Bitcoin Forum

just noticed that r0ach has started to indulge in heavy pro-Momero propaganda beginning today

most likely bribed/paid - the usual deceptive game by momero community managers

however! this won't do well as r0ach is literally known as a roach on Bitcointalk. he's a bad investor

MOMERO please use better shills, TRY HARDER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He recently changed the name of his thread to allow for Monero to go up:


He originally claimed that all altcoins would dump and only Bitcoin would rise. Now he changes his tune.

Oh yea, Smooth is bribing me with so much money.  So much money that I'm even banned from the Monero IRC because Othe said I didn't talk enough about Monero and only talked about Bitcoin and boats.  Where's my truckload of payment that this guy implies, Smooth?

https://i.imgur.com/LLHEDmX.gif

I should technically not even be pro-Monero because Smooth didn't even unban me after Othe banned me.  Othe tried to pull some "I am an op so I am god here" nonsense and I refused to back down to him so he banned me.  If there is anyone who has a non-biased view of the situation, it is me.


Did the alt market not implode as stated?  I stated about halfway through the thread I was going to rename it to an altcoin talk thread eventually instead of just letting the thread die.  If the alt market is done imploding, there would be no reason to post in a thread titled "The alt market will implode soon".

12 posts and knows the ins and outs of roach's game plan??

post under your real account.

why are you scared pussy? battle r0ach in public with your real account. Are you chicken?

Thanks for the heads up. This warning should be pinned for all to see. Will closely monitor this r0achtard.

This time I agree with Roach.  XMR is a buy and it's starting to break out.  A good price to get in would be .00235 - .00255.  Now granting BTC will go steady eddy for a while and not surge upwards vs fiat, getting into XMR for a little BTC profit is a good idea.

But of course get that stoploss always handy in case the trade goes against you.  

Good luck!

Edit:  I would also like to point out that I only agree with Roach to a point.  Specifically from a trading point of view.  That's how far it goes.

Just because the fact that he went from Bitcoin maximalist to ardent XMR supporter based on his own position is  ::)  doesn't mean that Monero isn't actually a great blockchain. 
 
I can't advise any specific prices, and I encourage everyone to assume its a scam and work backwards from there - do the research, convince yourself of the truth, and then mine/buy accordingly. 

Yes, he saw the last XMR pump to 0.003 and FOMO got the best of him and bought the top and is now desperate to get rid of his bags.

or maybe he just noticed that xmr actually has a community:
https://i.imgur.com/mLZFqpf.png

r0ach is full of shit babbling on about how great Monero is. Monero is insecure. The following is from the attacker who is draining the DAO and who did the Mt.Gox attack:

This difficulty attack requires a much higher percentage of the hashpower than a 51% attack.

The article does make a valid point. If a coin uses the same mining algorithm as an "ASIC Goliath coin" that has gone through more than one generation of ASICs, then it can be attacked using the now obsolete first generation ASICs from "ASIC Goliath coin" that would be otherwise worthless junk. The example of Dogecoin in the article would only work if Litecoin goes through more than one generation of ASICs and Dogecoin were not merged mined with Litecoin. Extrapolating  this attack to Monero fails because:
1) Monero uses CryptoNight not SHA 256, Ethash, Scrypt etc.
3) CryptoNight is ASIC resistant. There are no ASICs for CryptoNight let alone multiple generations of ASICs
2) Monero has by far the greatest hashrate of all the CryptoNight coins.

Incorrect. The point is that no matter what proof-of-work algorithm an altcoin employs, those who are protecting Bitcoin will rent enough mining hash rate to fuck your coin forever. They only have to rent it for a short period of time, and your difficulty will be so high that it will never produce a block again. And all the money in the chain will be unspendable for a very, very, very long time.

The "attacker" has the resources to do that to any proof-of-work altcoin which doesn't have the level of hashrate of Bitcoin.

Of course the altcoin can then manually reset the difficulty lower using a fork, but then the attacker can repeat again. It will quickly become clear that the altcoin is fucked.

If Monero starts to approach $1 billion market cap (or perhaps much less if the liquidity is very high, which it is for Monero), this attacker will destroy Monero and profit by shorting.

This doesn't mean I am attacking Monero. I am just speaking factually.

If the proof of work algorithms are different there is nothing new here. Manipulating the difficulty in the manner suggested in the article is a horribly inefficient way to attack a POW coin, if the objective is to create havoc in the coin, since it requires much more hashpower than a simple 51% attack. The simple economics of this is that the greater the market price of a coin, the more costly such a brute force attack would be and consequently the least the chance of such an attack. There is really nothing new here. As for bear raids again the more liquid an asset is the less likely a bear raid will succeed.

If the proof of work algorithms are the same then there can be little or no cost in the ASIC case I mentioned above, because the equipment is surplus and obsolete and there is no other use for it. This is why we have seen this phenomenon in some small SHA 256 coins not because the coins were specifically targeted for an attack but rather because people were trying to extract additional value out of obsolete ASIC Bitcoin mining equipment.

Edit 1:  Many in the early days of Bitcoin were afraid that some large bank would attempt such an attack on Bitcoin in order to "nip the competition in the bud", it did not happen. My take is this did not happen because the large players rarely take much notice of the small players until it is too late. If Monero were to grow large enough to pose a serious threat to Bitcoin, and that will take way more than a 1 billion USD market cap, then it will be also way more difficult to attack.
Edit 2: The DAO and MTGox were attacked because there were very weak and full of vulnerabilities. Ethereum could easily go down with the DAO, because the Ethereum devs panicked under pressure and are inducing the community to panic. They should simple do nothing  and let the DAO fail rather put the entire credibility of Ethereum at risk. Bitcoin did not fork over the MTGox troubles and that is why Bitcoin is still around. As for Monero it could not fork to pull these kinds of shenanigans even it it wanted to, because one would not know which transactions to censor.

But, but, but.  I heard Monero has already hired all the botnets of the world, and even invented a new FTP-based one.

What happens when a resourceful adversary starts a bidding war for those botnets?

Usually the price of Monero goes up with the difficulty (less blocks = less xmr supply), so I would welcome such an event!   8)

If the adversary succeeds in driving up the difficulty so high the network gets stuck between blocks when they leave, I'm sure somebody like Risto or Arcticmine (xmr whale types) can light up a data center long enough to get us over the hump.

IIRC Litecoin briefly had a billion dollar cap.  Your proposed scenario failed to materialize; ergo it's just paranoid FUD representing your demon-haunted world, not actual reality.

Who said it is new? I am just reminding everyone that altcoins are insecure. And if they have enough liquidity, they will be raided. First Litecoin, next Mt.Gox, next Ethereum, and next.


It only requires a very short duration to send the difficulty permanently into the stratosphere. Only a fork can revert it. The attacker doesn't have any ongoing cost. The rental cost is cheap. All your CAPEX arguments fail because you forgot about renting.

---

The "attacker" can rent 1000X more botnets than you can. That was the entire point of the "attacker's" blog article.

rpietila and the "attacker" of the DAO are mortal enemies. And the latter is about 100X more wealthy than the former. You don't have a chance in hell. Plus he has rich friends. You are just tinker toys for him.

He commented (http://trilema.com/2014/the-woes-of-altcoin-or-why-there-is-no-such-thing-as-cryptocurrencies/#comment-117679) about Monero today.


And look where Litecoin is now, after he "attacked" it by raiding it's liquidity.

You are all bravado and BS. Bye fool.

Guys did you see my last comment today on my SIG link ?

I have a special proposal for you all ;)

I started now i ask you ..will you join me ?

Litecoin is doing fine.  Now sure what your point is, except to deflect from the fact your FUD scenario is EMPIRICALLY DENIED.

1000X more botnets?  I see you like to make stuff up when pressed on specifics.

MP and fluffy not taking Monero seriously doesn't mean #BA is going to attack it, not anymore than they attacked LTC at $1 billion.

Look what else he said, speaking directly to you:

LOL.  That's a nice way of saying GET REKT M8.   ;)

What like people care about what you sig?!? Get over yourselves and take all your Spoetniktard sockpuppet accounts with you. Utterly pathetic.

Incorrect. This is mounting a 51% attack for approximately one day in order to double the blocktime for approximately two days. I do find it interesting though when people suggest attacks that are way more expensive than a 51% attack and have relatively insignificant impact.

Incorrect. This is mounting a 99.9% attack for a fraction of a years in order to increase the block period by 100X for a period of years.

Please get the math correct.

off-topic much guys ?

..as long as it ain't ETH being shilled then so what !

Go Nuts guys  ;D

Cometh the halvening, and lo! ... all them Chinese chicken coops full'a insta-obsoleted SHA-256 gear :o
Gonna be glorious!

https://s32.postimg.org/ag0hs94p1/opt.jpg

>99.9% attack for a fraction of a years in order to increase the block period by 100X for a period of years.
(all the GPUs currently mining a coin) * 999?

For how long do you want to keep up your 99.9% attack for? Like for how many blocks?

That's not how it works these days.  Modern difficulty adjustment algos have sanity checks to prevent, or blunt the impact of, that class of attacks.

Why don't you get a blog, spend some time to structure your ideas properly and so on ?   ;D

I do not want sound sarcastic, but this is starting to sound to me as attempting to find the most inefficient way to attack a POW coin.

You guys are welcome to provide a succinct pseudo-code for your difficulty adjustment algorithm and then I will explain how it is broken in those more specifics.

