Which crypto currency becomes the future payment system

willrocks said:
Bitcoin is the most secure crypto by a long way. Other “fast” coins are simply sacrificing security for speed.

I could create a single server that would perform faster than any crypto. But it would require everyone using it to trust me 100%.
Click to expand...

I’m a novice in cryptos, but can’t you have 5 Super fast servers owned by different entities performing the same transaction at the same time?

For example, fb, visa, master, PayPal, eBay all running the same transactions and the transaction will complete based on the speed of the slowest server?
 
willrocks said:
Bitcoin is the most secure crypto by a long way. Other “fast” coins are simply sacrificing security for speed.

I could create a single server that would perform faster than any crypto. But it would require everyone using it to trust me 100%.
Click to expand...

How many confirmations are needed at an absolute minimum? For example as an analogy, as a deterrent to theft I could build a 12 foot high electric fence around my house, fill the back yard with a pack of forever hungry Dobermans and marry a 125kg gutter tramp who spends the day waddling around the proximity of the front gate in her $9 sun dress munching on a 6 pack of Dunkin' Delicious donuts while I'm at golf, but it would come at a cost - a cost that may not be necessary nor willing to bear for my security.
 
mmm....shiney! said:
How many confirmations are needed at an absolute minimum? For example as an analogy, as a deterrent to theft I could build a 12 foot high electric fence around my house, fill the back yard with a pack of forever hungry Dobermans and marry a 125kg gutter tramp who spends the day waddling around the proximity of the front gate in her $9 sun dress munching on a 6 pack of Dunkin' Delicious donuts while I'm at golf, but it would come at a cost - a cost that may not be necessary nor willing to bear for my security.
Click to expand...

BTC is normally 6 confirmations. The howmanyconfs.com site compares how many confirmations alt coins require to equal the security of Bitcoin’s 6 confirmations.
 
Zuck has opened the pandora box, waking up authorities around the world to the existence of cryptos and now everyone will be rushing to push out regulations for cryptos. In the meantime, Libra will be getting free publicity.
 
As I'm not a FB user, I only read today that whilst FB have been developing the concept for their own crypto for over a year now, that they banned adds for crypto's on FB some 12 months back.....if so, sneaky sh#ts.
 
The future payments System WILL BE GOLD, just ask Russia & China who have most of the REAL MONEY.
The Western CABAL of Central Banksters are pushing for a Crypto-currency to continue their reign of usurpation against the rest of the world.
p.s. You can thank me later, just give me a LIKE now. LOLOL.
 
JOHNLGALT said:
The future payments System WILL BE GOLD, just ask Russia & China who have most of the REAL MONEY.
The Western CABAL of Central Banksters are pushing for a Crypto-currency to continue their reign of usurpation against the rest of the world.
p.s. You can thank me later, just give me a LIKE now. LOLOL.
Click to expand...

Kevin likes it....
upload_2019-6-20_16-25-52.jpeg
 
Oddjob said:
Kevin likes it....
View attachment 24077
Click to expand...

How can you pick Kevin Rudd as an EX-SPURT on anything but eating from his ear? LOLOL.
p.s. if you are old enough @Oddjob we can recall some good $#!T. CHEERS, John. (not my real name).
p.p.s. got to go now & TRIZE them over on SilverDoctors (can't use the (T) word or it will get picked up by the Algo's).
 
Last edited:
willrocks said:
BTC is normally 6 confirmations. The howmanyconfs.com site compares how many confirmations alt coins require to equal the security of Bitcoin’s 6 confirmations.
Click to expand...
.

You didn’t answer my question. ;)

I was asking for an absolute minimum, or to put it another way, what is the minimum standard acceptable for most transactions?
 
willrocks said:
It depends on the amount/value being transferred.
Click to expand...

So as far as the vast majority of daily transactions go (and I'm talking from your average consumer level where most eftpos transactions are less than $100 for example), BTC's security measures are excessive and can lead to inefficiencies?
 
mmm....shiney! said:
So as far as the vast majority of daily transactions go (and I'm talking from your average consumer level where most eftpos transactions are less than $100 for example), BTC's security measures are excessive and can lead to inefficiencies?
Click to expand...

Ok to put your scenario into perspective. A one hour attack on Bitcoin (typically 6 confirmations) would cost approx $872,340 USD (Assuming you could buy enough hashing power, which you couldn't for Bitcoin).

However no attacker would target your single $100 transaction. They would find a way to exploit some service where the payout would be much higher than the cost of the attack. For example they may find exchange(s) where they could spend X in Bitcoin then quickly transfer it to some other value and withdraw it (i.e. another crypto). They would then reverse their Bitcoin deposits, leaving the exchange out of pocket for whatever crypto was withdrawn.

If the cost of the 51% is low, it makes your investment in the crypto susceptible to drops in value. Companies won't want to deal in a cryptocurrency where transactions can be reversed. Especially exchanges.

https://www.crypto51.app/
 
Ploughing through Radix’s tech stuff, not my forte.

It’s not a block chain DLT like BTC which I think is the vertical style of system they refer to in their literature, it’s not a Tangle like IOTA which has problems with consensus (as information is not shared among all nodes?), it’s a horizontal system called Tempo that is massively sharded, so it can be built upon without requiring all the previous chains of information ie blocks making it more “lightweight".

