Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 167 results by opennux
If no-one puts forth their IRL persona to support any forks (i.e. the monero classic et al. shitspew) then you know it is a scam. Show your face or you're nothing but scammers. No one has, so..scammers.
Don't support this and don't transact on the chains - you might lose out on some quick money, but you will pay dearly over the long run.
Don't support this and don't transact on the chains - you might lose out on some quick money, but you will pay dearly over the long run.
Name me one charity that would be a good idea to support officially with monero and I'll do my best to say why it's a bad idea.
wikipedia
Name me one charity that would be a good idea to support officially with monero and I'll do my best to say why it's a bad idea.
http://softwarefreedom.org/
No matter which charity there will always be some sort of political underpinning.
While in the strictest possible sense this is technically true. I don't think the conclusions follow. There are charity initiatives that *almost* everyone supports unanimously. The best example I can come up with right now is helping the communities affected by these hurricanes.
You guys are proving my other point, which was that no matter what it will turn into a debacle. Add logical fallacies ad libitum ad naseum.. I'm not going to pick each one apart. It doesn't even matter if the criticism is valid or substantial - because then we just see the trolls emerge.
The easiest is of course to support the project itself to the development fund.
The work done to implement all your ideas is almost the same irregardless of where it's implemented. Might as well push it directly to charities instead.
Don't open up attack vectors, when entirely not needed.
goin2mars is probably right in realising that the people to implement this tech and those to approach are the ones already running all these ad-plugins and so forth.
Even apps like firefox could implement this into their application so it's mining when open (even though it's already a resource hungry app).
All those more hidden places (and probably many many many more) would likely make the network propel much more.
It would also add liquidity to the market and probably also soak up a lot more coins (just by virtue of storing it and transferring it over short periods of time) which would have a positive effect on the exchange rate.
This is a good idea. getmonero.org could have a page on the site where people can choose to mine for a while for a certain charity. It would be a really good marketing stunt
getmonero.org should be setup to do this.
It is an amazing idea.
We could choose also some marketing active charities and inform them about it. It would improve the XMR image.
Also donations to the development fund could be done on this way.
Whilst I appreciate that the concept behind that type of mining and see the potential in micro transactions through this, then it is an entirely bad idea to do any charity-related thing through official monero sites - such as getmonero. Why? Because Monero is apolitical. No matter which charity there will always be some sort of political underpinning.
What COULD be done is to do browser mining where all proceeds went to the monero foundation address instead - one could set it up when idle, and people could choose a cpu% or such. That would make it possible for people without technical know how or motivation to donate that way.
Unrelated to the official monero sites someone with the ability to carry through could setup donation sites - with the use of monero of course.
You do have a point but i think it is a bit splitting hairs here. What will happen imho if we do this is the following:
1) getmonero.org starts this and gets mentioned in many magazines
2) lots and lots of other sites copy the idea (of course one of the donations will be for themselves)
3) monero will be famous and then...
4) we decide to stop the mining 'experiment' because we want to be apolitical
You forgot:
1b) Potential debacle because the charity for purple kittens turns out to be a tax-evasion scheme, and the charity-donation for hungry african kids turns out to be going straight into the pocket of the tribe in power/government who repress the other tribes and use their poor hungry kids to fill their own pockets.
4b) ..and stopping it turned unsuccessful and furthermore energy was spent debating that "my charity is better than your charity". The skies are darkening, can you see the shitstorm coming?
Not splitting hairs at all. That's the kind of thinking that will get you in a ETH short squeeze. Name me one charity that would be a good idea to support officially with monero and I'll do my best to say why it's a bad idea.
This is a good idea. getmonero.org could have a page on the site where people can choose to mine for a while for a certain charity. It would be a really good marketing stunt
getmonero.org should be setup to do this.
It is an amazing idea.
We could choose also some marketing active charities and inform them about it. It would improve the XMR image.
Also donations to the development fund could be done on this way.
Whilst I appreciate that the concept behind that type of mining and see the potential in micro transactions through this, then it is an entirely bad idea to do any charity-related thing through official monero sites - such as getmonero. Why? Because Monero is apolitical. No matter which charity there will always be some sort of political underpinning.
What COULD be done is to do browser mining where all proceeds went to the monero foundation address instead - one could set it up when idle, and people could choose a cpu% or such. That would make it possible for people without technical know how or motivation to donate that way.
Unrelated to the official monero sites someone with the ability to carry through could setup donation sites - with the use of monero of course.