Just like I did to ArticMine when he explained the precise equation and algorithm of Monero automatic block size adjustment algorithm (c.f. the "Satoshi did not solve the Byzantine General's Problem" thread), I showed him how it is broken. Recently he tried to speak some nonsense about CounterParty and Rootstock and I also explained to him how he was wrong. Before that it was some nonsense about CopyLeft licenses and I explained how he was wrong. A clear pattern has developed. And ArticMine I also don't want to sound disrespectful, but sorry I don't have time for all your mistakes.

Of course you guys will deny it, so how about you stop wasting my time.

iCEBREAKER, you don't know what you think you know, as I showed you last time you tried to belittle me about my work on programming language design. Go find another tree stump to hump. Your nonsense is so banal and repetitive.

We can't have a technical proof in a forum post. Both of you guys know that. So stop fooling the readers.

Who is smart ?

and i quote.. "WARNING scammer r0ach now shilling for the Monero hoax"

Now go read the comments here..  :D

Do cocky opinionated assholes always think every venue is a soap box for their "musings" ?

Hard to come off smart when you fail miserably at basic stuff like "internet'ing"

PS:
I support my fellow Satanist here..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Satan

In the adaptive blocksize limit case as in this case the attacks you formulated required a greater hashpower than the hashpower required to mount a 51% attack on the coin; however I must say than in the blocksize limit case the attack you proposed did not require 100x the hashpower of the coin. Can the difficulty adjustment algorithm in Monero be improved? Of course it can but that does not give any validity to an attack requiring 100x the hashpower of the coin since with a small fraction of such hashpower one can fork the coin and replace the difficulty adjustment algorithm by one that is completely broken by design.

As for our differences on the relative merits of proprietary vs free libre open source software development or between copyleft and non copyleft FLOSS licenses it is best to simply agree to disagree.

Edit: In 2001 Steve Ballmer the then CEO of Microsoft called Linux a cancer because of the Copyleft GPL 2 license. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/06/02/ballmer_linux_is_a_cancer/ (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/06/02/ballmer_linux_is_a_cancer/) It is fair to say that 15 years later this slow growing cancer is having an impact.

No you've forgotten smooth's point, because the 51% attack requires ongoing hashrate expended by the attacker indefinitely. The network eventually heals when the attacker stops.

The 100X attack is death star. The chain doesn't heal (even after the attacker has stopped mining) without external intervention of a fork, because the difficulty is in the stratosphere so thus no block is ever created again (or not for a long, long time such as years).

I must admit I am most frustrated with iCEBREAKER, because he is intellectually dishonest (probably because of ignorance but I am not sure). You can fiddle with the difficulty algorithm to try to auto correct from the 100X attack, but you open other security flaw holes by doing so.

Agreed you and I, can agree to disagree on the philosophy of licenses.

So does the 100x attack since the attacker has to maintain the attack for a period longer than the number to blocks used by the difficulty algorithm to calculate the change in difficulty. So my point is why would the attacker not just fork the coin and set the difficulty to some insane high value?

Edit: I am still waiting for the answer to: For how many blocks do you want to maintain the 100x attack for?

There is a huge difference between forking the protocol with 51% hashrate and adhering to the protocol with 100X hashrate (both being ways to set a stratospheric difficulty level).

In the former case, honest miners will ignore the fork. In the latter case, they can't do anything.

ArticMine you are a physicist and I am a programmer for 37 years. I will be more skilled at my field and you will be more expert at yours.

'NotBack you are going of the deep end a bit here.

The difficulty stratosphere attack you've described doesn't work very well against Monero if you work out actual numbers.

If you wanted to drive up the difficulty 1000x then you would need something approaching a billion typical (old, insecure, low powered) botnet nodes. If you wanted to use higher performance computers say from cloud computing you'd need 10 million or so, which is good portion of the capacity of the big cloud computing vendors. To rent that you would have to displace most or all of their other paying customers (or in the case of vendors such as Amazon or Google, their own usage). That won't happen.

Now lets say you did manage to, somehow, drive the difficulty up 1000x. You would drive the average block time from 2 minutes to 2000 minutes which is around a day and a half. The chain would not completely stall, it would continue to generate blocks at this slow rate. Those blocks would feed into the difficulty adjustment and after a few days the block time would rapidly begin to come down. It would still be slow for quite a while, but the severity would subside. Meanwhile, the blocks would be full of high-paying transactions and the block size would increase. The network would hobble along until it self-healed.

If you tried the possibly more plausible 100x version instead of the ridiculous 1000x version, then the block time only goes to 200 minutes, which hardly slower than Bitcoin on a bad day (I've personally waited over an hour for a block). Again, block size adjustment would start to kick in and clear the transaction backlog. Over time (hours to days, not years) the block time would start to come back down pretty fast anyway.

This ignores that Monero with a billion market cap would probably have a much higher baseline hash rate, meaning not only is 1000x implausible but 100x would probably be as well. And a 10x difficulty attack is just purely money for basically no purpose.

Nothing about this is specific to Monero's algorithm, which probably isn't even all that good. This sort of attack won't work against any current alts with faster base block times and difficulty adjustment algorithms that have been battle-tested not only by malicious parties but by auto-switching pools which do this form of "attack" automatically and routinely by rapidly moving massive amounts of hash rate between coins.

The attack works much better against Bitcoin-style coins (1st gen alts mostly) that start with a higher block time and that maintain a fixed difficulty for a (reasonably long) cycle. You drive up the difficulty during one cycle and the difficulty never adjusts at all until the end of the next cycle so there is an unacceptable wait for the whole cycle (2016 blocks in the case of many early alts that just copied Bitcoin).

The attacker in the 51% case is mining otherwise perfectly valid blocks but at a higher attack difficulty rather than the correct optimal difficulty in the blocks. There is no actual change in the protocol. The trade-off is that the 51% attack blocks could be easily detected by the network in exchange for a much lower cost of attack. In either case once the attack ends the difficulty starts to fall since time ticks by with no blocks being mined. There is a key difference between Bitcoin or a Bitcoin clone and Monero in that in Bitcoin the difficulty adjustment is discrete approximately every 2 weeks while in Monero it is continuous, This means that by timing the end of the attack correctly the attacker could keep the difficulty constant in Bitcoin for 2 weeks, while in Monero the difficulty starts to fall approximately 2 min after the end of the attack.

http://www.coindesk.com/data/bitcoin-mining-difficulty-time/ (http://www.coindesk.com/data/bitcoin-mining-difficulty-time/)
http://www.coinwarz.com/difficulty-charts/monero-difficulty-chart (http://www.coinwarz.com/difficulty-charts/monero-difficulty-chart)

Collusion between honest miners and devs could mitigate the attack but in both cases it involves ignoring the difficulty in the blocks in some way, effectively a hard fork. One can mitigate against this attack by having the difficulty algorithm drop the difficulty at a faster rate if no blocks are found after a given amount of time, where this time is statistically much larger than the normal block time.

Still I do not see the economics here. One can do a lot more damage with a 51% attack than this.

Please stop trying to pretend that Monero's measily hashrate is secure! You are both lying.




Or a combination of both. Don't say what will happen when China can easily build that computer power if you threaten their Bitcoin mining cartel. If you think the computer power mining Monero is a significant fraction of world computing power, you have a few screws loose in your head.

I don't appreciate your insult. Should I return the insult or will you be a little be more circumspect from here on?


Incorrect. The attacker would with a much lower level of hashrate than the initial attack be able to win a block every 2000 minutes and thus block all transactions except his, so he can exit the coin with his mining rewards. With Monero he can even hide his coins, so no one knows! Doubly-fucked because of the anonymity.


Look there are tradeoffs on security when you have the adjustment fast or slow and the attacker can game which ever weakness you enable. If too fast, he can fire up his hashrate again for only a very short period of time to start another period of 2000 minute block periods.



Fucking wrong as wrong can be.

Please stop fucking with me.


I asked you Monerotards to stop wasting my time.

If you do not want to waste your time may I suggest:
1) Stop proposing attacks that make zero economic sense
2) Stop insulting people.

You are a liar (or incredibly ignorant of the technology).

And you are insulting me. I asked you to stop being intellectually dishonest and wasting my time.

Now you send smooth here to insult me and lie.

smooth, ArticMine, and iCEBREAKER ganging up on me and lying.

Quoted for posterity. I will deal with this later.

Edit:

This is gibberish. It reads like you are drunk.

Yes a 51% attacker is mining valid blocks so when he stops mining, the difficulty is not very high, so that is not the same as attacking the network with 1000X the hashrate and driving the difficulty skyhigh. In your prior message, it seemed you proposed to fork the protocol to change the difficulty using only a 51% attack. I explained that honest miners would ignore the fork. Now you seem to imply the attacker can do a 51% attack, but mine with 1000X the hashrate so they don't need to change the protocol. Well then that isn't a 51% attack, it is the 1000X attack. So you've made no point at all. But it is difficult to understand what you mean, because the above just doesn't make any sense.

So what the hell are you trying to say here?

Please stop wasting my time. Write coherently and correctly at one post. Put your entire point in one post and expend the effort to make your post coherent. This back and forth is very wasteful.


On the continuous sliding adjustment window, this doesn't impact anything w.r.t. to this issue. It is just equivalent to a smoothing filter.

