Post #25235

fcf118844bd696317240f189be85a58f24a65acb9cbd1264178b6f3b46967945
d79fa0f5f7557cec9a928b76c92236f5bf7ba944db8ca4283f1589e974b103ae
Signature not verified

This entry might be using an old signature, or it was signed by a key that does not exist on the server.

{"entry_date":1582329141,"post_data":{"edit_count":0,"last_edit_date":0,"last_edit_user_id":0,"message_sha512":"10d0c72077ac7a99032d67d53bc11b96e41b7402f6834aa89c1e8f3a8533b06ea6acf1026152822e711d3e11d30e5ae032d440b198ebb1309bc592bab077c0af","node_id":52,"post_date":1582329096,"thread_id":3423,"user_id":43},"post_link":"https:\/\/factomize.com\/forums\/index.php?threads\/3423#post-25235"}
The entry content as it exists in the database. This should be verified against the blockchain entry.
Voting NO on anchor and Oracle master grants
[QUOTE="Alex, post: 25227, member: 11"]
The anchors are not time sensitive either so i think we could go lower than the market rate in the knowledge that there is a high probability an anchor will get posted eventually.
[/QUOTE]
I believe they are time sensitive, other than the obvious security benefits they bring, it brings that extra layer of finality and trust. Once an entry is anchored into Bitcoin it gives that extra layer of confidence.

I don't think it would be wise to drop Bitcoin as an anchor. From a marketing point of view, something like:

[I]The Factom protocol anchors into Bitcoin, inheriting their security as well.[/I]

Sounds much better than saying XYZ coin.
This is the raw content, without BBCode parsing.
Top