The price had a nice rebound from the low. Is $100 by Thanksgiving to early?
The price is just $10 at the moment. I do not think the price will go to $100 in a few weeks. It might be in a few years.
Are you new in crypto or what? Crazier things have happened. And both up and down.
Re: [2016-08-29] Bloomburg.com| New Digital Currency Spikes as Drug Dealers Get
What do they gain from such an attack against Monero?
They do not learn anything about the transactions from mining, and how to determine what transactions to attack? The most they could do would be to mine empty blocks and delay transactions by two minutes or so.
This sort of attack is not effective verses block-chains where the transactions are private, not public.
In fact they could already be doing this, no one would know, because it wouldn't matter.
And comparing the hash rate of a CPU mined chain to an ASIC mined chain is a false comparison. You should know better, sir. FUD rejected.
If the majority of bitcoin wallets implemented ring-signatures and required the use of BIP47 addresses (aka stealth), then Bitcoin could stop worrying about this sort of thing also, but too many do not care about their privacy until after it is violated, (and they find out).
They do not learn anything about the transactions from mining, and how to determine what transactions to attack? The most they could do would be to mine empty blocks and delay transactions by two minutes or so.
This sort of attack is not effective verses block-chains where the transactions are private, not public.
In fact they could already be doing this, no one would know, because it wouldn't matter.
And comparing the hash rate of a CPU mined chain to an ASIC mined chain is a false comparison. You should know better, sir. FUD rejected.
If the majority of bitcoin wallets implemented ring-signatures and required the use of BIP47 addresses (aka stealth), then Bitcoin could stop worrying about this sort of thing also, but too many do not care about their privacy until after it is violated, (and they find out).
You must've skipped over the entire post, which considering your history of posting slap-dash pseudobabble, isn't surprising.
It was a theoretical attack vector based on the farcical fabrications of an e-journalist that Monero is replacing Bitcoin somehow with darknet/black market transactions.
Now follow very closely here, because I know attention to detail isn't your forte, but the amount of computing power (regardless of algorithm, my dear chum-filled chum) is TRIVIAL compared to what is needed for Bitcoin to execute an attack. That was the point. I know you're working it through your goldbergian-meatworks-of-a-frontal-lobe right now trying to make it twist to your reality, but that is the unvarnished truth of it.
Go back to writing about your Bitcoin "religion", its more suited to your obfuscated and gordian-knot-like thinking skills.
I don't think your point was missed. Everyone is aware that the hashing power and subsequently the cost of attacking the chain is much cheaper. It would just behoove to compare apples to apples.
First of all it's not about the hashing power, it's about the cost of the hashing power, and thus the cost of the attack.
Second of all, you could compare the price of the coin and attack to bitcoin when bitcoin had the same price or hashrate. (And btw. note that most of the DNM stuff is still denominated predominantly in btc)
Thirdly, it was mentioned that the attack vector - though acknowledged as a genuine attack vector - would be moot in the application you're describing (snooping, transaction withholding etc.).
Fourthly, it's doubtful an agency is going to blow a budget of now millions of $USD with the aim of maybe stopping some crimes they could solve better in other ways. Gaining more power? Perhaps, yes. But stopping/catching bad guys? Very doubtful. Very very doubtful. What kind of manager would approve a budget on now more than $100m (I haven't done any calcs, I just assume it's up there..) to do what exactly? I realise that there's golden toilets and nefarious dealings, sure, but how much normal detective work (which is FAR MORE effective) could you deploy for the same budget?
Fifthly, as we have seen, as the currency grows, so does the hashrate. In late 2010 the hashrate is comparable to monero's today. Look how fast the bitcoin hashrate grew from there on.
There are many other attack vectors and reasons for them, and a large number of reasons why the whole project could fail. The reasons for this attack vector just seems implausible. Then again, more implausible things have happened.
When Monero reaches the parity with bitcoin and goes beyond, please do not come here to post bearish posts.
1. I'd be way too rich if that happens
2. I'm not making bearish posts
It's a risky game you are playing. Your calls are gambling, nothing else. I think many with the same mindset were locked out for good after selling at 008 thinking that this was for sure the top and they would rebuy lower.
I hope the same happens to you, cuz I don't like your condescending tone towards investors/holders, you need to accept that not everyone is a trader.
And nobody gives a fuck about the success of your trades, so take your boasting somewhere else.
I hope the same happens to you, cuz I don't like your condescending tone towards investors/holders, you need to accept that not everyone is a trader.
