I saw this on the PCGS Boards. You'd think a top-tier grading service would be able to recognize how soft the planchet's metal is, some small amount of research when handling some of the earliest federally-produced coinage.
Theology degree here. The most important thing Luther did was this. He was the first person to translate the Bible into common language of the people (German). Before Luther it was in Latin and only the clergy could read it so when it was translated it was mass produced on the new printing press giving everyone the opportunity to read it and interpret it. Granted only the wealthy could read but it was a huge step. The Bible has thus become the most translated and best selling book of all time.
Edit: if you read my whole statement, it says he was the first to translate it into the common language, then it was mass produced by the printing pressb to be distributed to the masses. I must be mistaken that there was a printing press in the 800's.
It had been translated into various languages before, but Luther's doctrine, and the ability to read the Bible by the layman, only succeeded because they coincided with the advent of printing by Gutenberg, allowing the Bible to be not only made available in many languages, but also for many copies to exist and be made available for purchase.
Actually, a lot of the printing during that time wasn't done with Gutenberg's method, but with copper and wood prints. It was a much cheaper method and Luther also wrote sermons and short song collections that were distributed. His first translations of the bible were actually not published all at once, but in smaller pamphlets.
I was just referring to Gutenberg's development of movable type (as a metaphorical tinderbox) and the subsequent outpouring of printed material from all sources, with corresponding rises in literacy, as the factors behind Luther's success.
From what I've heard it's an all in one gui wallet/miner
Do you know where it can be accessed?
Nano is publicly developed and many contribute to the codebase. I believe there are ratings that specifically gauge the open nature of the git repos and Nano consistently rates towards the top of these.
We are always more than happy to see new contributors and it's actually the one and only reason we even released the roadmap (to attract talented individuals and minds to join in our mission of building a global currency).
By 'private' I did not intend to imply that Nano was not developed by individuals outside of the organization, but rather that it was not created directly in conjunction with a government ('public'). My concern lies with the possibility that sufficiently large scale adoption of any blockchain asset as a currency will trigger backlash from governments or more conventional private financial institutions (or both, thanks to the fact that we have legalized bribery in the States, thanks lobbying!).
I disagree with the sentiment entirely. Governments are inherently localized and can not provide a framework for exchanging value that is borderless. We are increasingly a globally network world and as such, new concepts for things like exchange must be brought about that allow us to continually improve the efficiency by which we operate.
Nano is able to reduce the obstacles and provide a near-perfect solution to do these things. We have a long way to go, don't get me wrong. We have a ton of work to complete. We do, however, have a path to make it there, and we absolutely have the tech to do so in my personal opinion.
Either way the future is exciting. I am a fan of the industry as a whole and support many great projects.
And I do hope that you succeed. A universally accepted crypto that crosses borders, with the transaction speed and lack of fees that Nano provides would be amazing, and of tremendous benefit to international cooperation and development. I am simply stating that I believe there is risk associated with such a concept, as it relies on the de facto recognition by world governments of a currency that functions within their borders that possesses legitimate purchasing power that they do not control in any capacity (supply, etc.). Governments with exceptionally centralized systems of management (e.g., China, with so many facets of society controlled to some degree by the Party, or Russia, a network of oligarchs in close proximity with the government) do not necessarily stand to benefit as individuals from sacrificing any degree of power over their currency as it currently stands, unless they can be convinced that a service such as Nano provides stimulus for international enterprise and commercial development (which I believe, given sufficient adoption, it could do).
"Jesuit" is derived from the name of the order: Society of Jesus. So of course the name is going to sound a lot like "Jesus".
Fun Fact: The term 'Jesuit' is traditionally ascribed to the radical Protestant reformer John Calvin, who intended the term as an insult, but it was eventually adopted as an acceptable term (similar to 'Yankee' in the States).
There's nothing fun about John Calvin.
