Bitcoin Forum

i'm fairly sure your 70% is wrong.  i think if bbr had as much transactions as xmr it would be like 80% the size of xmr's blockchain.

And if my grandma had wheels she would be a bike

But she doesn't.  We aren't comparing hypotheticals.

Reality is in front of you, these are the block-chain sizes that exists and so I documented it.

PS: BBR total TX 139,920
     XMR total TX 483,983

     = 3.45 Less transactions within BBR.

     Actual Blockchain size BBR is 6.42 x smaller than XMR, and the most important thing- It CAN be trimmed by design, unlike XMR

BBR has a worse name tho  :D

I think XMR will win

I'm a little confused at the difference in market caps actually, seems that XMR is built on a sandy foundation whilst BBR is built upon concrete. (maybe sounds a little unfair but in terms of emission rate, blockchain design, proof-of-work algorithm, etc. The Bitmonero distribution is really not good IMO)

It was noted yesterday a Monero developer making git pull and copying code from BBR, without a solid idea what the code actually does. ???

For synchronization, It was around 12 minutes for BBR, and close to 4 hours for XMR. (I have all logs and also own test-suites- anyone can verify this information independently) That is an astounding difference.!

Could you give the basis of your argument as to why I should invest into XMR instead of BBR?

I feel like If I invest into XMR I be investing into the weaker project simply because it is the flavor of the month pump/hype train. I don't like to buy into hype or 'celebrities'  It seems the market in XMR is more saturated with less chance of positive return at this point.

Looking at BBR, I just see consistent updates from the developer scrolling back. Still cannot understand why the value is so different comparatively. Did funds pour into the wrong cryptonote coin- is this a result of the 'whales' propping the price? - serious question, not trolling

Solid infographic OP, good points. You are a brave man picking a fight with Monero on their own forums though.   ;D

Where's moneroman???

 ::)

Smoke was such a better character in the Mortal Kombat games. If Smoke was XMR, and BBR was Sub Zero, depending how the fight ends; THIS could potentially happen...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxTBLKH4tZ4

Choose your destiny wisely everyone!

No one is scared to pick a fight with Monero - although, this really isn't a fight. Outside of more money being speculated in XMR, BBR is superior in every way. BBR also has the leading CN developer in the world and it isn't even close. Hell, even XMR devs admit that (look at my sig if you doubt that).

The ONLY thing XMR has done better is get speculators to speculate. However, this is about (already) to change. 

We will put SuperNet, and its potential 1000s of daily wallet (announcing soon) users aside for a moment, and just look at the landscape. There is a lot of BTC whales and outside money looking to invest at BBR. Just look at the order books, where over 25% of TOTAL coins are current bid for on the bid side.

So the market is prime to even out the ridiculous market cap between the two coins. The only question is which side do you want to place you bet on?

Don't believe me? Then just keep an eye on this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=577267.4780 over the next couple of weeks. You'll get a taste of the changes to come.

Whilist I admire Boolberry and cryptozoidberg (Generally I admire any talented developer), the reasons for XMR being larger is because the blockchain scaling is not a problem at all in my opinion. Even Bitcoin at 20 gb blockchain is nothing, Gavin is already trying to solve this with Bitcoin and any improvement could be forked over to CryptoNote. The whole scaling problem will be solved one way or another in the future by some genius dev I am not the slightest worried it will be a problem.

XMR dev team is larger than BBR, the dev team consist of atleast 10+ different developers while Boolberry have one dedicated one named cryptozoidberg, while he should have cred for his efforts, I personally believe XMR is the better investment here. Purely speaking from an investment perspective I think any change that would be made to Boolberry for the better could be ported over to XMR easily.

Monero have a better branding name, bigger following and a seems to be the winner the marked picked in this race for anonymity.
It is clearly the winner among the CryptoNote coins.

Bingo

Lol plus blueberry name  :D

Bigger is not better. This is a MYTH. Satoshi proved this and so have other leading devs - BTCNext, JL777, etc.

However, plans are in the works to bring in other developers to build out the BBR eco-system.. In fact, I have been contacted by several already just this week. And, one of the best in crypto, JL777 is already providing an amazing 3rd party platform through SuperNet to support the distribution of BBR.

Monero isn't a better branding name. It does have a bigger speculation following, but relatively speaking both coins are small in following. There is no WINNER. The best winner in ANON TECH will be the best ANON TECH.

You have been fed a pack of lies. You have bought into those lies. Going forward - over next 3-6 months you will see that all your points were just myths, based on nothing but hype and propaganda.

But don't take my word for it. Watch this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=577267.4780 and decide for yourself in the coming weeks.

This is the best you can do? Lol. Really? Ok. ;)

Not really. And this is about as weak of an argument for a Anon Tech coin as you can possibly have. In fact, it makes XMR look weak to talk about BBR's name. Come up with something substantial.

So let's all praise the one man team v.s the 10 man team. Let's praise zoidberg to be our god for the development. Shall we?

Monero being the best name is subjective, although I am sure many agree with me on this one. The best anon tech is CryptoNote already, I don't think any small changes here and there s going to make such a difference in the future 2 years from now or so. It all comes down to what the market choose and looks like we already have a winner here considering the market cap and developers backing it.


Bring it on. I have picked my favorite already.  ;D

If you dont think the developer is the most important part of the coin and community, then this may explain why you are buying XMR and not BBR.


If you think these "changes" are small or the fact that 1 developer has out developed 7? 10? (I thought it was 7, but whatever) is not an issue, it probably explains why you are buying XMR and not BBR.