And nobody gives a fuck about the success of your trades, so take your boasting somewhere else.
Agreed, but when you have 90% permabulls someone needs to balance things out. And I'm not even bearish on monero longterm
+1
As somewhat monero (quiet) supporter almost from the begining, I really appreciate your posts here to temper the somewhat over-enthousiast tone.
In the beginning of the thread I was being called out for "trolling against Monero" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=753252.msg8506015#msg8506015 .
I'm extremely positive about Monero (only crypto I hold next to Bitcoin. in total I only ever held 4 different cryptos (PPC and LTC are the others)). I was just calling out that even Monero is pseudo-anonymous (although vastly better than Bitcoin) and that theoretically zo-proof theorems are superior (although there isn't yet a practical way to initialize in a trust-less manner).
It happens when people get over enthusiastic and overly attacked by retards. They start to think that every counter argument is bad.
That doesn't really count when you see who the poster who replied to you was.
I'm a bit afraid that the dev team made their cash and are not so much in business to develope the GUI.
I mean i could do this with java in 2 days. I dont unterstand whats their problem here...they have had now 2 years.
Another problem is that people get used to something. Look like whatsapp or facebook. They are used to use Bitcoin. As long that dealers on DN doesnt give discount its hard to make the people switch to XMR. Moreover the volatility atm is not so good for the coin. Dealers could loose 15% in 2 days. Thats not less.
But still, XMR is superior from every view. Only the people around/behind it are sometimes the problem.
So solve this:
GUI
Make XMR to a prefered currency
Alphabay did its job, now its on the people.
I mean i could do this with java in 2 days. I dont unterstand whats their problem here...they have had now 2 years.
Another problem is that people get used to something. Look like whatsapp or facebook. They are used to use Bitcoin. As long that dealers on DN doesnt give discount its hard to make the people switch to XMR. Moreover the volatility atm is not so good for the coin. Dealers could loose 15% in 2 days. Thats not less.
But still, XMR is superior from every view. Only the people around/behind it are sometimes the problem.
So solve this:
GUI
Make XMR to a prefered currency
Alphabay did its job, now its on the people.
That is the EXACT opposite.
Re: THIS IS ACTUALLY A BIG DEAL! PLEASE READ MY DRUNKEN MUSINGS!
Can we start a fund to raise capital for a full time developer or two perhaps?
I think that's a good idea but it's one that would probably be better voiced within the reddit subreddit.
The forum on getmonero.org has a fantastic funding system. Several developers has been paid through this. So far notably moneromoo and also the GUI development etc.
I've donated a (probably too small) amount to the GUI fund effort from several months ago, but I wonder...
What does everyone think about some small amount per transaction being paid directly to the developers of the wallet? Monero transaction already have pretty heavy fees, (didn't used to be a big deal, but last time I saw 0.2 fee for polo withdraw and I never noticed it before because, well, you would be transferring thousands at a time. Most recently I noticed and thought, "hey, that's like 2 bucks" )
I think it would be acceptable, perhaps preferable, if there were a 0.01 transaction fee tacked on to each and every transaction to be paid to the developer(s) -
Labor of love and altruistic behavior is nice, but the people that contribute should be rewarded, greatly.
*edit for thoughts of transacting fees* = I think the relatively large transaction fees (in relation to bitcoin fees) plus the tail end issuance makes Monero a much better candidate to maintain sustainable security of the blockchain over a longer term. --- side question: does Monero offer opp codes or some other method of embedding data or hashes of data? I'm wondering now if Monero might be actually more immutable than bitcoin over the longer term, like 20 plus years...
First of all, the funds from the forum system is only released after work well done. Secondly when "smart-mining" arrives it is supposed to incorporate an easy setting to choose if you want to mine to the dev address or your own. Thirdly, the transaction-fee needs to adjust in accordance to XMR buying power, and needs to do so automatically - no arbitrary changes as it is now, but I don't think anyone has any concrete ideas as of now. http://monero.stackexchange.com/questions/1246/how-does-moneros-transaction-fees-change-according-to-price
Can we start a fund to raise capital for a full time developer or two perhaps?
I think that's a good idea but it's one that would probably be better voiced within the reddit subreddit.
The forum on getmonero.org has a fantastic funding system. Several developers has been paid through this. So far notably moneromoo and also the GUI development etc.
The influx would be several magnitudes below the nominal market cap increase.
