checking in
havent sold anything
increased my position size by 300% since this time last year
12 Likes
Why not have a process to automatically move people to the newest pool? there also needs to be a mechanism to count the coins which acts as an audit to make sure everyone knows the circulating supply is valid. The more times the audit proves the circulating supply, the more risk is reduced as people get comfortable that no one is counterfeiting. It also reduces risk for people who don’t understand the risks of doing nothing, which if there was counterfeiting would hurt the people who are last in line (turn style).
I think it’s critical to make zcash trustworthy, which to me means people don’t have to move their coins to the newest pool it’s just always up to date. And if someone put there coins into a safe/cold storage it would also automatically be seamless for the user.
I think auto updating and being able to take unilateral control of everyone’s money was left disabled for safety reasons and certainly if you’d want it to pass through the counting mechanism you mentioned.
(I would argue the pool thats always up to date is the one that doesn’t get updated)
If we get a healthy rout or a bear market, there are going to be some very good buys for zcash. Dreaming of being able to rebuy $40-60
Because nobody has the private keys except the owner of the address, and you can’t send anything without the pub & priv keys.
I have a feeling things going crazy for couple months before seeing 2018-like crash.
Only a couple of months? Probably longer. Maybe a year or two. Real estate has just been heating up for a few months now. Crash would be more like 2008 than 2018 since that was what precipitated it then as well. Try to sell crypto at the top and then buy real estate after the crash and rebuy your crypto of course.
I dont think price will ever go that low again.
5 Likes
do the people that post in this thread swap to usdt or similar then back?
if you do, what are your recommendations?
Maybe a dumb question. But if the private keys are in essence the coins. It seems like we should be able to store the coins and they will work in the future in the same way as putting paper money in a safe. In not, can you explain in simple terms why I can’t just put zcash in cold storage and forget about it (and know I don’t have to do anything). Then in 20 years be able to use it.
2 Likes
Mate I 1000000% agree with this , it is what bitcoin was founded on.
However due to a print free zec but we have to have turnstyling. I am not happy with it, but okay.
This thread scares me to death tho. - What do we do about legacy value pools?
so while zcash was meant to follow BTC. it has changed its mind. - i see shawn composing a post so he might correct me. however that thread is badnews.
The issue that autotuna is referring to is the theoretical idea that the current encryption used in Bitcoin for public and private keys can be broken by quantum computing. Thereby if this happens in 20 years then all coins using the same scheme will also be broken (ie T-addresses in Zcash). I personally don’t think this is a near term issue, but it’s not “impossible”. This is a doomsday scenario because if that crypto is broken then the entire internet as we know it is also completely broken. Https won’t mean anything.
So that leaves the question of Zcashs shielded pools and shielded transactions. If the network decided in the future that an old pool was obsolete (like Sprout pool is now) and the Nodes would no longer process transactions from that old pool, then if you had stored in that pool for 20 years then your coins would become inaccessible.
True, but keep in mind when you create a new address, be it a T or Z (sprout or sapling) those coins are in that pool (Transparent, or Shielded) forever unless the owner of the address chooses to move them to a new address.
The only real risks to coins being inaccessible in the future with Zcash are 1. A breakthrough in quantum computing. 2. A network upgrade that depreciates an old pool.
this is my problem. this will happen before quantum. forcing people to move funds or lose them is bad imho. especially in a tech project. it just about works with fiat.
1 Like
The fact that the current transparent pool will be obsoleted regardless because it cannot scale is the point I was getting at. (I say it carries the least risk against the quantum adversary because its all in plaintext, theres no point in wasting resources in trying to see what you can already see. Elliptic curve cryptography seems good now against the quantum infant but it only took like 65 years to get from Kitty Hawk to the moon and without the transparent pool any critical exploit could leave the whole system in a unrecoverable state requiring a complete restart, where before we had the turnstile and at least part of the network still going to rebuild from but yeah, doesn’t matter apparently.)
1 Like
Does it make sense to keep old chain active so users can access their coins on old chain if old pool is fully deprecated in new chain? The value of coins might be lower than chain with new pool but its not lost. Some miners might support old chain because they get rewards & transaction fees.
Could a bridge exist b/n new chain & old chain?
There’s a few conversations going on here. I @'d Shawn because the ZOMG once asked for ideas with what kinds of grants to look for and I suggested refactoring the transparent pool bits so if it is deprecated it will be because of choice and not obsolescence (and that seems worthwile).
The other conversation is about pool lifetimes and is the motivation behind my suggestion to the ZOMG whereabouts I describe my would-be arguements for why voting the transparent pool into permanence is the most secure choice. I’m not sure exactly what you’re referring to in your post but don’t get ahead of yourself
1 Like
Are you referring to my reply or different one?
Yes the above there but understand that once those pools fork off then they aren’t Zcash anymore. If people continued to mine it then they could just trade the old coins for Zcash which is much simpler or do some kind of pegged thing because a cross chain real value transfer functionality sounds like an easily avoidable forging vulnerability. Jack suggested a faucet idk 
, kids do love the faucets
They’ve nearly doubled their holdings since November? Wow. Love to see it.
1 Like