If you are just sticking to you guns because you "picked a favorite" already then it probably explains...well you know. :)

Now I know you have no idea what you're talking about. The best possible team size to have is a size of 4-9 people. Monero devs have 7, Boolberry has just 1.

Also, Satoshi Nakamoto was most likely more than 1 person, as shown by his use of the word "we" in replies.

Monero is a hugely better branding name, Boolberry sounds like a brand of cereal, not a currency.

Devs worked together on the BCX threat.

Methinks the crypto community would be better served by recognizing and saluting cooperation instead of battling.

Actually, as for the OP, I thought it was somewhat clever, but sure to spawn unproductive comments.

Disclosure: I own both and I'm happy to own both.  My holdings are in pretty close proportion to the market caps, so I own more Monero. 

Ok. :/

Monero will be #3 market cap soon.

That would be great actually. If that happened, then BBR would probably be top 10. With room to grow.

Cool trolling bro. So the lies and propaganda shit you were told to buy this shit coin is what you are now passing on in hopes others will buy similar shit.

Who are the 10 developers? Can you show me which developers we are talking about and what their commits are ? and that too on a coin which is a simple shit clone.


MMM no mmkay. It has 3 developers who have pushed code and are working with zoidberg, but obviously he has more command and knowledge. And more are joining.

You can continue shilling for your shit coin. No lies please, we are internets.

You know what I don't like in BBR? Some of its vocal supporters. Look above and despair.

Thanks a lot for raising the level OP, because all others are so obnoxious it doesn't really lure. Crypto Zoidberg does a fantastic job, but the community...well. I can't say I saw the best of it in the last weeks.

I own both XMR and BBR btw, so don't bother accusing me of taking a side. I want both to succeed, unlike all those unbearable warmongers that can't appreciate competition.

Check GitHub (although it only shows details for master on both repos, so commits to other branches won't be represented)

https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/graphs/contributors

https://github.com/cryptozoidberg/boolberry/graphs/contributors

Why are you focussing on XMR this much? Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to compete with other anon-tech's instead of fighting eachother?

Let's focus on making the pie bigger as a whole instead of scraping crums of eachother. Once we have a decent sized pie we can start focussing on the individual differences. The chances of cryptonote becoming THE default anon tech is much larger if you have 2 (or more) solid coins than just one (also less harder to defeat, whoever the enemy may be). And frankly, I believe that battle is way harder ánd more important right now. 

Think about it please. Some people on this forum are fighting the wrong fight (on BOTH sides). Waste of energy, time and resources. Let's kick some ass a cryptonote community instead of indiv coin-communities.

I did. It doesn't tell what is going on does it? (and you knew that already anyways) For example we all know you are not a developer., neither is David Latapie (whose job is to suck Risto and is now planted in Malla), or othe, or smooth or eizh or Noodle (whose initial miner optimizations were great appreciate, no offence Noodle). That takes out 6 of you from 7 "core team". Other names come from the forks like the BCN developer amjuarez is listed a contributor.

Only tacotime is a developer and some of the other commits are from paid outsourced people which BBR can also get if they want. Only they don't, the people committing are doing it for free for the love of code and the BBR project. Those who like the coin can contribute anytime. They are being led by the best developer of CryptoNote to help them and help each other.

The rest of you want money via dev funds to pay more outsourced work and maybe pocket some yourself for trolling the forums 24x7 and call it core team. Shameless pricks.

The era of lying through your teeth to get dumb newbies money is over. You lying shills have turned this into a crypto company as opposed to a crypto currency.


https://i.imgur.com/h4Sgic5.png

Wait.
Is it true?

I have the impression that XMR has more developers than BBR. But it may not matter.

2 of important comparisons you should for sure put in here should be:
- daily trading, best in last month, since one day is not so perfect.
- hash power, again average of at least a week.

Volume is that if you buy coins you will be easily able to sell. HAshpower is more stable network and less chances of this attack that CN was facing last days a lot on this forum.

Yes.

Bigger isn't always better.  Time will tell which one takes the lead. 

I own both, but at this point i'm leaning more to BBR since Supernet.... jl777 is a coding monster and I have full faith in him

I think ultimately it's going to be more about XMR vs NEOS but we shall see.

I don't see how what Gavin is doing applies here. Different technologies. One Bitcoin transaction is recorded as one transaction, not n mixins.

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure typical blockchain pruning methods that might work on Bitcoin don't work on the CN coins. The developers are going to have to invent novel ways to reduce the size. Although I've heard it mentioned that anything more than linear reduction is probably impossible, but that was a while ago.

Skinnkavaj is only trying to sell Monero with any arguments possible it can be "blablablabla" as long as it sounds good in random
retards ears that make up for 50% of these forums, there is Moneros market - thats why its marketed in a certain way,

You know nothing about me or about where my knowledge, skills, and experience lie. You conflate the amount of work necessary to bring a well thought out feature to fruition with the act of writing the lines of code. Would you, for example, think that a sysadmin who is in a devops role is less valuable than the code monkey he supports? Would you consider the eloquent design from a database architect somehow less worthy than the moron that spits out a few classes for the DAL? Would you argue that the hours of design effort a UI specialist puts into making a wizard intuitive and beautiful should not have his efforts held high against the junior developer who wired up the buttons?

True innovation does not come from code churn. It also does not come from design alone. It comes from straddling the line between well thought through design and the actual implementation. That is predominantly where the core team is and should be focused. It is, therefore, true that the bulk of my work is more architectural than anything else, but you clearly have not actually looked at the github link I provided:

https://i.imgur.com/9onFgmY.png

So I guess despite me never claiming that I am a developer, my openly visible commits are there to demonstrate that I am also not incapable of developing.