W.r.t. to detecting attack blocks, this is nonsense. All blocks looks the same. There is no way to identify which blocks are coming from the attacker unless all the honest nodes are colluding. But that defeats the entire point of decentralization and trustless. The attacker could Sybil attack your trust for example.

ArcticMine you always drag me into the long nonsense debates and then I win at the end. Please be more respectful of my time.

I am not wasting any more time on you. What you see is what you get.

Thank you.

Shebly spends more time off the deep end than on land; his distinguished history of eccentricity one of his more endearing attributes.   :)

But after a spanking such as smooth just administered, he won't be able to sit down for a week.   ;D

The term "codemonkey" exists to describe the end result of hyperspecialization in software (and concomitant atrophy/retardation of other disciplines).

Physicists have much more of a "full stack" understanding of the world, as software (in all of its complexities) is merely a tool in their belt, to be used in multiscale modeling from below to above.

EG, SETI@HOME/BOINC were seminal in the development of distributed computing, yet developed by astronomers and cosmologists.

Shebly may have once been a whiz at writing printer drivers and pondering esoteric nuances of type theory, but utterly fails to contextualize software within the socioeconomic matrix of Actual Organic Reality.

Thus he thinks it's legitimate to ponder attacks on $10 million market cap Monero as if they seamlessly/transparently apply to $1 billion Monero.

The (self-modulating/regulating/defeating) of Shebly's proposed attack are so far outside his narrow field of expertise, explaining them to him is like trying to explain graphic design theory to a Dunning-Kruger afflicted blind mole.

Notice he still hasn't specified how for how many blocks his attack endures.  What intellectual dishonesty!   ::)

iCEBREAKER, nobody cares what you have to say.

You are irrelevant. You don't code.

Do I need to link you to ArticMine getting schooled by myself the prior day about side-chains, CounterParty, and RootStock. Why should I bother to waste my time on you.

You don't understand that if you hasten the readjustment that enables other modes of attack. No matter which direction you go, the bottom line is that Monero isn't secure against an attacker with 1000X the hashrate. Period. Stop lying.

Incorrect. You claim to win in the end when in fact the opposite is the case.

Edit: As demonstrated in your response here where you did nothing to support your claim:


Where for example did I say that Monero is secure against an attack with 1000x its hash rate? Or any POW coin for that matter?

hmmmmmm

I don't suppose you same sold usual suspects recall ANOTHER previous topic
where you pulled the same damn fucking shit that went on for 100+ pages ?

I sure as fucking hell do.

You guys jacked the god damn forum and you would not STFU.

It was of course the same base concept and the exact same guys LOL

Do you remember that or what i am curious ? Should i go bump the other super topic etc ?

EDIT:
In other words many of you *as usual* do NOT possess the ability to control your behavior.
A clear sign of mental problems me thinks.

So you waste my time, forcing me to go dig up links to show where you lost the prior technical arguments. You just don't know how to quit do you. All you Monerotards do is go around stomping on every body else in the forum.

Here is where you didn't understand properly side-chains, CounterParty, RootStock and consensus algorithms:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1518508.msg15283868#msg15283868
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1518508.msg15284907#msg15284907
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1518508.msg15286387#msg15286387
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1518508.msg15286631#msg15286631
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1518508.msg15286694#msg15286694


I dug up the mistakes you made about Monero's block size adjustment algorithm:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1183043.msg13844014#msg13844014
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1183043.msg13844373#msg13844373
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1183043.msg13848626#msg13848626
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1183043.msg13850005#msg13850005


Please don't make me repeat those discussions. You had your chance already when you made those discussions. No remakes.

and yet here we go AGAIN.

seconds after i commented LOL

and like 2 years ago you all went and pulled this same shit for 100+ pages before
and in the end got no where with it but spamming the shit out of this place with it all.

the SAME guys as way back sitting here NON STOP pushing & pushing & pushing

..off-topic LOL

AGAIN  ::)

---

EDIT:

I asked you all nicely a few questions related to this topic etc
I had an idea and YOU IGNORED me and went off on a tangent.. derailing the topic.
So..
Meanwhile ETH rallied to $15 coin while you old hens pull your your typical bullshit.

Trying to get them ducks in lien is working to well LOL
..they run around all willy nilly "quote from Jake"

You know why I know you lost the argument. One word in your post.

Edit:


Again I dispute your claim that I am incorrect on the matter; however you have saved me time by collecting this material in one place and for this I do thank you.

You send iCEBREAKER here to foam at the mouth. What do you expect?

You three attacking me and not even being coherent on the technical issues.

So why are you arguing with me then?

Didn't you realize that was what this discussion was about since the start. Did you even read the attacker's blog article that made that point which started this entire discussion.

1. You don't even know what the discussion is about.
2. smooth tries to argue that 1000X hashrate doesn't exist.
3. iCEBREAKER swallowed expanding foam.

I did not send anyone to say anything. Again an accusatory allegation with no evidence to support it.

Huh? Secure against ordinary 51% attacks and against 1000x attacks are two different things. 51% is possible. It isn't cheap or easy, but possible for someone with significant resources.

Monero's hash rate is probably >1/1000 of Bitcoin when adjusted to equivalent energy. It is quite secure against 1000x attacks, especially considering they are not entirely effective as they were against some gen 1 alts. Algorithmically it is reasonably secure against 100x difficulty spike attacks (as are most other current alts such as Dash), though somewhat better than those that don't have a variable blocksize (again such as Dash) to absorb a transaction backlog.

It is self-evident that Monerotards attack in droves.

If you don't like being associated with that foul mouth, then say so. Otherwise, by self-evident association of how you Monerotards popup together in the same attacks on everyone, I'll presume the self-evident association.

How about  looking at it from my side?

How do you think it feels to be on my side and being attacked? And you not even knowing what the discussion was about. iCEBREAKER not even knowing enough about the tech and just hurling his foul mouth. And smooth pretending that China can't produce 100 - 1000X Monero's hashrate for burst periods of time. I suppose smooth has high security clearance and has access to all the data about the supercomputers that China has. And smooth knows who all the whales are in Bitcoin and what access they have to computing power. Etc... Smooth is omniscient, did you know that!

You made an allegation that you cannot support. Please do not try to justify it with insults or by repeating the allegation.

If you are talking about me, I haven't even been online for most of the past day. I dropped in and posted a few times. Nothing to do with anyone else. Many of the other posts I'm not even reading.

You lose the technical arguments and now you try to argue for victory on a technicality when you know damn well why I am pissed off.

Grow some people skills. Treat people like shit and waste their time and attack in droves and you will not be liked. Period.


Now that you 3 guys have wasted several hours of my day. May I bill you $500 for my lost time? Of course not. But I hope you understand how wasteful this is.


No one dare speak up about Monero, lest they lose their entire income due to endless attacks.

That isn't saying much when BitCON is only using 1/1000th of the world's electricity.

So Monero uses 1 millionth of the world's electricity. Whoop–de–do.


Edit: and downthread even ArticMine admits Monero is likely to lose 1/10th of its hashrate as block rewards decline to the tail emission, so that will be 1/10th of a millionth. And remember you and I were originally the only (vocal) guys who wanted a tail emission and rest of the Monero community didn't and Monero didn't have a tail emission before they realized we were correct.

Again another unsubstantiated claim.

You idiots pulled this same exact shit for 139 pages to be exact before on the same fucking topic

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789978.2760

It is so bad it's archived and listed as DELETE

You blow-hard's are mouthy spammy morons who THINK they are smart.
and never shut the fuck up.

..always about Monero ::)

---

look at page 99 of 139 people

same mouthy douche bags and same arguments..

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789978.msg9079524#msg9079524

---

EDIT:

And i quote..

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789978.msg9079679#msg9079679


TheFascistMind vs smooth

ding ding ding round 140,000 of techno rammble spammtard Morono bullshit

..again  ::)

Dude I posted the links of proof on the prior page of this thread.

And I am saving the slam dunk for last.

Monero's hashrate will plummet as the block reward declines.

And the transaction fees not only won't scale up because Monero has no adoption use case, but they can't scale up because Monero didn't solve the block size bandwidth problem (as neither did Bitcoin).

So smooth's points are slam dunk refuted.

Stop the whining shit please. And be nice. So others can be nice to you. Everyone can see clearly that there is no unsubstantiated claim. It is quite clear what happened here. Just read the thread.

I can't help it if you didn't understand what the discussion was about and started to write gibberish. And then somehow you expect me to be nice after you three gang up on me. And especially when all 3 of you are incorrect on the technical issue.

I try to be nice and friendly with others. But hopefully you can see this situation was impossible to take. Go read the thread and imagine you are myself. Put yourself in my shoes for once.

It's a performative contradiction (IE euphemism for hypocrisy) to simultaneously reply to me while *at the same time* claiming "nobody cares what I have to say."  Obviously, and demonstrably, *YOU* care what I have to say.   ;)

"1000X the hashrate" for how many blocks?

Despite being asked you've yet to specify, in a typical display of intellectual dishonesty and schizophrenic derangement.   :-\

Did anyone claim XMR (or any PoW coin) is completely safe from 1000X hashrate attacks?  I don't recall such an assertion.

You need to accept the fact smooth just woke you up, fed you breakfast, got you dressed, put you in your little car seat, and TOOK YOU TO SCHOOL.   8)

P.S.  Arcticmine, smooth, and I mix it up frequently; you have zero basis to assert we are conniving in the manner of you and jl777scammer.