For real. I just finished a book about Michael Servetus, the theological scholar, doctor, and printer who was burned at the stake for pointing out that the Trinity is not Biblical, but instead originates from the Council of Nicaea; his death was almost entirely Calvin's doing. Servetus was also the first to publish a description of the pulmonary circulation of blood, 75 years before it was fully described by William Harvey. Nobody heard about it because it was published in one of the Servetus books that was banned by Calvin and publicly burned with him, on a pyre of green wood that caused him to die over the course of 30 minutes.
You may find these links helpful:
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Thanks, AutoMod. I'll check them out. If anyone has any additional insight, I'd appreciate it.
You only need $100k for a Walton node right now. When a holder of NEO from the start, that is pocket change.
Just look at the WTC supply numbers, that and the tech which is clear puts my mind at ease.
It's surprising to me how far out of reach a masternode is for us normal folk nowadays. A few months back, it was a genuine possibility for even smaller investors if they traded well. But when you put it into words, it feels surreal: 'A WTC masternode costs $100,000.' I mean, that could buy a house in a good chunk of the States.
Valid concern but then.....why did facebook beat myspace? Why did google beat yahoo? Etc....
Fair point, but it's not like Myspace and Yahoo failed completely. They had their time in the sun. Were they ultimately beaten by a better product because they did not develop? Yes. But they were still very valuable companies for some time.
Even after Walton’s Twitter fuckup they’re going up. Vechain stays down after major announcements. Why???
Disclaimer: I own both VEN and WTC, and I like both projects. I believe the reason that WTC has rebounded so quickly is in part due to its very dedicated investor base, who did not see the Twitter debacle as defamatory to Walton, but rather a continued deficiency in social media, a screwup by the marketing company they hired. Following the Twitter incident, less than 10 Guardian Master Nodes sold their WTC, out of almost 1800 remaining, all of which have held at least 5000 WTC since Dec. 10 to retain Guardian status. After WTC's AMA earlier this year, about 40 sold. It's not like the community likes screwups like this, it's that the remaining holders have gone through a lot before now with a marketing effort equivalent to that of a lemonade stand, to the point that they will ride or die. Plus, the event has brought a lot of eyes on Walton, perhaps some new investors?
What potential clients does WTC have?
The most recent, and seemingly highest profile, is Freyr; the WTC equivalent of the DNV GL partnership. A pair of smart cities (China/Korea), several large Chinese industry partners; see the WTC all-in-one thread for more.
I think the biggest difference is VEN is focused on their business model first. Not to say WTC isn't out there getting partnerships, it just seems to me that VEN is ahead in terms of adoption and real world applications.
I like and hold both projects; to be fair regarding adoption, WTC does have its mainnet launch scheduled prior to that of VEN (but it has been pushed back once or twice), and will launch with multiple child chains. We can only speculate how the period between those two launches will affect them both.
We're going through the same thing we did back in the 1930's; too much commemorative garbage, too much effort, on very niche subjects. They'll strangle the market and interest will wain, we'll go through a lull, and start all over again.
Tanoai Reed (born February 10, 1974) is a Hollywood stunt man.
Reed was born in Honolulu, Hawaii of Samoan and Norwegian, Swedish, Irish descent. He is the cousin and stunt double of Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson.
He is featured in the video "Pump It" by The Black Eyed Peas, playing one of the villains Fergie fights. Reed appears in the 2008 relaunch of American Gladiators as the gladiator Toa.
I'm more impressed that the guy is 44.
All of my research indicates VEN is a confido style scam, please be careful. I rarely call this stuff wrong and successful in this market since 2013. I have acrued evidence that the same team behind the XRB shill is behind the VEN shills. VEN supporters have been whipped up into a frenzy by this paid shilling, over a product with little to no true substance imo.
I can understand paid shilling; don't approve of it, however it is understandable in a competitive, emerging market. But calling a project with several billion dollars in MC a scam requires some pretty substantial evidence, particularly given how very publicized their partnerships seem to be. Do you have any evidence that disproves the validity of either their product or their partnerships?