Unsurprisingly, it is much the same with Bitcoin, where the contributors with the most commits are not always the people doing the bigger picture, design-level efforts: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/graphs/contributors (pay particular attention to where gavinandresen is in that, for instance).

The worst thing with your obsession with the metric is that it's embarrassingly outmoded. Even Bill Gates famously said: "Measuring software productivity by lines of code is like measuring progress on an airplane by how much it weighs."


Let's take all 17 names (https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/graphs/contributors) and check to see if they're contributing to "the forks", shall we? You clearly seem to be against lying, so let's make sure you're being accurate. Incidentally, where it says "N commit(s)" under the person's name, you can click on it to see their commits on the project. Probably should have done that first before making such a boldly inaccurate statement.

• fluffypony - me, obviously
• mikezackles - contributor to Monero only
• tewinget - contributor to Monero only
• NoodleDoodle - Monero core team
• decred - contributor to Monero only
• Neozaru - contributor to Monero only
• jakoblind - contributor to Monero only
• Jebes - contributor to Monero only
• paybee - contributor to Monero only
• Jojatekok - contributor to Monero only
• amjuarez - original Bytecoin account
• ekimmo - contributor to Monero only
• vertoe - contributor to Monero only
• tomerkon - contributor to Monero only
• rfree - contributor to Monero only, maybe you need to check his commits first: https://github.com/rfree2monero/bitmonero/commits/development
• zone117x - contributor to Monero only (he wrote our pool software that all of the CN coins use, so pay some respect)
• artifexd - contributor to Monero only

And here I thought you were against the "lying shills", only to discover you are one. For shame!


I'd love to see what your contributions have been to, well, anything besides pseudonymously trolling on the Internet. Clearly you lack the self-confidence required to put yourself up on a live video stream and accept...*gasp*...that people will see your face, and that's ok. I understand. I have had friends who have had serious self-confidence issues, and I want to tell you that it gets better. Your life will get better. And when it gets to that point I have no doubt you'll look back on this era and realise that you accomplished nothing by writing nonsense on a forum on the Internet.

Teeeee heeee - somebody got SPANKED.

i've watched ur vids fluffy and I'd do you if I was gay ... sexy accent  ;)

Well said.

OP, you forgot this comparison:

Mining fee for dev (aka, tax on the stupid  :P): 

• BBR: 1% mandatory
• XMR: 0%

Advantage: XMR

If you mine on a pool, you cannot turn off this fee. Cunning, this CZ dude, he realizes most will mine at pools and won't be able to turn off.
 
Now the fee itself is not bad, devs need to be compensated; but the fact it was enabled since the start of the coin is. It's more respectable to have this fee be decided by the community or from donation, which is what XMR is doing.  Admittedly volunteered donation is not too effective though.

Also, CZ being a single dev possesses a serious single point of failure for BBR. God forbid should CZ have some health issue in the future, who will carry the torch? windjc? slapper?

Nice attempt at FUD. Actually, miners can vote to turn this off at any time. There are multiple developers in the BBR eco-system. Do some research. :)

https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/commits?author=fluffypony

Nice job modifying readme files, txt files and merging PRs 72 times. When you write an iota of worthwhile code come back and talk to us. Until then enjoy playing wannabe admin. I really don't want to bash other genuine coders., they don't need to dragged into this.

Rfreeman, good job.

Edit: omg you really didn't say Gavin there did you. This is going to be fun popcorn time in future.  :P

If only there was already a CN coin that has implemented this   ;)

https://i.imgur.com/BAUAwtv.png

Yah God forbid, who will the devs of a competing go to first to seek help  ::) Risto might start getting really anxious  ::)

This is a truly ridiculous argument. I mean, what do we have so far, - making fun of the name, saying the dev could die, not understanding basic BBR functionality. This should be a serious discussion, not a bunch of silliness.

It's really pathetic seeing these BBR guys out trolling XMR. Instead of trying to build something up, they just want to tear others down. Windjc and slapper are pretty good at that though, seeing as how the two of them both played major roles in destroying the BBR community.

This thread was created by someone who obviously saw the tech differences between BBR and XMR. I'm not trolling anything, simply giving responses to things that are false or irrelevant.

You seem to think that the BBR community has been destroyed somehow? In my opinion, its stronger than ever. Seriously. I'm getting several PMs a day of people wanting to join and get involved with the promotion and development. Also having a lot of discussions about investments and development applications with others that are contacting me.

Of course, as a "marketing director" I also get to be the punching bag of numerous XMR supporters, but I'm okay with that. I am fairly reluctant to carry a title at all, because I truly believe in the decentralized nature of the BBR community, especially given that it is state-of-the-art anon tech.

And despite what you may think I have absolutely nothing personal against anyone from XMR. People work hard and tirelessly in that community for their community and I applaud that. I work hard to and I respect that in others. I also dont think the leadership of XMR are bad in anyway. I do think they are competitive and I do think many have tried to do what they can to crush CZ and the BBR community because they see it, rightfully so, as a serious threat.

However, I am dedicated to dispelling any of the myths about BBR that have been perpetuated by XMR supporters over the last 5 months.

But trust me, there is a lot of "building up" going on right now.

Meh, needs moar DarkNote.  Its market cap is between XMR and BBR.

XDN has anon msg.  That's just cool.

i used to mine a bit of BBR but due to lack of GPU pools and solid info ive quit

If you need any information about pools or anything BBR related, PM me and I'll get you what you need. Cheers.

You are right. However, a mandatory small fee in the early stage of the coin is very important.