I don't answer those who don't understand that the debate is over already, and who ask irrelevant questions. My prior post is proscriptive.

jl777 is not partnered with me on any project. Any more lies?

Your entire argument fails for Monero because you are not taking into account the tail emission which places a lower limit on the hashrate. for a given price in terms of the cost of computing power. As for fees in Cryptonote coins I expect the total fees per block to over time oscillate around a constant fraction of the emission regardless of the block size. For a constant price in terms of computing power I would expect the hashrate for Monero to eventually drop to around 7-8% of the current level. This is higher than the current hashrate of Bytecoin. Without a tail emission Cryptonote coins will eventually become insecure, so yes your argument does work for example for Bytecoin. Interestingly Bytecoin's pre mine / ninja mine could provide significant advance warning, in the order of two years, to the Monero community if one were to argue that the tail emission on Monero is not enough. This is kind of like a canary in a coal mine.

Edit: Taking only part of an argument while ignoring the rest of the argument does not invalidate the argument.

The tail reward is much lower than the current reward.

So then if smooth already admitted that a 100X hashrate might be difficult to source but feasible, so then 1000X becomes feasible when Monero's hashrate drops by 1/10 as you admit.

Please stop the lies! You continue to lie (see bolded, underlined).

So after wasting my entire fucking day, I was correct.

And you wonder why people get annoyed at Monero's community. Surely you are smart enough to have figured this all out 3 pages back and said, "you are correct". Then I would respect you.

Everyone knows that software developers disrespect those people who waste our time. Because we never have enough time.


r0ach close the damn thread. It is wasting a lot of precious time!

In 2011, Namecoin was a prime example of this (bolded).

it took months for the difficulty adjustment to happen downwards.

You don't play the victim very well.

Anonymint is that you?  ::)

Who is forcing you to respond in this thread?

Nobody but yourself.

Do us all a favor and at least own your own actions (like wasting your own time posting on the forum per your own words).

So:
1) Wait for Monero to reach tail emission
2) Hope the price does not go up in the interim (A major failure that is orthogonal to this debate)
3) And then the attack is barely feasible.

Edit 1: Maybe we should table this debate until Monero reaches the tail emission, since the attack has to wait until then to have even a hope of possible feasibility, and save everyone a lot of time.
Edit 2: r0ach did not start this thread.

All of you (except possibly Spoetnik) are certified idiots.

None of you can understand how I, as the inventor of the "Video Microwave" in 1989, have a wholly superior knowledge of quantum mechanics and the use of the cavity magnetron for manipulating EITHER NTSC or PAL broadcast signals.  It was therefore superior to the fundamentally inferior "Video Toaster" which ran on that damned Jay Miner's Amiga.

Jay sent god dammed Tim Jennison in to taunt me with more lies, and though my technology was superior their lies were able to influence the world of video production for years to come.

But w.r.t. to this current topic of mockery I simply do not have the time to explain how stuipid you all are and you would not be able to understand it anyway.

I am an inventor while you are all mice.

Or possibly a squirrel in the case of Spoetnik.

Having just posted upthread I fell I must expand to clarify, I do not think Spoetnik is anything like the Squirrel galagos (Sciurocheirus) whose prehensile hands ( in both fore AND hind paws) give it the neural sophistication that is way beyond Spoetnics capacity.

He would be more the inferior melanistic eastern grey squirrel.

Common, and wholly idiotic almost as fully as you Mus Musculus fools.

I can ICO THAT !

And nice to see you in the Altcoin section Bruno LOL

I warned these guys before you were comin'  :D

I see smoothie was compelled to jump into this bs too ahahhaha
You are all compulsive and manic techno blow hards..
Which would be fine if it was even remotely within context of the discussion at hand.

Funny part is i can quote all of these guys bad mouthing Bitcointalk
..then proclaiming how they are all leaving  :D

(funny 'cause their still here spouting off)

Do you want to discuss the topic ?
It does not seem that way.

If you are all content acting this way then go for it..
I just tried to point out how it catastrophically undermines your "I'm smart speech"

EDIT:
I may have not gotten the guys name correct on that..
Guy PM'd me to say it's not him.

Privately developing an ASIC for Monero with orders-of-magnitude increase in power efficiency that normally results from an ASIC, is another potential way to amass massive hashrate advantage. Cryptonite seems to be compute bound, so if true then it is not ASIC resistant. If that is true, then until Monero's market becomes large enough to incentivize the development of publicly available ASICs, then it could be vulnerable.

Also as Monero's hashrate falls due to declining block rewards, that opens another opportunity to attack it more cheaply with rented hashrate.

Monero is fighting the State by offering anonymity. The Black Budget of the USA in excess of $4 trillion. If the DEEP STATE decides they want to crush Monero with hashrate attacks, then I don't believe Monero can defend itself. I believe this is what the blog article I linked to that started this discussion was concerned about. You may observe his writings are laced with anti-USG rhetoric.

Observe the Monero gang attacking me here, but none of you have proceeded to the blog of the author of the article I linked. His blog is open for comments. Are you afraid to rebuke him, the source of the allegation.

I think it is ludicrous to argue that these small market cap altcoins with declining block rewards are secure against such threats. It shouldn't even be an argument amongst sane individuals.

You convinced me.

let's roll over and die.

I raised the point not because I wanted to give up (although sometimes you guys make me feel like I would like to leave CC yet luckily my desire to fight overpowers my feelings/perceptions about how insane this market is). But because r0ach who has been for the past months (ever since he stopped teasing us with Bitshares' DPOS) arguing that Bitcoin is the only shit, suddenly starts pumping an altcoin (Monero) (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520564.msg15298455#msg15298455). He raved about how it is superior to Zcash and he said basically it is the only altcoin that is worth considering. Fuck if Monero is the be all and end all of our attempts to improve CC, then we should roll over and die.

More power to Monero if they can surprise and actually figure out how to fix these problems and even challenge Bitcoin. But I am not holding my breath.

Monero had their years to dominate the forums. And what do we have to show for it?

Let someone else have a chance. Don't tell me Monero is only choice!

We need more experimentation. Monero has no clue on how to fix these issues. Nor how to obtain adoption. I was in their chat the other day to listen and it is all just nonsense. They have no plan whatsoever that is viable. And I wasn't planning on stating that, but since it wasn't enough to just let me make a statement about mining security being a weakness of proof-of-work altcoins, it unfortunately comes to me spilling out my other perceptions.

I have no problem with Monero, other than when people start speaking lies. Monero is one of the anonymity coins. It is a contender. Zcash is a contender. r0ach you are acting like the snake oil salesmen, such as iCEBREAKER who just say anything without any care whatsoever as to balance and accuracy. It is not true that Monero is superior to Zcash in every way, not even after RingCT is implemented, but I don't want to get into another long debate. So I won't even tell you why. I have already discussed that in the other threads many times before and I will not waste my time rehashing it. You are attacking a coin which isn't even released yet.

Note I haven't slept for 24 hours. So of course my writing is atrocious.



Let me add that I believe in meritocracy. I wish we could all stay in our official coin threads and go compete with action.

Enough words!

Please stop pumping shit!

Go work and STFU. All of us.

Compete and win on the merits of your adoption. We don't need r0ach or any other personality leading us like flock (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520564.msg15298455#msg15298455). Run a signature campaign if you want to plaster the forum with your banner. But pleeeeassssee stop with attacking other coins such as Zcash. Go build your own fucking coin and make it a Bitcoin killer. Words against Zcash isn't accomplishment. And for as long as Monero has ongoing forks (upgrades), please don't holier than thou about how Zcash has a corporation doing the open source coding. Open source coding has often been funded by corporations.

We need action. Stop the fucking games!



Fail. It is not even not funny. But it says something about you.

I think he's talking about the fact that you alone donated like 20000 Monero  to the team which makes you like a giant Monero bagholder if u can do that lol... no wonder this forum see's you going crazy on Monero threads along with hashfest scammer Icebreaker and the 2 commit "Monero developer" Smooth  =(

You know what's funny after calling out that MOnero developer who took also around 20000 Monero's from that gambling site Monerdice hosted by the main Monero developer Fluffypony  I think he's name was othe...yes yes that useless developer who took the biggest win on that website yet he didn't do much also for 2 years or so...so yes it is believable to say that Monero with their giant bagholders and useless developer would hire ppl to spam the forums.

Someone has sent iamnotback to gang up on my superior comedy.  I could send links and links of superior comedy to prove it, and I just may.

Everything I post says something about me.  Not sure what you think I said there though.

But you never seen not even not until you've seen my version of not even not.  And I fully understand the not even wrong theorum.

But I don't have not too much work to not do right now to never not argue with you right now or not.

This will be my last ever post.

i personally cant see any comedy in ur utter shite my nifty boy

but i want to thank u for deciding that to be the last post

thanx

~CfA~

You are a beta male and incapable of understanding such filigreed subtlety.

Begone.

Readers please note that I don't have anything against Monero as an open source experiment in crypto-currency. I support their experimentation. I don't like (bordering on hate although I don't allow myself be consumed by hate) the community of Monero. And I don't support when someone writes that Monero is the only altcoin that is serious or worthy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520564.msg15298455#msg15298455). They have not yet earned that, and if ever they do earn that, they won't need to state it because such truths are self-evident.

There is something foul smell in the community of Monero. I'd rather not try to explain what that smell is, as others have already explored that. Ethereum has its idolizing fanboiz and Monero has its delusion-of-superiority, pack-dog-attacking bagboiz. Something like that.



