Quote from: iamnotback on December 05, 2016, 01:20:22 AM

Quote from: ArticMine on December 04, 2016, 10:46:20 PM

This "refutation" is based upon the concept that if a virtual currency focuses on something other than micro-transactions it will be shut down by the the "state".

My quoted logic had nothing to do with the "state".

Quote from: ArticMine on December 04, 2016, 10:46:20 PM

Edit: Monero is not even suitable for micro transactions by design, with minimum transaction fees likely to remain around or above 0.01 USD over time in real terms. This is not to say that micro transactions are not a viable market in its own right, but rather than there are likely much better suited solutions for this market. The opportunity for Monero in the micro transactions market may actually be in the on and possible off ramps for these solutions. So for a virtual currency focused on micro transactions Monero is not even a competitor.

I think microtransactions are the big enchilada. And not just monetary microtransactions.

Anonymity is so incredibly unrealistic and it is fighting against the socialism. Please see my prior post which was a refutation of the tinfoil hats. I have more debate with them at the following thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1665943.0

Although I originally was a tinfoil hat and originally touted the importance of anonymity, I am now coming to the realization that we don't win by hiding from society. We win by changing the economy of society.

The key here is first Fungibility https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fungibility, then Privacy and only last Anonymity. One does not need to consider a war zone to understand the value of fungibility; however it is important in that scenario also. Monero delivers fungibility, Bitcoin for example does not thanks to the likes of https://www.chainalysis.com/