1% fee is optional, not mandatory. You're entirely free to gravitate to a pool with donation vote disabled. Most of the Monero pools forward at least a portion of their fees towards a development fund too. Same concept, just  tacked on at a higher level instead of baked in to the protocol. Not to mention some of the closed source XMR GPU miners tax users 5% or force them to forfeit hashpower- interesting example of game theory there as users would be out of pocket more by setting no donations and getting crippled slightly than they would lose by enabling donations.

 I'm totally supporting small percentage of donations to be enabled in these fledgling cryptonote projects,
Don't think the reason why needs too much elaboration-- unless you imagine development costs are coming out of the dev's own pocket and they are completely altruistic and self-sufficent. It's nice to assume community will always chip in but huge evidence in donation behavior economic models demonstrates opt in (set it and forget it) is many times more effective than opt out.

 I struggle to find a scenario in which users would object towards an ongoing 1% distribution being awarded to the developer and maintainer of the project (big difference between premine there where dev can do no work and cash out on day 1) - The size of the developers paycheck will directly correlate with the success of the project and how much they are willing to give.  I think the approach taken by BBR is an example of how do it right frankly- Besides With the current market cap of BBR, it amounts to what a competent coder could earn from a weekend project.


TFT was a single point of failure for Bitmonero, so the current monero core crew hijacked it and renamed it to monero, now the project is successful under their leadership. It was a community effort between a group of individuals who saw an opportunity to 'save' it, and part of the reason it flourished . No reason to assume the same could not happen for BBR. Besides, It's a common misconception CZ is working as a single dev, it's not true.

Is it hard to switch off?

"Tax" and "default" are contradictory terms.  I wish my taxes were only ON by default.

Its not FUD if they're facts. :) And I have no ill wishes for CZ as implied.
I mine both BBR and XMR and wanted to point out the obvious difference. As you've stated, we can elect to turn off the fee but it requires either finding a pool which has it turned off or choose to solo mine, which both are unlikely scenario for most miners. I dont necessarily oppose the fee but like others I'd like it to be better documented on the BBR thread. For example, is the dev fee part of the total supply of coins or is it in addition?

As the marketing head for BBR, you could take a lesson or two from smooth. You childist behavior such as your sig and forced rebranding turns off a lot of supporters.

I think there needs to be an infographic about this 1% on/off , current miner status, miner fee and what not. Otherwise it is the same sockpuppets always saying how you are hurting the BBR community windjc. Yep, don't hurt the BBR community too much. I'm bleeding.


Regarding mining, BBR OP has clear info.



http://i61.tinypic.com/2dkj0nb.png

HOWTO&FAQ thread:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=781961

CPU Mining
The most efficient CPU mining is done with CPUminer-Multi. Complete instructions are on the Boolberry How-To (http://boolberry.com/howto.html) page.

GPU Mining
GPU mining is dynamic and constantly improving. The first post of the GPU Mining thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=693118.0) has current info and the thread itself has lots of information.  

If you're not incapable of developing, why you are making random git pulls from BBR and inserting them into XMR without an idea of what the code actually does?  Semi-capable might of been a more appropriate word.

Actually, How did that gaffe slip past extensive peer-review by a team of no less than seventeen experienced XMR developers?
Unless it wasn't actually reviewed and you have unfettered access to the repo.

Why did it take a developer of a competing project to point out your mistake so you can revert it?
I'm being a little harsh there, you had a long day and you were probably burned out dealing with the drama surrounding the attack. Understandable.
However it's a point made by zoidberg that if the XMR developers don't fully understand the commits they are implementing and just add features willy nilly from other project some damage could of been done. Malicous backdoor could of been inserted into the XMR this way.

I see you making not so subtle insinuations that crypto_zoidberg is a glorified code monkey, If it wasn't for CZ there could potentially have a mtgox like situation on our hands with poloniex, you should be more respectful about background works. He has done some hand-holding on a number of occasions and you know it well. I actually checked out your git commits. Majority of them are version bumps, string replaces & single line additions. seems if zoidberg role is code monkey your role is  secretarial duties- you are assigned to brush up on the verbiage and misc typos, But I suppose you prefer the role 'architectural visionary' or 'creative director' and consider pushing out code something mostly below you, but something you do to keep you occupied whilst you are having a morning croissant or on the shitter maybe?


Someones been practicing their best Jony Ive impression ;D. I agree with what you said about code volume being a useless metric. Anyone can hire 10 freelancers from bangalore. The only reason it was added to infographic was I heard someone ask if the project was dead due to lack of activity?? So the clear numbers are shown to demonstrate neither projects are stagnating, clearly the fact BBR has less cooks in the kitchen doesn't mean the broth is being cooked slowly, nor is the quality suffering.

About true innovation:

• True innovation starts with: Taking the time to develop an intimate understanding of the codebase you are working with, so you are unrestricted to expand freely without worry.
   Example: auditing the Proof-of-work so it's not blatantly crippled upon launch. A third party good samaritan had to step in to fix Monero's initial borked code, Hardly inspired confidence in the 'real' team.  He had this to say:
  
  
  Quote from: NoodleDoodle on May 07, 2014, 05:53:50 PM
  I took a look at the code and changed some extremely easy to spot "errors"
  By the way, I'm not even a real coder, so whatever changes I made should be easy to spot; especially for experienced developers.
  
  
  
  
• True innovation starts with : Choosing block emission parameters from scratch, instead of just leaving them default because Greed won over in an arguably rigged vote (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=585480.0)
  If there is anyone who considers the XMR emission schedule optimal and not just a necessary blemish that's good enough and will "have to do" (polar opposite of innovative) I would like to meet them.
  