And you are?

(obviously at least a *Munderotard bagholder)

*Munderotard
noun
Often confused with a decentralized crypto-currency, it rather refers to a constituent in the community of bagholders and bagboiz whose sole vocation in life is to convince force down the throats of everyone else that bagging users is an adoption marketing plan for a future-shock coin with regularly scheduled "community" forks leading the way away from centralization to that Holy Banal Grail (HBG).


Yet another glorious example of Munderotards banding together to play political games and thinking this is an accomplishment.

Analogous to a pact of dogs or monkeys. Not less predictable than a broken clock twice a day.

Masters of destruction and mundane, excruciatingly slow (rate of development of and actual execution performance) creations.


Logic of fail. If I own my actions (posts), then I am forced to defend them against attacks.

Four pages of shred, just to come to the conclusion that yes indeed altcoins with $million mcaps and declining block rewards, are probably insecure against an adversary with the resources of a billionaire, or more so when their hashrate has so declined already.

It shouldn't require 4 pages of bagging, to be intellectually honest and cordial and arrive at an amicable understanding that yes indeed altcoins need to be able to gain millions of users as Bitcoin has, so they become secure against all hashrate attacks. Then again Bitcoin has the subsequent problem which is then how do you stop the mining from becoming centralized control as the adoption scales up.

No non-vaporware block chain has yet solved this conundrum.

So again instead of attacking me (which is not an accomplishment), how about you just get in touch with reality, roll up your sleeves, get to work, and stop pumping your shitcoin down everyone's throat.

I realize you Munderotards are jealous with Ethereum and others making 100X gains, and you need to find some bagholders to dump your bags on, but taking your frustration out on me is not an accomplishment. Really, slaying AnonyMint is not worth even a single fuck. Find a more productive vocation.

I am quoting this post as insurance for the future. Why? Because, in the unlikely event that Monero becomes "the only altcoin that is serious or worthy" those who bought Monero early and held, could become very successful financially and human nature being what it is also become targets of hate on the grounds that "only a few benefited".  This is the flip side to the "Monero has its delusion-of-superiority" comment.

I wish you the best luck on that.

If we all can just be more honest about the flaws and strengths of our projects, I will be copacetic. And that doesn't mean berating them, but more so it means not pumping claims that aren't true at the expense of all the other ongoing experiments in CC.

I want to see action, not words.

You are welcome to hold me to that same standard, as long as you are cordial and coherent when you come into my official project thread. Feel free to quote me in the future on this point.

But if you come into my thread doing political manipulation (and turning my thread into a noise box that no one can read), I'll censor you. You can make as many uncensored threads about my vaporware (or launched) project, as you wish. I won't fight back.

Our attitude+capabilities will carry us forward. The shit hits the fan on those realities. Talk is cheap. I am working on mine.



That was the main marketing innovation I saw from Monero's ecosystem. Even someone used that once to fund me.

It is befitting that Shapeshift.io copied you, given one of the threats Monero used to make when ever I would explain I wanted to work on my own experiments, was they being open source could just copy any thing that was valuable.

Btw, I was pitching the conceptual idea of XMR.to back in 2013 on BCT. It was one of the rebuttals I had for the Bitcoin maximalists. And yet again one of my ideas becomes a blockbuster success. You think I don't have a lot more of those ideas in my back pocket.

Care more about random anonymous people on a forum. :)

I was too sleepy at the tail end of that marathon day yesterday when this debate heated up at the end with 4 against one sleepy one.

smooth et al, you forgot another key point. You argued the high difficulty would only cause the miners to win a block every day ~200 minutes instead 2 mins (assuming the more plausible 100X hashrate attack), but the miners will leave because they become unprofitable (as the block reward doesn't increase but the length of time they need to mine for the same reward increases by 100).

So the your mining hashrate actually drops to 0 also under the attack scenario.

Duh!

PWNED.


PWNED. REKTD.

I say this whole debate should be tabled until Monero reaches the tail emission.

This may happen but a lot of miners are just on autopilot and won't stop. The hash rate will never literally go to zero. People mine on broken abandoned forks for months if not years. So maybe the 200 minutes becomes 500 or 1000 or whatever. It doesn't really matter because the longer the spiked block times, the faster the difficulty will drop once it starts dropping.

You earlier mentioned that the attacker can keep driving the difficulty up, and this is true, but it changes it from a one time attack to an ongoing attack. If you're going to do that, probably a regular 51% is at least as effective.

The in-progress Surae Noether difficulty algorithm (its somewhere on github) might also be more resistant to these types of attacks. It is designed to resist changes in hash rate that are "unnatural". I haven't looked carefully at this particular scenario though.

I know of one other way to improve resistance against this attack.

Monero's block reward subsidy gets smaller every block, and may be traded off in exchange for larger blocks.

By the time Monero's market cap gets to the $1 billion magnitude you claim would trigger Bitcoin's nuclear counterattack, we would expect to see heavy actual use accompanied by appropriate fees that cumulatively dwarf the (by then tiny) subsidy.

Those unclaimed fees would pile up if no blocks were found for 200 minutes or whatever, providing economic incentive (in addition to static background social/ideological) motivation for miners to operate.

smooth already explained this to you.  Please don't skip nap time.  You get cranky, incoherent, and unteachable when you do that.

You started talking about $1 billion Future Monero, but then used assumptions from $10 million Present Monero in the ensuing rambling and ranting.

Not sure if intellectual dishonesty, analytical schizophrenia, or both.  IE par for the Crazy Uncle Shelby course.   :P

You entirely didn't understand the issue, because the quoted is irrelevant to the issue I pointed out.

PWNED again.

This confirms that everyone in Monero is a clueless idiot, since none of them have yet admitted that what I pointed out in my prior post, totally REKTED Monero and all other proof-of-work altcoins. Actually the author of dao attack is the one who pointed this issue out, but I also remember being aware of this issue in the past. It is one of the reasons I invented unprofitable proof-of-work.

Smooth your damage-control-lies are not what I expected from you. What ever you do to adjust the algorithm to compensate in one way, will open a vulnerability in another way. It is absolutely insoluble for to defend against even a 10X attack, not to mention a 100X attack. Arguing that any significant number of miners will indefinitely mine at 0 income is disingenuous. The difference between the 51% attack and the 10X burst attack is not that the total hashrate expended by the attacker is less, but that it is 10X less income for the other miners.

Note I don't enjoy having to say this against smooth. I respect smooth, but this is out-of-character for him.

Amazing how the Monero gang is getting destroyed in this thread LOL

Not that they ever had any argumentz in first place.  Anyway very interesting to read this stuff

ThX Shelby

~CfA~

I am not discouraging them from gaining more adoption. but you don't get there by lying.

And also there is still the issue that the block reward is declining eventually to the tail reward which is (estimated roughly) 1/10 of the current.

And when they launched Monero, they argued against smooth and I as we were arguing for a tail reward back in 2014.

Btw, I am sure smooth knows all of this and he is merely caught by the politics of it. I hate politics!

smooth already explained why, in terms of hashrate and tx fees, More Is Different (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence) when it comes to a 1000X botnet attack on a billion dollar proof of work ecosystem vs our current $10 mi one.

Shelby is unteachable.  He can't understand basic economic concepts of marginalism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marginalism), or at least cannot apply them properly.

His Dunning Kruger affliction is overwhelming, but not uncommon.  Many codemonkeys fail at understanding messy-but-robust complex dynamic systems such as economics and law, which are utterly unlike the pristine-but-brittle digital reality where they are natives.

OTOH, a physicist like Articmine has spend a career studying the subtle intricacies of self-organization, scale invariance, and phase transition, so grasping an idea like supply and demand equilibrium is easy.

Excuse me. The discussion was about what Monero is now (a <$10m mcap), not your projections of what you hope it will become.

Moving the goal posts is doubly REKTED.

As for the rest of your theories that you attribute to ArticMine, please provide the white paper that explains all this theory allegedly baked into Monero. No white paper, means you are just blowing hot air out your ass as usual.

How many guys in the GCHQ basement are working the Shelby persona?

You all need better coordination to keep track of what the previous shift wrote.

EG:


R. E. K. T.   8)

Um, its actually >$20 mil as I write this. Not sure where anyone is getting <$10 mil.

http://btcbase.org/log/2016-06-23#1487906

mircea_popescu: https://archive.is/HOMve re missing luke chadwick / vertis.io thing
asciilifeform: ah lel that was in the logz
asciilifeform: somebody crawled shithub for aws creds and cashed in
mircea_popescu: aha
asciilifeform: hit each chump for 4fig usd of ding , for a few bux return each
asciilifeform: because why the fuck not.
mircea_popescu: litecoin of all things.
asciilifeform: at the time there was no scrypt asic.
thestringpuller: wow. maybe theymos has something with his r/bitcoin moderation: "Please, never ever turns Bitcoin into a democracy sh** thing. Be strong."
asciilifeform: hence litecoin.
mircea_popescu: anyway, talk about "botnet market" bla bla : imagine if guy had where to use this, recoup closer to the 4fig.

It isn't only not disingenuous, it is based on real world empirical observation, which always trumps theories. For example, when Monero did our planned hardfork to upgrade to v2 blocks, there significant hashrate that didn't upgrade and continued mining worthless blocks for days if not weeks. AEON's planned hard fork was similar (though with less advance notice and perhaps less well-publicized). I didn't really pay attention to when the v1 fork stopped growing on either coin (or has it ever?). This was not a spontaneous attack catching-unaware miners by surprise either, it was an upgrade that was announced and well-publicized for weeks to months.