IIRC someone did a calc to the effect that $1 inflow moved cap by ~$10 during one or another of the btc bubbles. Anyhow, what moves btc cap by 600 could move XMR cap by 600. I'd find that amusing.
Rpietila did some I remember.
There has been an influx of 600.000.000 fresh $ to the crypto market within the past days.
The entry door is very likely through Bitcoin. Given the current trading volumes, it is not crazy to suspect that up to 50% of this money is supposed to be traded into Monero.
Therefore we'll see a market cap. decline of Bitcoin somewhere around the $300 million range. This money will go into Monero within the next days. Let's just assume that a lot of profit taking will be going on.
Still it's more likely than not we'll end up somewhere around $20. And this is just the potential with the current money in the system.
I see no reason to be bearish within the next weeks.
The entry door is very likely through Bitcoin. Given the current trading volumes, it is not crazy to suspect that up to 50% of this money is supposed to be traded into Monero.
Therefore we'll see a market cap. decline of Bitcoin somewhere around the $300 million range. This money will go into Monero within the next days. Let's just assume that a lot of profit taking will be going on.
Still it's more likely than not we'll end up somewhere around $20. And this is just the potential with the current money in the system.
I see no reason to be bearish within the next weeks.
The influx would be several magnitudes below the nominal market cap increase.
This is the most bullish event since that other bullish event: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg16147288#msg16147288
That's been for sale for ever. Someone bought it.
That's been for sale for ever. Someone bought it.
XMR now poses a prisoners dilemma to BTC whales. They must now build a position to sufficiently hedge against XMR becoming a coin with an economy rivaling BTC.
Unfortunately for them XMR holders will not let go of their coins so easily. The distribution is very fair compared to many coins and the whales like Risto, Warz and Smoothie have no need to relinquish their XMR positions given their BTC wealth.
Unfortunately for them XMR holders will not let go of their coins so easily. The distribution is very fair compared to many coins and the whales like Risto, Warz and Smoothie have no need to relinquish their XMR positions given their BTC wealth.
The hands are definitely gripping tighter this time around.
Feels great to wake up to 0.023/btc HELL YEA!!
You guys think this ATH price will maintain or go another leg up? I'm worried about the correction that hasnt happened yet.
You guys think this ATH price will maintain or go another leg up? I'm worried about the correction that hasnt happened yet.
This leg is not finished. 0.04 is the target. From there I am not sure.
i dont like to fall from too high. getting dangerous everyday.
makes me think of ltc at 65usd ish and now 3usd ish
What goes up must come down. It's all about time. It could be today, it could be tomorrow, next year or next decade or 1000 years from now. It's all about time.
Hey guys, tell me if I am totally off with my reasoning here: when Bitcoin was spendable mainly on Silk Road, and other dark markets, the higher it went was 32$, right? And then it went down massively. So at 15$ Monero doesn't seem much undervalued, to say the least. Or maybe some of you think the dynamic is entirely different this time and the two situations aren't comparable?
I could add 2 things here when comparing Bitcoin with Monero.
1. Quite many got their BTC really cheap. So they did not really care at what price they will sell since they made huge profit from basically nothing. Some maybe even get them as a gift. With Monero is totally different since price was relatively high from first week. those that hold XMR for over 2 years dont have even x10 profits so far.
2. People learned something from their mistakes.
Precisely. The exponential outbreaks that happened back then in BTC was basically unprecedented. Today they're not. People know what can happen...Sorry, will happen..
The recent StackExchange victory
What is this in reference to?
http://monero.stackexchange.com/
Only cryptos that have their own stackexchange site are bitcoin, ethereum, and now monero.
Wow! What an endorsement.
Not endorsement - but big community effort.
Yes, that's all good.
But believe me, the sensationalist pieces will follow -- that's not being either pessimistic or contrarian, simply experienced with the print medium. Its the obvious angle for editors to spice up a dry tech/economics story.
In some ways its not a problem, it simply reflects the same rite of passage BTC went through -- and of course it does mean a lot of writers are going to have volte face on how they describe BTC (ie they sold it to the masses as anonymous but hey turns out it isn't).
But believe me, the sensationalist pieces will follow -- that's not being either pessimistic or contrarian, simply experienced with the print medium. Its the obvious angle for editors to spice up a dry tech/economics story.
In some ways its not a problem, it simply reflects the same rite of passage BTC went through -- and of course it does mean a lot of writers are going to have volte face on how they describe BTC (ie they sold it to the masses as anonymous but hey turns out it isn't).
