token is using ETH and only ETH for trading, paying ... then you are 100 % correct. If you can use token and pay with any other asset or digital currency than sky is the limit (read VERI fits in this group). I stated that the value of each "good" token should be above ETH price (per unit based on circulation supply) not that it can be. 

OFFICIAL Veritaseum T-Shirts NOW available!

From our SHOPIFY store.

https://www.getitfrommike.com/collections/veritaseum



Here's a YouTube video I made. Make a video and get a FREE T-shirt (while supplies last).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3P_-que3eY

Also...facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/VERITASEUM/

Spreading the WORD is very important!

I don't know about that? I have to think about this a little more, but on the face of it the two are separate after birth. Veri does utilize Eth's network to transact using gas, but beyond that they are not bound as a trading pair. Meaning you could literally dump all of BTC into VERI and exit out of it without ever using ETH via a third party exchange. I guess what I'm trying to say is ETH's market cap has nothing to do with VERI's and vice versa.  

edit: I missed the end of your statement the first time,  I see you addressed it in the end.  
"only if Veritas is traded off/away from ethereum's network"   I would think this is the way it was intended post any ICO, for these tokens to be sovereign/stand alone representations and traded as such.

This also brings up another point about how should large ICO's exit out of ETH. Seems like someone should create a smart contract that all ICO's should use, that acts as a fair and large balancing act. To allow ICO's to sell off orderly without disrupting the entire market and maximizing their return at the same time. Kind of like traffic rules and stop lights are to autos.

I have this doubt when thinking about those speculative remark made by some people that Veri will compete with bitcoin on market cap.

Here's why I believe that remark is based on ignorance.

Veritas is based on the ethereum blockchain and it is not going to shift to anywhere else in the foreseeable future.
As it is based on ethereum blockchain, Veritas' market cap can never be larger than ethereum's market cap.
In fact, all those ERC20 tokens' market cap combined cannot exceed ethereum's market cap. Why?
A fish (or fishes) cannot grow bigger than the aquarium it is living in. If Veritas' market cap is, say $40 bil, and ethereum's market cap is $38 bil, there won't be enough eth supply to exchange for it, and that supply is short by $2 bil.
Veritas' market cap can exceed ethereum's market cap (let alone compete directly with bitcoin's market cap) only if Veritas is traded off/away from ethereum's network.

ROTFL. Well this UET does not qualify as useful and is of no use as well ...

Well, maybe not *ALL*. Look at UET.  (http://uetoken.com)

Guys. All valid and useful tokens with real-life use should be worth at least the value of ETH based on the circulation number (so ETH *93mio/Token circulation number) because they add the extra value.

In Year Two, I'm thinking parity with bitcoin.