  
• True innovation starts with: Designing a novel memory-hard blockchain based Proof-of-work function from scratch that's many times faster than the vanilla cryptonight PoW adopted in XMR, yet provides the same level of ASIC resistance. Something which the Monero developers admittedly tried to deny due to lack of understanding until they were educated  by an authority on the subject (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=577267.msg8648753#msg8648753) BBR synchronized from scratch 20x faster than XMR. The difference will be smaller on usual day with same transaction flow but it's undeniably and provably faster
  
  
• True innovation starts with: Designing your cryptographic constructs with the future in mind. In an eloquent and frugal way BBR allows the network particpants to not take onboard more than they need to. The blockchain can be easily pruned, drastically reducing bloat. BBR is already a leader in terms of disk footprint- (5x smaller) such feature only serves to increase the gap.

we could go on, BBR baked in alias support, XMR devs dismissed it as a gimmicky feature, now they are adding in Aliases themselves
XMR community balked at the '1% tax' only to find themselves brainstorming for fundraising ideas for development funds now
BBR was built on a concrete foundation. This was a project dreamed up from scratch. Every detail was carefully planned.

XMR was not designed from scratch, it was cloned from another questionably shady developer, warts 'n all.
Some of the flaws have been polished out.  It's completely fair to say there will be continued polishing but there are certain aspects such as the poor emission rate which will never be fixed. It has to be swept under the rug or twisted with careful marketing to appear as positive feature. Because it was not their creation they do not have the luxury of choosing ideal parameters. Therefore it's built on a sandy foundation which is being retroactively strengthened but it will always remain less than ideal.


Maybe part of this is referring to Monero's ongoing work on moving blockchain out of RAM, or the work on outsourcing wireframe mockups to your unreleased, groundbreaking, this-changes-everything GUI that will allow auntie mabel to easily manage her ring-signature based cryptocurrency portfolio

Meanwhile I have tested a fully functional, clean and intuitive GUI released long ago by BBR; introduced without a whole lot of prior fanfare
I have tested and confirmed blockchain.bin dataset has been reduced in real life. The update was just pushed out, not with a ton of hand waving in advance. None of these are 'innovations' which are being slated for future release or hypothesised about in missives. They just get added then moved onto the next.

Seems if we make an analogy Monero developers stole brought a phone and now just getting acquainted with learning how to use it as they go,while proclaiming they are masters leading the way whilst BBR developers already clearly familiar with the functions and keep mostly low-key just making updates- not so much talking but the work rate is high. . There is nothing wrong with this but you are liars to imagine you are the only ones innovating in this space.

With XMR all it ever is is 'ongoing work' more premature assured congratulatory self-pats on the back and more hubris eminating from core team. You can smell the superiority complex a mile off with you guys..the air is just thick with unwarranted supercilious smug You seem to believe you've achieved enough critical mass to have won the race before it's even really started.  The best part of avoiding the Monero circlejerk not having to deal with a community of insular elitists. You guys embarked on an orchestrated smear campaign to throw every other competing cryptonote coin under the bus and I have some pretty damming evidence including internal conversations  implicating some of the more senior XMR community members in what (even to a casual observer with no skin in the game) is undeniably dirty tactics. As someone else put it some of your PR schemes would make goebbels blush.  Rest assured I will elaborate on that when the dust starts to settle.

No, I see (as someone else put it) sexual tension.

The pleasantries are not more than a public facing image. Only skin deep . In private words and actions are dripping with disdain

I am so bothered because I've seen some really low tactics emanating from those in a privileged position in the XMR community (let's not pretend all behavior from other project communities are angelic because that's certainly disingenuous) but that's the worst I've seen so far.  I will post what I have at a later date and perhaps there will be some re-evaluation.

Add some extra graphics, just for historical reference

https://i.imgur.com/1olJtbO.png
https://i.imgur.com/xhKa3pn.png

To spare us the next 30 pages of bullshit, watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5yjrr7OzYk

Even rpietila has said the XMR emission is not optimal. I think it's pretty clear looking at the graph that the reason the XMR price struggles so much despite all the fanfare is the money supply is inflating incredibly fast and that drives away some people who would otherwise be interested.

I have nothing against XMR in general, but in anything other than a short trade during the run ups I personally find it quite hard to justify putting down money in it long term.

In three or four years if everything works out the way MEW et al are predicting I'll be there money in hand as supply dries up. If XMR really does become the leader of dark liquidity world wide I think being as close to it as I am I'll be able to see it happening and have time to buy some and still make money, even if that happens in 2015. But until then the sheer amount of money it takes per day even at this relatively low market cap to sustain the price is a bit of a deal killer.

I don't want this to come off as an anti-XMR post at all. But I'm just a little surprised at your defense of the emission since I thought the official line was something like 'what can you do? we didn't set it like that', which is fine considering it's the truth.

I was responding to "slapper" who said: "we all know you are not a developer". There was no "more appropriate word" - he said something, I responded, fin. I have no idea why you're jumping on the bandwagon and misinterpreting my response to him, but hey, it's a free world;)


The decision was indeed taken by the core team to merge that. As you say, it was a long day, and we were fried.