I wonder if the smart editor would pick a different angle. I mean, what bitcoin went through has been done so many times now. It's really beating a dead horse, and I just wonder if that's a good sell for a news-outlet. If I was an editor that only had page-views / newspaper sales and a happy board in mind, then I*m not even sure I'd choose that whole approach and sell again. But I am giving them too much credit...
Smart editors....ha ha ha
"If it bleeds, it leads"....similarly sex, crime and drugs get eyeballs.
Also, most editors are in thrall to their proprietors' political views/ambitions. This (XMR) is low hanging fruit for rightwing news outlets.
Way, way too much credit
My point is: a tsunami of these stories is swelling on the horizon but don't worry, in the long run it will be good for XMR.
haha..
yeah, there's hardly any, if any at all, stories like that on bitcoin anymore.
Yes, that's all good.
But believe me, the sensationalist pieces will follow -- that's not being either pessimistic or contrarian, simply experienced with the print medium. Its the obvious angle for editors to spice up a dry tech/economics story.
In some ways its not a problem, it simply reflects the same rite of passage BTC went through -- and of course it does mean a lot of writers are going to have volte face on how they describe BTC (ie they sold it to the masses as anonymous but hey turns out it isn't).
But believe me, the sensationalist pieces will follow -- that's not being either pessimistic or contrarian, simply experienced with the print medium. Its the obvious angle for editors to spice up a dry tech/economics story.
In some ways its not a problem, it simply reflects the same rite of passage BTC went through -- and of course it does mean a lot of writers are going to have volte face on how they describe BTC (ie they sold it to the masses as anonymous but hey turns out it isn't).
I wonder if the smart editor would pick a different angle. I mean, what bitcoin went through has been done so many times now. It's really beating a dead horse, and I just wonder if that's a good sell for a news-outlet. If I was an editor that only had page-views / newspaper sales and a happy board in mind, then I*m not even sure I'd choose that whole approach and sell again. But I am giving them too much credit...
I did a little research, because mostly this price surge is argumented with DNM's getting in the currency, which i still do not believe.
On Alphabay in median 1,9% 2737 are accepting XMR in drugs and chemicals from total 136877.
On Oasis in median 6,9% 264 are accepting XMR in drugs and chemicals from total 3813.
The last 0,018 hype on polo had over 100kBTC volume, with now residing somewhere at 0,014 with ~24kBTC volume.
So if 3001 vendors are responsible for over 100kBTC volume, every vendor in median had to have ~33BTC for playing wiht XMR, now somewhat around ~8BTC each if every vendor is actively trading --> possible but not likely.
Why, simply because these 100BTC to 800BTC buy walls would to have been built, in median, buy more than one vendor at the same time --> possible but not likely.
Even if, let's say 10% of the active vendors are actively trading with the new XMR (multiply the figures buy 10) which i still do not believe, this would be more unlikely to happen at the same time on the same place. The lending figures intensify my claim and theory of a single entity playing around and making the market to the contrary argument of "natural" growth
Think about it
On Alphabay in median 1,9% 2737 are accepting XMR in drugs and chemicals from total 136877.
On Oasis in median 6,9% 264 are accepting XMR in drugs and chemicals from total 3813.
The last 0,018 hype on polo had over 100kBTC volume, with now residing somewhere at 0,014 with ~24kBTC volume.
So if 3001 vendors are responsible for over 100kBTC volume, every vendor in median had to have ~33BTC for playing wiht XMR, now somewhat around ~8BTC each if every vendor is actively trading --> possible but not likely.
Why, simply because these 100BTC to 800BTC buy walls would to have been built, in median, buy more than one vendor at the same time --> possible but not likely.
Even if, let's say 10% of the active vendors are actively trading with the new XMR (multiply the figures buy 10) which i still do not believe, this would be more unlikely to happen at the same time on the same place. The lending figures intensify my claim and theory of a single entity playing around and making the market to the contrary argument of "natural" growth
Think about it
That is completely disingenuous. Going from 0 to those numbers do absolutely mean something. I appreciate some statistics, but you gotta be less disingenuous in the way you handle the data. 2737 are accepting XMR. That is an increase of 2737! How many of the 136877 are active, or have been active within the last months? At the same time you ascribe ALL the volume to vendors trading. Dude. Come on.. Most if not all people in this thread are either speculators, holders, spectators or somewhere in between and have no connection to those DNM. We know with certainty that many in here are responsible for some of the volume.
That's not to say there's no big traders and attempt at manipulation happening, but come on..