Since you have now downgraded (or one might say upgraded, in terms of plausibility) to 10x attacks, that only requires 20 minutes to start to produce blocks at the pre-attack hashrate. IF 90% of the hash rate abandons mining, then it would still only take 200 minutes. Either way there will still be high-fee transactions stacked to mine, blocks being produced with larger block sizes, and the hash rate will start to drop.

On the topic of the tail reward, the eventual reward is about 1/20 of the current reward. So at 20x the current price you would expect a similar hash rate. That only brings us to about 600 million market USD market cap (factoring in increased supply). At 1 billion USD or more the hash rate would be higher.


This is wrong. In a 51% attack other miners get no income since their blocks are rejected.


No. Note that I didn't say attacks could be completely prevented. I said resistance could be improved.

Okay so it is not disingenuous but rather your lack of reading comprehension. Thanks.


No I didn't:

---

A reading comprehension issue again:

---

And Monero is not secure at the current hashrate against a sufficiently capable attacker such as the the Chinese State, which btw will be growing more and more wealthy as the West falls into its socialism abyss collapse underway. Ditto Russia is rising (even Germany outlawed their nuclear generation plants and mandated all electric cars, yet all the energy will then have to come from Russia).


I'm not wrong.

Because if the minority are on static IPs, then it may be possible for the minority to form a whitelist with the 51% attack scenario, so they reject any blocks from IPs that always appear the longest chain and not in orphaned chains, i.e. they fork away from the attacker's chain. The attacker can't waste blocks in the orphan chains with only 51% hashrate. Whereas, with the 10X attack, the attacker can allow allow all blocks without significantly awarding the minority any revenue.

Another key difference is that the effective block period is 10X slower in the 10X attack (after the initial burst of 10X faster and periodic bursts of being not 10X slower to maintain the high difficulty), which makes it more clear the coin is broken potentially amplifying the gains from shorting.

Another advantage of the 10X attack is the attacker doesn't have to be continuously active and can popup with new IPs periodically, to frustrate attempts to trace him.



White paper or it didn't happen.

You're right we don't have e nuclear deterrence force either. Maybe someday we can create a DAO that contracts for one though.


Irony much?

Remember the title of this thread.

I am not buying Monero, then telling everyone it is the only altcoin that is worth investing in (and that Zcash is inferior in every way), trying to dump my bagholding on others. Nor am I even selling any tokens nor investing in any tokens yet.

I stated very clearly upthread, that my reason for posting in this thread is because of r0ach's behavior, not because of Monero per se. But then it became a Monero community issue because of the way your community interacts in this thread.

Note I edited my prior post to make my technical rebuttal more logically coherent.

Okay, if you are pushing back against r0ach shilling, you'll get no argument from me. He is entitled to his opinion though.

Though, I don't think you've made a particularly good case why someone might not want to buy Monero now. Arguments about boogeyman attacks by the Chinese State or someone with 100x the hash rate, are likely not too persuasive. If that's the best you can come up with, it kind of implies that the Monero is pretty secure against the issues people are more likely to be actually concerned about.

Smooth I wasn't going around telling people to not buy Monero. I was trying to remain impartial to a great extent and let the altcoin experiments proliferate, so hopefully from that will come something better than the status quo.

My problem is when Monero people trying to tell everyone that everything else is a scam and shitcoin. I am fighting the lack of respect that Monero's community has for the importance of experimentation. We can't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I have no qualms with pointing out specific flaws in for example ICOs, proof-of-work, etc.. But to harp on "we are the only shit" (even going outside your official threads to enforce that "only us" doctrine), is extremely deleterious to our cause.

I will quote myself again, since it ended up on the bottom of the prior page of this thread:


So I guess I am done in this thread, barring any unforseen attacks against me.

You don't need the Monero community's permission to experiment. Just ignore them. That's my 2c anyway. You're certainly entitled to present your view as is anyone of course.

To be honest I would like to know where the "Monero Community" has been saying things like "it's the only alt coin worth investing in". These claims are kind of hyperbolic in my opinion. The community is made up of a fairly diverse and large amount of  people.  And not all of them are bomb throwers. But of course the bomb throwers  make the biggest splash.  But this isn't that unusual  an outcome on the Internet is it? The thread title of this post is enough to rile up some vocal fans of monero. And I don't understand why it matters what people on the internet say... really. Every alt coin and Bitcoin itself has a bunch of cheerleaders and detractors.

It is what it is.

Nothing to get your panties in a wad over in my opinion.

+1

that is a thing many people do not understand... they only watch the bomb throwers

For as long as you condone your community's abhorrent behavior, then you don't understand what makes open source contribution work.

No one wants to contribute to a group of assholes.

We want to see accomplishments that matter, not words.



And please put a leash on this rabid Monero predator pitbull who lacks reading comprehension (red emphasis mine).


Unfortunately the entire project suffers when you don't disown the bomb throwers.

Remember I fought rpietila when he was preaching that shit. And finally you all disowned him and that Monero Foundation (or what ever it was called, where they were naming themselves individually as Goat of Shire Monero and some hierarchy of reputation/power structure). But you haven't yet disowned these other asshurls who drive your community reputation into the dirt.

I had an amicable, cordial exchange with fluffypony in the XMR chat earlier in the week.

Btw, your key cryptographer shen-noether was also an asshurl to me when I tried to do some peer review in Reddit on your early revision of RingCT. And note I was incredibly ill at that time and he showed no understanding whatsoever for the brain state I was in due to my illness. Just all condescending shit.

And then your community tried to paint me as a whiner, self-important prima donna, or otherwise attack my reputation. Mighty fine community you have there.

Attacked me also because I said I didn't want to work for free as a volunteer. It was always their way or the highway. Join us else you are doomed because they claim to have the best and the brightest. Always sellling yourselves as a 20 year Manhattan Project instead of letting your accomplishments do the talking.

Who are you talking to? Please provide names. I want to know specifically who in this decentralized open-source community should be responsible for controlling/censoring individuals like iCEBREAKER. I expect a direct answer to this question.

To your community. And please note that "disown" is not "censor".

Clarification: "leash" was a humorous way to return iCEBREAKER's insult. Obviously I don't expect the Monero community to literally place a dog collar on him, although the imagery is quite apropos from my perspective. I've seen Linus publicly disown "idiots" quite frequently. And he has always said that if you don't like his repository and creed, then that is why he created Git so you can make your own.

I asked for names. Criticizing "the community" is your way of attacking everyone without attacking anyone. But you know this of course. You don't actually expect "the community" (nobody in particular) to police everyone on the internet who has a bad attitude.

Your Linus argument is a non sequitur. Monero is an open source project that people are free to fork or abandon at will. It remains nobody's responsibility to play internet cop.

hi, if u really and honestly r a sane man (sadly after years of evaluation the 1st I would have seen from dem Monero gang),
 
then PLZ for the sake of ur project indirectly control and censor sirs like iCEBREAKER et al by telling them that their particular ramblings they write on Bitcointalk do no good at all and only make Monero in general look like a bunch of desperate losers

ThX

~CfA~

No.

Just no.

I have no right to try to censor anyone, and their actions on the internet are not my personal responsibility.

And frankly your suggestion means you are one of two things:

1. A troll.
2. An idiot.

I don't give a crap about trolls, and I can't help it of you are too stupid to understand that the actions of individual posters are the responsibility of those posters.

You don't like icebreaker? I suggest you take it up with him.

How convenient the excuse. Hiding behind the "that would be centralization" get-out-of-responsibility card, so as to maximize the "benefit" of all-cummers jizz sprizzing biomass.

Quality, quantity fucks, not missing the holes.

(my illness is starting to fade)



You forgot to tell smooth that. What the fuck do you think the Monero Speculation thread does?

Hypocrite.

Take ArticMine's copyleft virally enforced communism and jizz it all over Richard Stallman's "software must be free" forced doctrine beard.

Meanwhile back at the ranch of accomplishment...

I am not, so please keep your community locked up in there, as you wish. Since we all know there is no worthy altcoin other than Monero. So no need to venture out.

hi cAPSLOCK (ur name looks almost like iCEBREAKERs :D)

we r not talking about individual actions here but entire community that fails to understand everyone from the outside thinks they r desperate to crusade and advertise some shite to ppl who dont want it :(

~CfA~

Interesting retort. I'll be sure to let the supreme leader of our decentralized user base know he's dodging his responsibilities, whatever those are.

When you come off the "holier decentralized more than thou" pedestal, remember to stop forking Monero periodically because forking is centralized control over the block chain.

Point is, nothing is perfect but surely all this verbal dung that is flung over all isn't good for us. It isn't good for our cortisol levels. It isn't good for our cooperation. It isn't good for our humanity.

We aren't baboons. We are humans.

We can strive for decentralization but it shouldn't be used as an excuse to support rabid communities that make the entire process here such a pita. At my age, it is no longer exhilarating to cross swords over trivial matters. It is exhausting. I reserve my effort for that which matters. I was also guilty of what I am now arguing against. I did mea culpa.

Any way, we know some "I know everything, but I don't"¹ like r0ach will make some incorrect sweeping claims again. It is impossible to prevent that. I think eventually I will go hide in my own project's official thread (if ever that comes to fruition).