It didn't at all. His post on Bitcointalk and the revert are not related. It was caught on #monero-dev (as one would expect when something is pushed to staging and causes an issue) -

[2014-09-24T23:02:33+0200] <otila> 2014-Sep-25 00:01:56.528495 [P2P8]coinbase transaction spend too much money (14.336009159350). Block reward is 14.332489999244(14.130220173955+0.202269825289)
[2014-09-24T23:02:36+0200] <otila> 2014-Sep-25 00:01:56.528601 [P2P8]Block with id: <450775fe7c413c32a6869eac58b074c4b93ae7597d0f11b071a88fc77465ca5e> has incorrect miner transaction
[2014-09-24T23:07:52+0200] <@fluffypony> what distro, otila ?
[2014-09-24T23:08:21+0200] <otila> I am lagged..  fedora 20
[2014-09-24T23:10:16+0200] <otila> it was maybe waiting tcp/53
[2014-09-24T23:11:11+0200] <@fluffypony> that's weird, it should fall back hardcoded seed nodes if it can't get dns seeds
[2014-09-24T23:11:17+0200] <@fluffypony> good use case to test for, though
[2014-09-24T23:12:25+0200] <otila> at least it does not notice if tcp/53 is connection refused
[2014-09-24T23:16:39+0200] <otila> stuck in do_handshake_with_peer when I exit, I get only "[node] Stop signal sent"
[2014-09-24T23:19:59+0200] <@fluffypony> welp
[2014-09-24T23:20:02+0200] <@fluffypony> I see it otila
[2014-09-24T23:20:32+0200] <@fluffypony> guess I'm reverting 014708fe71c1379af281ca9ac17e82c159e98e6d

Caught and reverted within 30 minutes of being pushed to staging. It's a mistake, it happens, move on.


We've only had the codebase for a few months. A slocount of just the src folder (excluding tests and epee) is 16310 lines of just cpp code. That's over and above the cryptography. It's a lot to grok and come to grips with. Nonetheless, we do not merge commits "willy nilly". This was done in a rush because we *do* respect CZ (which is apparently not mutual), and if he says that there's a major CN bug and is urgently contacting exchanges we are going to see the commit (which appeared to fix a varint overflow issue) and assume that's what he's talking about. You cannot take this single incident in isolation (given the circumstances) and extrapolate out from there.


I'm pretty sure the majority of my more recent commits are CMake related, so I have no idea how you reached that conclusion.


That person's obviously an idiot - I don't think BBR is stagnant on any level. I understand why you included it - my response wasn't to you or to the information in the infographic, it was to "slapper" bordering on hero worship because he thinks LOC is an indicator of anything.


When have we had the opportunity to do so? We didn't decide to fork Monero, thankful_for_today did. We ended up with it because thankful_for_today wanted to do stuff the community rejected, and we sort-of fell into it. Had we come together as a group and said "oh hey guys, we should create our own CryptoNote coin" I can fully agree with what you're saying. But that isn't the case and that isn't the situation, so we're incrementally refactoring completely undocumented code, building up an understanding of the cryptography (see the Monero Research Lab publications, for instance), and still adding functionality.


The good samaritan that is a member of the Monero core team? I even mentioned he's a member of the Monero core team in my previous post - you must've glossed over that:) In other words, thankful_for_today gave us the blatantly crippled code. When we (the core team, although very much in its infancy and only loosely affiliated at that stage) realised that we fixed it.


That vote was indeed rigged by thankful_for_today and the army of BCN sockpuppets, which is precisely one of the arguments the pro-emission-change users have raised. We (the core team) didn't choose the emission curve. If we don't change it then it is out of respect for the social contract, and not for lack of desire.


You're again assuming that we decided to do this from scratch. Nonetheless, inheriting it does not mean we're bound to the PoW. We have already indicated publicly that we are actively pursuing alternatives as a low-to-medium priority.


Pruning the ring signatures also means that the older part of the chain can no longer be fully verified. There are additional risks that one can intuit that have driven us away from looking at that as a solution. At this juncture we don't feel the need to deal with the blockchain size, although we will tackle these hard problems before it becomes an issue.


On the contrary, BBR's aliasing has a host of problems (such as: what if you lose you private key? how can you reclaim your alias, or are you expected to now tell everyone it's changed? and once there are a hundred variants of "Bob", I still need to have an address book that tells me that Bob Simons' alias is bob1982_waffle and Bob John's alias is bob-the-builder...how is that better than just having their actual addresses in my address book? and in both of these events, how is it *any* better than just having the address?) Instead of going with something that had been done, we developed an aliasing system that *every* cryptocurrency can use, including BBR and Bitcoin, that does not have the problems described. Perhaps you'll want to familiarise yourself with it first before assuming we've just "added in aliases" - https://openalias.org


BBR is based on the same code as we are. Bugs that affect us typically affect them and vice-versa. It's not dreamed up from scratch on any level. CZ did absolutely create a brand new PoW, and I'm not knocking the work he has done, but he most certainly did not start from the design phase and bring it to fruition.


I disagree - as our understanding of the codebase grows and we continue to incrementally refactor it we will eventually create a polished diamond out of the coal we have.


Huh? No. I was using it to demonstrate to slapper that more goes into development than just code, and it denigrates the efforts of those other domain experts if you focus solely on the code monkey(s).


It's not fanfare to show WIP.


We never said we were the only ones innovating. You've taken my response which was directed solely at slapper's troll post wherein he insults me and turned it into some sort of attack against BBR. My post was a defence of myself, nothing more. We want to work *with* CZ, not against him, although I am personally saddened and upset by his post that was simultaneously elitist and personally insulting (funny how you seem to see the same qualities in us - I hope your faith in CZ isn't clouding your ability to objectively see that).

That's the whole point. It's not optimal- But it cannot be changed. So why are we lauding a scheme without optimal parameters as the winner?

Risto actually said if the supply was 70% mined he would have never touched this coin. It isn't too far off when this will be 70% mined.
 
I don't understand why you don't care about the price. Did you just buy because someone you admire or respect encouraged you this is the winner? Did you do your own independent research as to short/medium/long term gain potentials?

In less than a year, (assuming NMC/BTC stays the same) XMR's market cap has to overtake NMC simply to ensure you are not at a loss - that's buying today at a relative low - do not forget many brought in higher. And yet there are speculators amongst you who proclaim a 1000 x rise (to the tune of 7x the current market cap of bitcoin!!) is on the table. Where exactly will the ecosystem for a $35 billion dollar market rise from?

