Quote from: rpietila on September 07, 2014, 01:24:17 AM

Quote from: rdnkjdi on September 07, 2014, 01:05:41 AM

Why are people pushing the coin this hard when it has this many problems?

My previous long post answers this:

Fair launch. It is just so precious. And never before happened as well. So that the largest holders are not there by accident (or more likely planning by the dev), but because they wanted to buy a crappy coin at a high price. Monero's history is special.

Just tell me one example of a coin where the dev is not the largest owner.

I believe it is very good that the coins are not dev pet projects.

Quote

"Why is this coin not taking off when so many big names are supporting it"

I can only say that if something should happen, but has not yet happened, there is a good chance that it will happen.

I really would rather not delve back into the whole BBR vs XMR argument again; the bickering is getting tiresome and I'm a supporter of cryptonote in general. -- it's a plain fact in both cases certain entities were operating at some advantage at some point in time. It's not surprising whatsoever.

With that being said, how can you say this of XMR launch without being disingenuous?
"It is just so precious. And never before happened as well."
"Monero's history is special. "

As far as I see, It's just a false statement- The gap between the fastest BBR miners and the average BBR miner, compared with the gap between the fastest XMR miner and the average XMR miner was smaller for some time. Considering the emission rate differences, less of the total BBR supply was up for grabs to those in an advantaged position too.

Sure, this

https://github.com/NoodleDoodleNoodleDoodleNoodleDoodleNoo/bitmonero/commit/3cc45e9324a402aee91e2f46861b2ca393d711aa was a slight oversight, because took a while after launch to spot. It would of been ideal if the proof-of-work had a few eyes over it prior to the coin launch,

Reference:

Quote from: NoodleDoodle on May 07, 2014, 05:53:50 PM

Like I stated in IRC, I am not part of the "dev team", I never was. Just so happens I took a look at the code and changed some extremely easy to spot "errors". I then decided to release the binary because I thought MRO would benefit from it. I made this decision individually and nobody else should be culpable, especially the community of individuals who have come together to maintain and foster the software.

By the way, I'm not even a real coder, so whatever changes I made should be easy to spot; especially for experienced developers.
Cheers.

But to the credit of XMR dev team, the fix was pushed less than 30 minutes after it was spotted. I understand it was something which was introduced by TFT, and monero developers were not familiar with the code at that stage, when they "relaunched" it under a new name. It is not like they themselves crippled it, on the contrary they managed to fix it after a tip-off.

Quote from: tacotime on May 07, 2014, 06:22:23 PM

I just posted the commit

Personally, my opinion is In the grand scheme of things it's barely a hiccup at all and pales in comparison to some of the shenanigans that went on during early BTC days - even forgetting satoshi, ( artforz owned 30% of net hash from early days- continued on to run gpus, fpgas and s-asics, before anyone else and then proceeded to launch crippled scrypt- have absolutely no doubt he knew the weaknesses in that implementation) for instance.

As you say it's also pretty well documented a lot of XMR changed hands in the early days from such miners taking profit from their advantaged positions, and those are freely disbursed in the market very early on. -- I do remember buying some XMR in the OTC days prior to it being listed on the exchange, I got a small quantity, checked back and the price had already shot up 10x. There really was not an opportunity to buy in big quantities as significantly lower prices than the general populous that I saw, So yes, people were paying more or less the same price for these coins which is a good thing indeed.