Most of my BTC I've been holding for a while. My actively traded coin was sold at prces about $10k higher than its current. I have none left that I'm willing to part with, and in fact, I've been buying more during the dips.
The thing is, the result of B might just be the littered corpses of failed blockchain projects. Banks can't just magic up a network of users big enough to hit critical mass. That's where BTC has a huge leg up. Not only is the network larger and more secure than anything the banks can come up with, networks tend towards natural monopolies and the advantage for the first big player is huge.
If it were truly easy to understand, you could explain it to a typical software developer and expect them to be able to program a decent blockchain protocol.
It's only easy to understand the way a car is easy to understand: by ignoring a bunch of shit you'll never understand.
Nothing forces you to use LN, so I don't understand your argument. Pay the higher fees and send BTC on-chain; that's your prerogative. You'll still benefit from the LN if the majority of other people's transactions happen off-chain.
You seem to have gotten very worked up at someone's response to an XKCD comic. Settle down, take a deep breath, and get some perspective. No scientists were harmed in the posting of that comment. No one's data was fondled in an untoward manner.
If you want to be alarmed at science, go ahead. But to get alarmed at THAT XKCD graph is a matter of faith in the impending doom of climate change, more than the science.
What is demonstrated there is that the vast majority of climate change over the last 20k years happened before the industrial revolution, and that modern measuring tools are more sensitive to short term fluctuation.
And in the United States, police can execute you without a trial just for being black. For perspective, there are more black men executed by American police than there are atheists being executed in Muslim countries.
The whole point of incorporation is to make it so the individuals in the corporation are not liable for this sort of thing. As long as the blame can be spread, no one is to blame.
I think it's actually 12, but the really important thing is that Lightning Network (built on top of BTC) can actually perform hundreds of thousands of off-chain transactions for each of those limited on-chain transactions.
The important thing to watch is where the fees get during the next bubble. Lightning and Segwit should both have a significant impact by then.
Dollar cost averaging is looking pretty attractive now. If it follows historical patterns, it should be entering a long, (relatively) stable lull before the next bubble, which should hit $25k minimum, and could get as high as $90k.
I see smart watches used for exactly two things: submission to digital exercise overlords and messaging addiction. I don't think most healthy people are interested in either of those "features".
Nope. Last Unreal game I played and enjoyed was Rainbow Six in 2002.
In fact, I just looked through the whole list of Unreal games listed on Wikipedia, and I've come to the conclusion I shouldn't ever bother with them. It's primariy FPS's which I don't play, and games made by devs who are more concerned with graphics than gameplay.
Honestly, I'd be happy if I could A) filter out apps that have in-app purchases and B) see all games categorized into tight groups where it's obvious your game is "Tower Defense" regardless of what skin you put on it. "Strategy" is a useless category. "Infinite Runner" is a good category.
Depends on the type of software and the severity of the bug. As a rule of thumb, if you're not introducing any new bugs and you fix all the bugs reported in the first year, you're probably pretty good.
"are you supposed to sell an app once and support it on all new devices for the next 20 years?"
If you fixed the bugs as mentioned above, there are almost no support costs. If you develop against non-deprecated APIs (if you're not, you're a crap developer) then there's literally nothing you have to do to support new devices. You don't stop supporting the platform, the platform stops supporting you.
"seems like there needs to be a way to either charge for updates at some point"
No. No there doesn't. If your app is desirable, you have new customers coming in to cover costs. If your app is no longer selling, start working on your next app. If you are concerned about supporting two apps, open source the old one.
"make it so that someone can't roll all their purchased apps onto their new device indefinitely"
No. No there doesn't. That's a pure money grab. You didn't do anything to earn that revenue. I purchased a license to use your software. I did not rent it.
"It doesn't matter how much you charge, over a long enough timespan the cost of maintenance will eventually be more than the initial price."