¹ And I've been guilty of that offense also.


(btw, I don't totally disrespect r0ach and he has in some of this forum threads made some points worth considering, but I think I am learning that trying to dominate the forum and everybody else is not a good strategy. He makes mistakes in his absolutism (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1524286.msg15351877#msg15351877)¹.)

I appreciate the more thoughtful reply, and I agree that nothing is perfect and we shouldn't argue over stupid shit.

The truth is, I don't care nearly as much about the BCT personalities as I do about making decentralized money an accessible reality. I don't base my support of any project on troll behavior or how annoying some of the supporters might come across, but I get your point that it may be a barrier for others.

I don't personally endorse the comments of r0ach or iCEBREAKER (nor do I follow or keep up with them), but I don't speak on behalf of "the community" either. Nobody does. So I do sometimes get frustrated by attacks directed toward "the community" that should be directed toward whatever individual is causing the problem in the first place.

Don't buy Monero

https://twitter.com/MoneroPromotion/status/746006420508729344

One of the easiest ways to lose money is to purchase things on the recommendation of others without understanding what is under the hood

Education is free.  Come to StackExchange and learn. Private beta will start soon.

Bring your difficult Monero related questions.

+1

Excellent reaction. Very positive outcome (my effort wasn't wasted thx).

I personally appreciate difficult questions for highly educated people like you. Monero is not perfect, but the community will not hide from its imperfections. The more intelligent people who study Monero, the greater the chance that weaknesses (and improvements) can be found.

This is one grand experiment. Of course I hope Monero succeeds, but if it does fail I will promise you one thing. I will learn something from the experience.

http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/98617/monero

How nice everyone is friends now.  No need to worry about baseless accusations or name calling.  

Luckily I can take my own advice.

As if the Monero community never called me derogatory names and made baseless accusations against my reputation.

When I made a statement about the Monero community, it wasn't a personal attack on you.

When I wrote that you are a "hypocrite", it was a factual statement because you advocated that your community can't (or shouldn't) apply censorship, yet you do in your Monero Speculation thread and besides I wasn't asking your community to censor. I rather suggested to your community you might want to tell this rabid dog to fuck off, because he continues driving your community reputation into the dirt:

It didn't. Individuals may have.

Are you that clueless about marketing and reality of human grievances to use that logical twist as an invalid retort (yeah it is logical to an idealist nerd but who cares). Then you'll never get any where. At least Linus understood and he created greatness.

Power of unstoppable (leaderless) organizations to self-destruct (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1523492.0)

Leadership is absolutely essential. If you guys are under some idealistic delusion of forsaking leadership, then now you see why it doesn't work.

Maybe we might obtain a protocol which is leaderless, but we don't have it yet. And for sure, community project development and marketing can't be leaderless. When it becomes so ubiquitous that it no longer has a leader, then you've already won. But you've got to walk, then run, then sprint before you're flying.

To be fair, if you had a coin and were acting as you do now, you'd be driving it's reputation into the dirt by your own standard--namely name calling and criticizing coins other than your own is the mark of a bad or unimportant  coin. I almost think you don't want to create your coin as it allows you to play back-seat developer to other coin developer's decisions. It's a FOSS project, and hopefully, no one will ever be reigning anyone in as it is likely a waste of time and would be a case of developers trying to use their position to bully the message. But by all means, develop your coin and show everyone how it is done if you think Monero or Bitcoin can't live up to your expectations. I don't mind the technical arguments, but you and icebreaker going back and forth on who REKT or PWND whom is like listening to two boys argue over whos dad would win in a fight.

Agreed I would be. But I don't have a coin.

But again, I was only responding to r0ach telling everyone that Monero was the only worthy altcoin and his allegation that Z(ero)cash will suck in every way compared to Monero.

Don't forget why I posted in this thread. If r0ach didn't do that, I wouldn't have posted any thing about Monero.


First of all, the inventor of the term "open source" says to please stop using that term "FOSS" because it was created by an academic as weasel word.

Feel free to not reign anyone in and fuck your/Monero's marketing. It is your community (and also a personal affiliation) choice. I am not the only one who gave this feedback to Monero's community many times.


If you can't see he instigated that and continued that even as I tried to cut him off, then I don't know how else to get you to understand the definition of disingenuous.

I responded to him in his own language of slum, because that is the only language he understands. When speaking to baboons, we must grunt and thump our chests, otherwise they won't have any clue we are communicating.

I am not the monero community.


THIS WAS a personal attack on me. You called ME a hypocrite.  I don't actually give a crap because it is baseless nonsense. Especially since I did not start the thread you are talking about, and have absolutely nothing to do with it's moderation.

I made a factual statement, as I already explained to you.

Look how you Monero weasels weasel. No culpability for your actions whatsoever.

Furthermore, moderation of a thread here is within the rules. Even you have done it. In fact you deleted one of my posts once.

It also echoes the fundamental value of free speech.

OK for some but not others?

Whether true or not, it is irrelevant to the point of that you made the statement of hypocrite. Because your community does have a choice whether to moderate or not moderate their threads. I never said you can't censor them. I said don't be hypocrite and tell me you never or can't censor, because in fact your community does.

Blah. Can you waste more of my time with your poor logic skills.



Lookie ma, the entire Monero brigade is here attacking me now. I'm famous. Whoop-de-do.

Lol, now I am not only a hypocrite, but now I am a weasel.

I can call names too.  You are being an asshole.

I will feed this silliness no further. It was fun for a moment...

Of course you will. You Monerotards always do.

Your community will surely be attempting to attack me and take revenge at every opportunity.

Put him on ignore--the Monero devs can't do that for you and it would be the quickest and easiest way to get him to shut up. Personally, I have no interest is arguing with baboons, especially when I can just delete their existence (within my own existence) with one click.

I can't (in every case) put false allegations on ignore. Be stop being disingenuous.

There may come a day (not too long from now) where I only post in my official coin thread and no where else. But that wasn't today.

And besides, Monero is getting this feedback from others. It isn't only coming from me. Whether Monero reforms or not, is not my problem. I will probably try to eventually never read anything outside of my coin's thread, so I don't know what is being said about me.

Success/zen is when you know that everything everyone is saying is entirely useless. When actual victory is attained, words become irrelevant. I am not quite there yet. Crypto currency isn't there yet. But i can assure you that those fucking their marketing will not be victorious.


Communities have a culture.

I didn't say to put every false allegation on ignore--I said put him on ignore. As you've mentioned him many times, he seems to be a particular thorn in your side. As for the feedback from others, that's mainly coins that don't like having their scammy designs revealed for the public to dissect fairly and openly (I thought you knew that--as the some of those same coin's investors have made the same claim against you, when you've criticized their design). Anyway, peace be with you and smell a few roses on the way--too many people stoop to smell the fertilizer and miss what's being fertilized.

This thread became about pointing out what a thorn he is to Monero's marketing. My side alone is irrelevant. It is the impact this is having on the perception of Monero amongst many on the forum. You all are free to ignore it. I believe it will destroy your marketing, but your strategists are welcome to ignore (not act upon) our complaints/feedback.

Having the Monero community as the enforcers of the altcoin forum is going to backfire on Monero in a very big way. You opened the door wide open for my (and perhaps others such as maybe IOHK's) marketing to offer a breath of fresh air and mutual respect.

Thank you Monero. Please don't reform. Please double-down on what you've been doing.

As an example, I posted today my IDEALs for crypto (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1526067.0). This could be considered an attack on other coins, but instead I have pushed it as set of positive ideals, instead of ramming it down every coin's thread as some disrespectful "assimilate or die" enforcement. None of us like the Gestapo. Why would we be in decentralized crypto if we wanted to be overlorded on by Monero or any group (including Blockstream).

Besides you know most speculators here are looking for speculation gains and they don't really care about the fundamental technology except in respect to what they think it can generate in terms of excitement. So if you are Gestapo enforcing "scam" and technological memes, you will just be perceived to interfering with their freedom to speculate and maximize their degrees-of-freedom.

Theres always people that are better at posting on one single forum than someone else.

Much as IB likes posting at BTCtalk, and people say they hate him, it would still be counterproductive to spent any time on getting him to stop.

The best effort would be to come here less, and reddit or other places more.

That, imo, would be a much better tactic thats quite outwardly focused. Put your chips in many baskets. What would you miss out on by not coming here anyways? If a new CC comes out nowadays its highly publiscised anyways, and even they are avoiding coming here.

You complain that we shoot ourselves in the foot, then tell us to slap our own hand, then you call us diningenuous?

I think I like reddit, 4chan, and yahoo stock forums, etc, etc.., much better than this place now anyhow.

Anyways just thought Id stop by and say hi today, and Im glad youre all still alive :)

LMAO what happened here, did Monero issue ICO and raise tens of 1000s of BTC suddenly?

Horrible trolling in the forums here. Years and years of trolling by some names (who keep coming with new names to impress themselves) in this forum while ICOs & Smart DAOs and Dumb contracts and scam scrypt clones and Bobsurpluses and NXTs siphon away BTCs from newcomers and these internet goons cant do shit about them.

If you have tons of BTCs you rule the scene. The rest is just inbred fighting going on to see who is a bigger twat.

I remember when ETH was around 0.002/3 and all the same bunch of guys creating thread after thread to diss it. It went to 0.03 and will stay around 0.02 before the next push. I bet tons of clowns stayed away from it because of all the hoopla by the gangsters and nothing happened to price wise.