Risto himself would earn 350 million if that were to be true assuming his self-declared holdings are 1)true and 2)not increasing

I would be somewhat satiated if he would just come forward and admit his prediction has absolutely no grounding in reality, just like his 1 million dollars/per bitcoin that he predicted in 2013.

This threads sucks because it's a tedious rehash with zero original content.

I rate it Zero Bowls of Popcorn.   >:(

Thank you for the Godwin; now we can move on to more interesting and original discussions.

Lets make this simple.

Proof us that BBR or Bitcoin Emission is optimal.

Less talky talky more walky walky.

So BBR is mined half as fast, but at some point the Emission will simply cross the XMR Emission in terms of daily inflation.


PS: I think there is no optimal Emission and we all know fuck nothing about whats right or wrong today. Its an experiment; i also think that most of not all Cryptocurrencies will be replaced with something more advanced in the next 50 years or so.



Thats his thing, if the coin is mined 70% and the price is still the same, whats the difference? Does that mean i shouldn´t buy Bitcoin now as its already +60% mined?

It takes ~ 3 years to mine 70% of XMR. - thats pretty far off from what i can see. For BBR it takes what? 6 Years? and then? No one will buy it because 70% are mined?! 3 years are such a big difference?



Dunno? No one of the core team said something like that. No one knows, its that simple, crystal balls aren´t working.



Everything can be changed or tweaked if needed; its that simple - so far we know absolutely nothing about if it will be needed and except baseless claims no one yet delivered a proof of that.

Some valid points, fair enough


Didn't completely gloss over it :) It was the good samaritan who wrote this:


IIRC, it was only later he was employed/affiliated with the core team


If you lose your private key (seed) to your Monero wallet how are you supposed to spend your funds? or are you expected to tell everyone not to send you more money to that address? - exactly the same argument, So losing your keys seems a little straw grabby. The nature of decentralized protocol like this is there is no customer services to call up to issue a password reset. A simple backup will take care of that

There may be some variations of bob, bob-the-builder and bob21912. It's exactly the same on twitter- in fact any other service which allows users to choose their own names. The same 'problem' with your DNS aliases. if you propose users will be so confused between @bob-the-builder and @bob1982_waffle why wouldn't they be confused between bob-the-builder.com and bob1982_waffle.com?. caveat utilitor as always.

Additionally BBR sensibly limits allowable characters in their aliases. See if you can spot the difference between these two:

 

I followed your hangout where you discussed that. It's pretty neat  but comes with it's own set of concerns. eg Malicious resolvers, spoofing/poisoning attacks- -Most resolvers aren't using DNSCrypt, setting up alias requires registering/managing a domain and keeping it renewed so it's not decentralised or optimal from a privacy standpoint arguably, although it's at least cool if you imagine it will take off and you escape worrying about name disputes.

Actually about 11 months until it's 50% mined.


It can't though. It's part of the social contract- there will be too much resistance to change it at this point in time. It's something that just has to be lived with. As Este nuno points out, it may well make sense to enter the markets when inflation dies down.

You have a lot more problems, if your standard resolver is malicious.
Also IIRC DNSCrypt is enforced as part of the protocol, which limits the number of DNS servers you can use, but the security benefits of this are bigger then the disadvantages

The disadvantages of the BBR alias implementation are obvious:
First of all you have to solo mine (or have supportive and generous pool operators), which will not work at a greater scale. Even at this stage, getting a block through solomining is unlikely and asking pool operators to do it, might work now, but with increasing adoption, pool operators won't be able to satisfy the demand.
Also with DNS most name conflicts are already solved and you can pay for your Windows license in a system which uses OpenAlias with a transfer command to the address pay.microsoft.com, while at a blockchain implementation like BBR somebody might have stolen the name of Microsoft, while with DNS aliases you normally can easily prove it.
Namecoin is also avaiable to use with the OpenAlias system so this also removes another attack vector

Thank you for acknowledging the bolded part above.

Meanwhile, can you please point out what true BBR supporters have been turned off by sig or the discussion of a rebrand? First of all, I am not forcing a rebrand on anyone.  So that's just more FUD. Second, fluffypony came onto the BBR main thread and made that statement in my sig. You may want to take it up with him as to why he was so candid in that moment.

If DNSCrypt is forced it's even worse. You've limited pool of participants to a much smaller number

And the thing is you can't pay for your windows license using a cryptonote currency - that's just a pipe dream in a world where cryptonote has a large scale functioning economy.  (how would you propose you receive the code back btw?)

Pool operators can easily monetize alias generation service. Aliases could be traded OTC or via a third party service. This is the same situation we had and still have with domains where anyone is free to grab, if the technology takes off- (In which case both XMR and BBR holders will have big smiles on their face) squatters may stand a chance at turning a profit, just like the dotcom saga.

Ah but May 7th there *was* no core team. In fact, just a few posts up from that -


Things have progressed, and a core team formed thereafter. NoodleDoodle was and has always been part of the core team *from its inception*. Clearly one of the reasons for this is his work he did on the PoW implementation, as well as his many (invisible to the outside world) contributions thereafter.


You're conflating - if you lose your private key to your Monero wallet, you can still change the address if you use OpenAlias. So you'd tell people to send funds to donate.monero.cc or whatever, and if you lost control of your wallet you'd merely update your address on that domain.


