Quote from: Akbarkoe on February 08, 2015, 05:27:50 PM

I like this coin
time to buy again
go to the moon monero.

Many people like this coin.

Many people that like this coin hate some of the people that like this coin.

Aside from the currently high emission, I'm pretty sure the only reason people who like this coin, and people who want to like this coin continue to remain bearish is because they like to see certain people who liked this coin before them go almost bankrupt even more.

Actually, I'm convinced that more than half of the struggling that has gone on socially in this coin is because people hate people like rpietila.

Just speculation, not trying to personally bash the guy.

So, regardless of my personal feelings about this coin and the few people who are clearly being targeted, I'm going to hold off buying this coin until until either they're bankrupt, or divorce/divest themselves completely from this project.

I guess a risk assessment would be in order, so I'd have to research how much people like rpietila are willing to invest in this coin, whether or not that amount would put them in financial dire straits if the value of this coin were to continue to decline, and the actual amount of money I'd lose out on by either keeping the value of this coin low, or the amount of money i'd lose out on by not being financially engaged with this coin, and also the amount of value that each person like rpietila would not control in BTC due to financial involvement in XMR.

So if someone in control of 20k BTC were to invest as much as 10% as 2k BTC in XMR and lose about 75% of that value, is that valuable to me, after this player has basically relinquished 1500 BTC of control?

I guess I would have to figure out how much money these types of people were willing to short on btc, because likely after months of being bled out I could only assume that they'd get much much quieter and potentially seek to divest completely, following a potential innovative streak.

Didn't one of them already put up a big BTC wall at a low price? I can't remember what that was, .0014 or something?

W/e my proposition for a new uptrend: get the current vocally offensive megawhales to divest, expect the price to drop a ways below .001 as they recoup their losses.

Likely the response to this is: not gonna happen.

Well then, expect to be usurped by some other cryptonote coin.

Also, then there's also the massive size of the transactions. Is there any possible way to get the same security with smaller sized transactions?

It's painful to see a 20kb transaction, as one single transaction, go out to thousands of people. The size of these transactions far surpass moore's law by at least an order of magnitude. So, is it possible to get reasonably sized, high mixin, transactions for 2kb? I'm talking a mixin of no less than ten with an average of 2-3 inputs?

I mean, look at this standard transaction using the new daemon with fee scaling: https://minergate.com/blockchain/mro/transaction/653f746ee2eda1d78557f261892b0d4871748a1143501f699c89f8bc45e5180d

Thats 5 inputs, one mixin making a whopping 2.561kb transaction.

Or this one: https://minergate.com/blockchain/mro/transaction/2a51c7438c41f7eb0ee35d299e6f4cdce3479ed1fee649a296d1bab6388703fc

With 19 inupts, one mixin making a staggering 3.95kb transaction.

The 5 - 19 inputs is a pretty good baseline for establishing an average range of inputs, yet the choice of using a single mixin gives someone a greatly increased ability to make your transaction identifiable. It's just not really strong as far as anonymity goes. So really, you're getting between 2kb and 4kb transactions just for using cryptonote as a standard transaction processing system. I mean with one mixin, your transaction is indistinguishable from only one other transaction. This hardly seems like enough, because in reality, it's not enough.

Now let's take a look at some transactions with average input ranges, and look for higher mixing.

Here's a good one, it uses the old flat-fee structure, but afaik that doesn't affect the sizing at all: http://chainradar.com/xmr/transaction/7e10418c95f426428f5146adea272324bdee5bc7d5dd461b482ff16e158b1472

It's 12 inputs, with a mixin of 28, but a size of 22.783 kb.

The tough part here, is that for cryptonote to work as intended, we're outpacing moore's law by at least two entire powers of ten. For cryptonote to even work at all, with minimal anonymity, we're outpacing it by a single power of ten.

Now, let me get to why I'm setting moore's law around a transaction size of 200-400 bytes.

Let's say we're looking to handle the amount of transactions daily that bitcoin handles: https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions

I'm going to use 85k transactions per day. That's literally about 1 transactions per second.

Biggest bitcoin transaction I could find: https://blockchain.info/tx/ae6f07f187c3d4fe3c2cdb75a325b6881a524d2e7f7ec3657d26d6a0ef37c6da

as 4.882 kb

But the average bitcoin transaction is here: https://blockchain.info/tx/f18119e64bd3d8d6dfc607608e267ad83199a840237ed80db58ebbcaeddb883d

as 260 bytes

other average bitcoin transaction sizes are usually under 600 bytes.

We can safely say that the p2p network and people's hard drives can definitely handle bitcoin in its current state.

With the large amount of people rejecting of the now 20mb block size hard fork, it's seeming like this is the correct 'size' of a cryptocurrency transaction from the standpoint of moore's law in 2014. Not going into it any further.

So, as we fall further and further away from following moore's law IRL, while also currently being 4 years out from even being able to being encompassed safely by it, I'm asking seriously, does anyone see this scaling to anywhere past a few tens of thousands of people?

I don't. Not now, and not without some serious changes to transaction sizes.

edit: I'm not trying to say that this is doomed or a fruitless effort, sorry if it came off like that. I say a few tens of thousands of people because of the moore's law scaling. If bitcoin has about 1,000,000 users, we can expect 10,000 monero users. I say this because we need to assess the market for potential candidates for monero adoption. "the world" seems a bit too large, so a more manageable size of "a few tens of thousands" might be better to start with -- let alone the mindset that comes along with that. I do not think there are currently 1,000,000 bitcoin users, because typically I'd expect to use my money about once per day if I were a currency user. So at 1 tx/second, we'd see about 86k actual bitcoin users. This would correlate to between 860-8600 monero users. If bitcoin scaled to even 100 tx/sec then that would be about 8,600,000 users, so 86,000-860,000 monero users. And if bitcoin made it to 1000 tx/sec then we'd use the same math. Seems not so far off from how many people use visa: http://www.howmanyarethere.net/how-many-people-are-using-visa-credit-cards-in-the-world/

Quote

There are 315 Million Visa Credit Card Users, 215 million Master Card Users and 60 million American Express users are there in the whole world.

Visa claims the ability to handle, http://usa.visa.com/merchants/industry-solutions/retail-visa-acceptance.jsp:

Quote from:

24,000 transactions per second

so they get about 13125 people for every transaction per second they handle.

Or here is a claim for 10k tps: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/11/12/bitcoin-needs-to-scale-by-a-factor-of-1000-to-compete-with-visa-heres-how-to-do-it/

which would yield 31500

Or the bitcoin wiki which claims some unicorn number or 2000 tx/sec, which would yield 157,500 people per every transaction per second.

I feel my number of one person per every second of the day for every transaction per second, as about 86,000 users per transaction per second is pretty reasonable given the three above sources. Users may be different from 'people' I guess.

2nd edit:

I'd also suggest researching anger and rage triggers related to naming and branding conventions. Unconsciously, both the naming an branding used in this coin are absolutely abysmal. The color choices would normally inspire hope, but given the naming convention does the exact opposite. I would suggest a name change to something else, as the word "Monero" clearly is not having the intended subconscious effect.