Why do I feel like I've seen this story before, you could issue assets on omni, liquid, and counterparty and none of those got traction, now you're going to add Taro, RGB and pear credit to the mix and for what marginal gain?

I've heard the whole we can issue stablecoins and people can use them, I don't see how that couldn't be handled by a custodian, this is just a custodian with extra steps

It also muddies the waters and now can you really argue with a shitcoiner when you're promoting token creation?

I think i'll be giving this one a pass, it just seems like a distraction and a low time preference attempt to cope with Ethereum envy

Omni protocol didn't have success , why taro would have, plz ethereum honey pot fiat fail2ban shitcoins on bitcoin

I keep getting this error: "please fix the issue with your invoice: This invoice already exists in our records.". Am I doing something wrong?

Lol, so few people understand why Taro matters, and there will not be shitcoins on Taro for the most part since it will not help them scam more people (though perhaps they will figure something out). Counterparty risk and shitcoin are two separate things. All shitcoins have counterparty risk, but not all things with counterparty risk are shitcoins.

Taro is a tool that effectively allows the unlimited transfer and assignment of one side of a contract, with the censorship resistance, seizure resistance, and auditability of bitcoin.

Now, after all that, you are still left with a contract, which is inherently subject to counterparty risk. Would you declare your sin of regularly accepting and continuously holding shitcoins for payment if you are an employee who does work? -- oh, you want to get clever and say your entire salary is continuously streaming LN payments? -- Planck time, motherfucker. I see you holding that obligation for future payment, that is not trustlessly assured because human time cannot be atomically swapped for bitcoin. Anyway...

This "adamcoin" is an edge case where it appears it actually is a shitcoin for those words mean nothing. They do not even contain the fundamental elements of a valid contract. Roasbeef gave an example on twitter of "high fives" on Taro. So if someone put out a faucet of 100 high fives they were issuing on Taro, redeemable at any time I see the person, and I expected I might see them at a conference, then I would be interested in grabbing one off of a faucet (if there were also a convenient app to manage/track the UTXO).

My latest newsletter post covers concepts on Taro that are strangely ignored by Lightning Labs, VCs, and various bitcoin cheerleaders on Twitter who are weirdly over-excited about dollars on Lightning, which is becoming abundantly clear from nostr, will not be a big thing. https://heaviside.substack.com/p/the-forgotten-fourth-function-of

*Debunking the dollars on Taro hype: https://twitter.com/unitimpulse/status/1618681029753204742

Edit: taking another 30 seconds to look at this, it's a web wallet that requires a login i.e. trash. As a final comment, observe that to most normies, bitcoin also appears as a shitcoiner, so shitcoiners being interested in something is not reason enough to assume that that thing is a shitcoin. I bet most of the people flippantly calling Taro a shitcoin tool have >5% of their net worth in some combination of real estate, equities, business interests, USD, and physical possessions, lmao

What is this? It seems to be like a new way to make shitcoins. To be clear, it seems like a way to separate Bitcoiners from their BTC. That's what shitcoins are.

Cool