Now they will make sure to burn down Monero because not one of them can publish a paper like lab.getmonero but it is easy to trash since the big BTC guys are staying away from it.

Since when did the technical facts I presented in this thread constitute trolling.

There you Monerotards go again trolling anyone who dare speaks facts that you don't like.

You guys will never stop this crap, because it is in your community culture. It is hopeless. Please just continue what you are doing.

Facts are this: BTC whales are not interested in Monero. That's all that matters. None of your technobabble nor the getmonero lab rats.

If a scamcoin issues ICO, you peasants cant do shit. You tried you technobabble on ETH but that shit don't stink because BTC backs it.
Bobsurpluses come and go and you can eat shit.
100s of scams will come and go and you can't do shit.

You are barking up the wrong hole and I am not interested, so stop wasting my time.

Can anyone translate what he wrote to some coherent statement that implicates me and my participation in this thread  ???

I think this thread has proved one truth. Everything you say, can be held against you, in ways that don't make any sense, and you will spend the rest of your life defending every word you ever wrote.

tldr; Don't write English, only write code.

Only write for your WoT. (When appeasing to the general public, candy coat profusely or just don't bother.)

Shakespeare purposely wrote so one could have multiple readings of the same text--great writing is like quantum coding. I think you are making the mistake of trying to write things into a neat box that limits the reader to one view (your own). Language doesn't work that way unless you write "Bob ran up the hill." even then the reader will infer how he ran, what Bob looked like, the scenery, the type of hill, whether he was naked or wearing an Armani suit, whether he was running from something or towards something, whether it was sunny, cloudy, windy, whether the writer miswrote "hill" and actually meant "bill" and the setting was a Korean restaurant on the corner of 6th and Main...

I'd either give up your desire for (undo?) control or go back to coding something (hopefully something great that extends privacy rights and capabilities).

*Also, many in the Bitcoin realm (including icebreaker) are militant in their abhorrence of lesser shit coins, and that hasn't seemed to have any negative impact on adoption--the real limiter to adoption seems that no one in the real world knows what the hell is going on in this tiny pool. When they do know, where and how a coin is positioned will be of upmost importance--IE this is the time for technical people to have technical arguments and hash out what's good and what's crap. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it until someone can point out how any currency, digital or otherwise, with under a $100 billion marketcap matters to a general consumer. My point is that we are at the exploratory stage and exploration is what has been going on, so to fault that (IMO) is an obvious case of putting the cart before the horse.

generalizethis, I agree.

Neither experts from Monero nor myself can know which technologies are going to be the most important.

I have some interesting technology that turns everything upside down. It is going to make people rethink the way they've been thinking about all of this. But technology in one's head is useless. Without code, it might as well be my mirage. And one thing that all programmers will tell you, that until you've written the code, what is in your head may not actually work when you've coded it.

As for Monero's tech, Zcash's tech, etc, etc., I have already written too much. There is nothing I could write that would really matter that much. Only those who code (and maybe marketing to some degree also but the fundamental tech will be probably be the one that causes the big paradigm shift) might have an impact on outcomes.

That is why I say let everything run free. None of us are omniscient. iCEBREAKER had changed ships numerous times over the years, because he is also not omniscient.

Originally I thought that smart contracts were useless, but then I had an epiphany on a more decentralized way to do a DAO. None of us are omniscient.

That is why I backed off of picking sides on others' coins. Yeah I'll make a post or two about potential egregiously obvious scams (e.g. the recent WAVES ICO and immediately spending the BTC smacks of repaying a loan which means the ICO might have been significantly fake and a cover for a premine), but I am not going to harp on it or take "assimilate or die" approach any more. I think I was wrong to do that. I was fighting against nature and serendipity. Because even the small chance I am wrong, that community might learn something useful even if I am right (e.g. I learned about importance of DAO from Ethereum's mistake), and that as you and I both realize, we can't stop the speculators any way.

This is artful trolling.  Annoymint's satire cannot match your gift for generating inflammatory, self-contradicting schizophrenic lunacy.

We get it; when you're not going off the deep end you're up on your Cross.  Enjoy the endless cycle of mania and depression.   :-\




Another brilliant post.  Thank you for coming here and writing these words.

Such a unique take on the powerful New Age Hustle technique!

You are teaching me so much about Jedi level trolling.   8)




Look how you draw highly intelligent people in to your typhoon of drama, arguing like a drunk couple having a fight about who first started calling names and which one is a hypocrite.

It's really amazing and impressive.   8)

Perhaps you have the first communicable case of mental illness?  Crazy virus patient zero?

Hmm,
Sorry but I was the 1st confirmed case of Communicable Crazy Virus, spreads whenever anyone reads my post.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-MoUeN2AUCQM/TfoRces-BVI/AAAAAAAAAKY/FVkB0WgEliw/s1600/blog-crazy4.jpg

Oh Crap, Sorry Everyone.   :D


 8)

FYI:
Crazy also Loves Company.  :D
Kind of explains BTCTalk.  :P

I don't have words to respond to you. Just hope I never see you in real life. You are sick person. Very sick.

If all your issues are with r0ach, or smooth, or iCE, why do you keep dragging "the community" into it?

r0ach said something you don't like? Don't blame him. Blame "the community."

iCEBREAKER pisses you off? Must be the community.

Smooth deleted your post? Community.

Girlfriend won't give you a blowie? It's that fucking Monero community.

Isn't it funny how all the attacks come from your community members. Must be a coincidence. Wait let me calculate the probability of that.

Come on dude, why are you trying to blame me for your fucked up community.

You just won't be satisfied until you can blame me. That is the Monero culture.


This is the sort humiliation your community attempts all the time. That has nothing to do with what is going on here. My gf will give me a blowie anytime at my command and she will lick my balls too and even my anus. Do you need proof, we can arrange for you to watch for a fee.

You seem to be hung up on this. Maybe this watching is the closest you will get to having a sex bomb 36D 26 year old suck cock.

Which attacks exactly? Aside from iCEBREAKER's most recent post, I don't see very many attacks directed toward you, but I see several directed from you toward others.

As for probabilities, you appear to have issues with quite a few people on this forum. It seems rather likely that a couple of them would be affiliated with Monero.

are you a slave, sir? you sound like one

It helps to read the thread before commenting about it.

Any way, we are both wasting each other's time at this point.

We will never understand each other. So please stop this nonsense now. You are spamming the forum with "Monero hoax" .

Do you realize you are bumping "Monero hoax" to the top of the forum every time you all continue this filibuster trolling victory by attrition tactic.

I am confident that Monero is going to get exactly what it deserves. And personally I would like to stop talking to you. Thank you.

It's okay. Nobody is actually fooling anyone into believing Monero is a hoax. It's been around long enough for everyone to know what it's about.

Agreed, lets not waste anymore of each other's time. If you want to turn your personal disagreements with a couple of people into a community vendetta, I can't stop you.

It is not "a couple of people". The list of those attacked me in this thread from your community include:

yourself
cAPSLOCK
Smoothie
Smooth
ArticMine
iCEBREAKER
AnnoyMint
meme magic

The list of those who've attacked me (not just in this thread) from your community reaches I would suppose a dozen+ names.

Note smooth insulted me and ended up being wrong, but he did at least not going on and on. Smoothie also didn't go on and on, although his attack was palatable. ArticMine needs to write a white paper.

Again I did not ask for any special accommodation. You continue to falsely accuse me of that, which thus makes you an attacker. I said that Monero might want to disown iCEBREAKER, but that was a suggestion for your community, not an accommodation that I am asking for myself. But since you all rejected that suggestion, I then stated that I would fine if you all would just continue to screw up just the same way you have been.  That would been fine with me.

Note XMRPromotion made a very nice attempt, but you all just had to keep going on and on and on, because that is what Monero community does. Nonstop useless bullshit in the Monero Speculation forum. Enjoy the hamster wheel.

As you can probably tell, I don't like you guys. And you guys don't like me. So let's stop talking. You can have the last word, as long as you don't try to paint me as the victim again.  ::)

I merely suggested you guys might want to stop fucking your marketing to hell. But on second thought, please don't reform anything.

---

The first part of not responding is to make sure you aren't responding.

Poor internet tough guy.  You've never had to deal with someone who can effortlessly/gleefully control the narrative despite your voluminous competing attempts, and now you don't know what to do, except threaten and pout.   :D

I see you want to bump the thread and destroy Monero's community reputation.

I suppose you'll be bumping this thread again, because destroying Monero's reputation is more important to you than admitting to yourself that you made a fool of yourself in this thread.

You've pushed beyond threats. Do not encounter me in real life. That is not a threat. My suggestion to you, is to stop harassing and stalking others on the forum. This is not an internet game. This is a real case of harassment and erroneously maligning my reputation.

This started out as discussion about the mining security of Monero. You have turned this into an harassment and an insane fight to the death over a block chain project. Thus I conclude you might be insane.

A quote once very much loved by the Monero community comes to mind that some could see analogous to this situation.

I think it went something along the lines of  "When you see scam and don't scream scam you're the scam".

It's a good principle to have as it can be adhered to it when it advances the agenda currently being run and it can also be conveniently dismissed when suitable just as well.

Monero and Dash will both do really well this year.  Things should get interesting after the halving is behind us.

I didn't even notice that the thread turned into 8 pages. Wow