Then stop supporting it and move on to your next app. This is about being a professional, not about tying you up it the basement to work as a slave. If your app isn't earning you money, make a new app. If none of your apps are earning you money, stop making apps. If the worst 99% of the app developers went out of business tomorrow, the app ecosystem would be a much better place.
"how many bugs do you think the purchase price should cover"
As many as are introduced.
"for how long?"
Depends. If you fix all bugs that appear in the first year, you're probably good, but it really depends on the type of software and the severity of the bug.
"cover just the current product or does it include any new bugs introduced"
If you keep adding bugs, you should keep fixing bugs. Again, this period depends on the scope o& what's being added and how it impacts existing features (probably not a big deal if a new bug only hits a new feature, for example).
"Would you be upset if I introduced a new version of the product that included new features but you had to purchase the new version?"
No. Just find a good way to present the differences in your app materials, so I can make an informed decision. It's better to not introduce a feature I don't want or that has bugs in it than it is to not introduce a feature.
"would you prefer to get the product free but pay a subscription in order to access the new features as they're released?"
No. I would be very unlikely to pay for your software if that was the model. It's nice to have a demo, though. Crippleware is a pretty good model so you don't have two versions of the app on the store, but has to be done with care.
"maybe you could ask your mom for some extra pocket money to cover the cost of the subscription so you wouldn't even be out of pocket."
This has to do with value. I regulary drop $15+ on apps. Recently I downloaded a free app that had integrated donations between $1 and $32. I payed $16.
Stop making excuses. Act like a professional and stop whining that you can't figure out how to run a business.
Slashdot Mirror
In either case, the problem is hidden costs. Just be up front and I will pay you gobs of money for decent apps.
No, that's the demo app model which was used widely on the Play Store before in-app purchases became a thing.
If you are holding bag number 25, and the first 24 bags were sold at massive profit, then I'll be a bag holder any day.
Most of my BTC I've been holding for a while. My actively traded coin was sold at prces about $10k higher than its current. I have none left that I'm willing to part with, and in fact, I've been buying more during the dips.
The thing is, the result of B might just be the littered corpses of failed blockchain projects. Banks can't just magic up a network of users big enough to hit critical mass. That's where BTC has a huge leg up. Not only is the network larger and more secure than anything the banks can come up with, networks tend towards natural monopolies and the advantage for the first big player is huge.
Because proposing linear solutions to geometric scaling problems is dumb.
If it were truly easy to understand, you could explain it to a typical software developer and expect them to be able to program a decent blockchain protocol.
It's only easy to understand the way a car is easy to understand: by ignoring a bunch of shit you'll never understand.
"Why can't the size of the pages in the ledger be increased?"
They can be, but anyone with half a brain realizes that providing linear solutions to geometric scaling problems is dumb.
Nothing forces you to use LN, so I don't understand your argument. Pay the higher fees and send BTC on-chain; that's your prerogative. You'll still benefit from the LN if the majority of other people's transactions happen off-chain.
BTC is up over 50% for the year. Please explain how it's a declining asset.
You seem to have gotten very worked up at someone's response to an XKCD comic. Settle down, take a deep breath, and get some perspective. No scientists were harmed in the posting of that comment. No one's data was fondled in an untoward manner.
If you want to be alarmed at science, go ahead. But to get alarmed at THAT XKCD graph is a matter of faith in the impending doom of climate change, more than the science.
What is demonstrated there is that the vast majority of climate change over the last 20k years happened before the industrial revolution, and that modern measuring tools are more sensitive to short term fluctuation.
Neither of those things are alarming.
The whole point of the article is we found a new way to make magnesite and increase yield. What relevance is the current yield?
And in the United States, police can execute you without a trial just for being black. For perspective, there are more black men executed by American police than there are atheists being executed in Muslim countries.
The whole point of incorporation is to make it so the individuals in the corporation are not liable for this sort of thing. As long as the blame can be spread, no one is to blame.
Use dollar cost averaging. Whatever you are comfortable buying on a weekly or monthly basis; the important thing is to buy on a regular schedule.