Claims made by the Radix devs:

1. Decentralised. Barriers to entry are low and fair as standard equipment is enough to run a node, min requirements are 2 CPU cores, 8 GB of memory and a 256 GB disk. Low powered devices can still participate in supporting the network and get rewarded.

2. Speed, scalability: Permissionless system that runs efficiently because it doesn’t apply consensus to every event, only events that conflict. Logical clocks keep a partial ordering of events in a node, new valid events trigger the node into checking its own database, incrementing its logical clock and then sharing this information “gossiping’ within the other nodes. This allows it to scale massively without sacrificing security as the consensus mechanism only gets triggered if any node disagrees. Information

There’s other stuff but to me it’s a bit all over the place because I’m not into this stuff, state transition information (whatever that is) is limited to those shards that require it at the time, Byzantine Fault Tolerance and Detection and blah blah blah.

The devs state:

the Radix platform is what Bitcoin and Ethereum should have been; fast, scalable, secure, wholly decentralised and powered by a cryptocurrency which is usable and relatively stable.
Click to expand...

That’s a big claim. It’s why it’s my number one crypto I’ll be keeping an eye on for release.
 
mmm....shiney! said:
Ploughing through Radix’s tech stuff, not my forte.

It’s not a block chain DLT like BTC which I think is the vertical style of system they refer to in their literature, it’s not a Tangle like IOTA which has problems with consensus (as information is not shared among all nodes?), it’s a horizontal system called Tempo that is massively sharded, so it can be built upon without requiring all the previous chains of information ie blocks making it more “lightweight".

Claims made by the Radix devs:

1. Decentralised. Barriers to entry are low and fair as standard equipment is enough to run a node, min requirements are 2 CPU cores, 8 GB of memory and a 256 GB disk. Low powered devices can still participate in supporting the network and get rewarded.

2. Speed, scalability: Permissionless system that runs efficiently because it doesn’t apply consensus to every event, only events that conflict. Logical clocks keep a partial ordering of events in a node, new valid events trigger the node into checking its own database, incrementing its logical clock and then sharing this information “gossiping’ within the other nodes. This allows it to scale massively without sacrificing security as the consensus mechanism only gets triggered if any node disagrees. Information

There’s other stuff but to me it’s a bit all over the place because I’m not into this stuff, state transition information (whatever that is) is limited to those shards that require it at the time, Byzantine Fault Tolerance and Detection and blah blah blah.

The devs state:



That’s a big claim. It’s why it’s my number one crypto I’ll be keeping an eye on for release.
Click to expand...

Debunking Radix: https://www.cmm.wiki/video/qXOFT2QI0ac/crypto-tips.html

Radix's creator, Dan Hughes, created Radix single-handily over a 6 year period. Unlike the creators of Bitcoin, Dan doesn't seem to have a solid academic background with cryptography. Sharding is a layer 1 solution that favors scaling over security & decentralisation. Bitcoin is still the most secure cryptocurrency, and probably will be for a very long time. Bitcoin will scale with layer 2 solutions (e.g. lightning network, liquidity network ... etc). When a user-friendly bitcoin layer 2 network is released it will make all the "scalable" alt-coins redundant very quickly.

Ligtning Netork's scalability claim is(https://lightning.network/):
Scalability. Capable of millions to billions of transactions per second across the network. Capacity blows away legacy payment rails by many orders of magnitude. Attaching payment per action/click is now possible without custodians.
Click to expand...
... or essentially no upper limit on transactions per second.

Current layer 2 solutions: https://github.com/Awesome-Layer-2/awesome-layer-2
 
willrocks said:
Most altcoins focus on solving scalability, those coins will no longer have a use-case.
Click to expand...

That’s not what the author said, but anyway I agree with your clarification.

Interestingly I’ve read that the Lightning Network may lead to censorship issues which raises questions around centralisation. But anyway...

It’s like a game of cryptographic tennis out there between the competing interests eg BTC v BCH, IOTA v blockchain, Radix DLT v blockchain and tangle all making claims, disputing the claims of others and counter-claiming. Like a pack of political parties.

Best advice I can give to anyone wanting to invest in this nightmare is not to invest more than you’re willing to lose.
 
mmm....shiney! said:
Interestingly I’ve read that the Lightning Network may lead to censorship issues which raises questions around centralisation. But anyway...
Click to expand...

I've read Lightning Network *could* lead to some centralisation, but I've never heard of censorship being an issue. Lightning nodes are non-custodial (meaning they can't take your funds), the payment is either routed to the destination, or it isn't. There will usually be multiple paths between two nodes, so if a node refuses to let a payment go through the payment will just go via a different path.
 
willrocks said:
I've read Lightning Network *could* lead to some centralisation, but I've never heard of censorship being an issue. Lightning nodes are non-custodial (meaning they can't take your funds), the payment is either routed to the destination, or it isn't. There will usually be multiple paths between two nodes, so if a node refuses to let a payment go through the payment will just go via a different path.
Click to expand...
Hi mate, how are you?! It's been a while!
Glad to see you're still on the ball :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top