It's unlikely to rebound anytime soon, if you go by historical bubbles. Now is the time for long term investment.
I think it's actually 12, but the really important thing is that Lightning Network (built on top of BTC) can actually perform hundreds of thousands of off-chain transactions for each of those limited on-chain transactions.
The important thing to watch is where the fees get during the next bubble. Lightning and Segwit should both have a significant impact by then.
Dollar cost averaging is looking pretty attractive now. If it follows historical patterns, it should be entering a long, (relatively) stable lull before the next bubble, which should hit $25k minimum, and could get as high as $90k.
So, it's for addicts? Maybe we should start regulating smart watches if they only serve to feed addiction.
I see smart watches used for exactly two things: submission to digital exercise overlords and messaging addiction. I don't think most healthy people are interested in either of those "features".
I'm not sure you understand how fire works.
Nope. Last Unreal game I played and enjoyed was Rainbow Six in 2002.
In fact, I just looked through the whole list of Unreal games listed on Wikipedia, and I've come to the conclusion I shouldn't ever bother with them. It's primariy FPS's which I don't play, and games made by devs who are more concerned with graphics than gameplay.
Honestly, I'd be happy if I could A) filter out apps that have in-app purchases and B) see all games categorized into tight groups where it's obvious your game is "Tower Defense" regardless of what skin you put on it. "Strategy" is a useless category. "Infinite Runner" is a good category.
"How many years of bugfixes?"
Depends on the type of software and the severity of the bug. As a rule of thumb, if you're not introducing any new bugs and you fix all the bugs reported in the first year, you're probably pretty good.
"are you supposed to sell an app once and support it on all new devices for the next 20 years?"
If you fixed the bugs as mentioned above, there are almost no support costs. If you develop against non-deprecated APIs (if you're not, you're a crap developer) then there's literally nothing you have to do to support new devices. You don't stop supporting the platform, the platform stops supporting you.
"seems like there needs to be a way to either charge for updates at some point"
No. No there doesn't. If your app is desirable, you have new customers coming in to cover costs. If your app is no longer selling, start working on your next app. If you are concerned about supporting two apps, open source the old one.
"make it so that someone can't roll all their purchased apps onto their new device indefinitely"
No. No there doesn't. That's a pure money grab. You didn't do anything to earn that revenue. I purchased a license to use your software. I did not rent it.
"It doesn't matter how much you charge, over a long enough timespan the cost of maintenance will eventually be more than the initial price."
Then stop supporting it and move on to your next app. This is about being a professional, not about tying you up it the basement to work as a slave. If your app isn't earning you money, make a new app. If none of your apps are earning you money, stop making apps. If the worst 99% of the app developers went out of business tomorrow, the app ecosystem would be a much better place.
"how many bugs do you think the purchase price should cover"
As many as are introduced.
"for how long?"
Depends. If you fix all bugs that appear in the first year, you're probably good, but it really depends on the type of software and the severity of the bug.
"cover just the current product or does it include any new bugs introduced"
If you keep adding bugs, you should keep fixing bugs. Again, this period depends on the scope o& what's being added and how it impacts existing features (probably not a big deal if a new bug only hits a new feature, for example).
"Would you be upset if I introduced a new version of the product that included new features but you had to purchase the new version?"
No. Just find a good way to present the differences in your app materials, so I can make an informed decision. It's better to not introduce a feature I don't want or that has bugs in it than it is to not introduce a feature.
"would you prefer to get the product free but pay a subscription in order to access the new features as they're released?"
No. I would be very unlikely to pay for your software if that was the model. It's nice to have a demo, though. Crippleware is a pretty good model so you don't have two versions of the app on the store, but has to be done with care.
"maybe you could ask your mom for some extra pocket money to cover the cost of the subscription so you wouldn't even be out of pocket."
This has to do with value. I regulary drop $15+ on apps. Recently I downloaded a free app that had integrated donations between $1 and $32. I payed $16.
Stop making excuses. Act like a professional and stop whining that you can't figure out how to run a business.