Congratulations for re-discovering Zooko's Triangle:)

OpenAlias is pretty much 1:1 email addresses, but with a layer that makes it secure. Users may not be required to memorise my email address, but I can definitely have a memorable email address if I choose to. The infrastructure for that is ancient and mature. With a new, closed aliasing system you will have a scenario where memorising it becomes impossible because the bulk of the easy combinations are taken.


I don't know why you'd suddenly decide to show some obviously faked output, but that's not what happens at all. If you use unprintable characters in your browser what happens? Same thing happens in Monero. Here, I cut-and-paste your two "examples" -


[wallet 49VNLa]: transfer 0 donate.monero.cc 10
For URL: donate.monero.cc,DNSSEC validation FAILED!
 Monero Address = 46BeWrHpwXmHDpDEUmZBWZfoQpdc6HaERCNmx1pEYL2rAcuwufPN9rXHHtyUA4QVy66qeFQkn6sfK8a HYjA3jk3o1Bv16em
Is this OK? (Y/n) n
Error: User terminated transfer request, disagreed with dns result from url: donate.monero.cc
[wallet 49VNLa]: transfer 0 donate.monero.cc 10
Error: wrong address: donate.monero.cc


If you can create a fake FQDN with unprintable characters you can do more harm to actual institutions than Monero.


You may have watched the hangout, but I don't think you actually took the 7 minutes required to read and understand the information on the website. Here are some salient points:

"With Namecoin, DIANNA, P2P-DNS, and other systems bringing decentralised DNS to the fore, the OpenAlias standard has been designed to be simple enough to drop in and work."

"In order to ensure that lookups do not betray the user's privacy it is best to implement DNSCrypt from OpenDNS, and force resolution via a DNSCrypt-compatible resolver. Dependent on your use-case, you may choose to bake DNSCrypt into your software, or bundle dnscrypt-proxy along with your application."

"There are only a handful of DNSCrypt compatible resolvers worldwide, and fewer still that additionally support DNSSEC validation, support Namecoin resolution, and don't log DNS requests. Additional DNS resolvers that meet these criteria will be launched and operated by OpenAlias and by contributors in the coming months. In order to make your life easier, you can get a list of available resolvers that have DNSCrypt operational on port 443 by fetching the A records from any of the following domains:

resolvers.openalias.org
resolvers.openalias.ch
resolvers.openalias.se
resolvers.openalias.li
"

So to speak to your specific points, OpenAlias solves them all:

Malicious resolvers - the standard recommends using resolvers linked by the resolvers.openalias seeds, or hey, run your own resolver.

spoofing/poisoning attacks - not possible with DNSSEC, I challenge you to prove otherwise

Most resolvers aren't using DNSCrypt - well isn't it great that there are tons of volunteers that run DNS resolvers that already do, and we'll be throwing down some m

setting up alias requires registering/managing a domain and keeping it renewed - I think GoDaddy has demonstrated that this is a consumer-grade service in 2014. In fact, for $36/year you can get GoDaddy's Premium DNS, and they provide managed DNSSEC on up to 5 domains! Additionally, the nature of the standard means that anyone can drop a domain down and provide alias services (for free or pay). The only real challenge is this space is preventing such a service provider from accumulating thousands of addresses on their service and then overnight changing all the addresses to ones that they control. This is trivially solved by having multiple signers on the records, thus invalidating it if it is changed and signed with only one of the two signatories.

so it's not decentralised or optimal from a privacy standpoint arguably - which is why we only link resolvers (and will only provider resolvers) that also have Namecoin support. There's no reason for your OpenAlias alias to live centralised, when it can happily exist on Namecoin's decentralised network (AND your query can use DNSCrypt and Namecoin records can by secured by DNSSEC, see NamecoinToBind for backhaul implementation details).

In other words, OpenAlias covers multiple use-cases, from the most entry level of users that just wants an X.paymemoneyz.com alias, to the more technical user happy to pay GoDaddy $36/year and have vanity aliases all over the place, to the geek that runs his own DNSSEC-ready infrastructure, to the decentralisation-obsessed user who puts his alias on Namecoin. It disconnects the cryptocurrency from the aliasing system, and let's the existing, decades-old infrastructure handle all the nonsense around it.

fluffypony responded to this below

This was just an example. I wanted to express that this can easily create conflicts with registered and/or known trademarks/names. Google won|t be able to choose @google as alias because so 13 year old kiddie chose to use it as his alias


True, but it requires extra work/ an infrastructure to build. Also this is no 'real' free market  and you can't expect to have low prices here. Why? Imagine a situation with Boolberry being as big as Bitcoin. In this situation the number of blocks is still enough, so that every new user could theoratically register themselves an alias.
Now the market/network share of pools is generated by the things they offer to miners, not what they offer on the alias side. This means, that big pools can cahrge arbitrary high fees to register an alias and everybody would go to the smaller pools, but they won't find enough blocks to give everyone an alias, which creates scarcity and with basic the most basic economic model (supply and demand) this will automatically increase the price for them (if the pool owners, don't raise them, then they will get reselled for a higher price). Because of this people will switch to the other pools, because they have to (the small pools don't find enough blocks, who can satisfy their demand, but then again increase the prices, because the users don't have any choice, but to register their alias there


EDIT: On a sidenote: Creating an arbitrary war between BBR and XMR is a poor move. The devs are working together to strengthen the CryptoNote technology and clean the codebase

I actually think this thread is a healthy and needed discussion. There has been a myth perpetuated that BBR and XMR are the same, but that since XMR had more bitcoin "whales" backing it, XMR is/was better.

As more and more people have come to realize and publicly recognize that Crypto-Zoidberg is currently the best CN developer in the world, these same XMR whales started including in their mythology that CZ was actually "helping" and "working with" XMR developers.

Now, while it is true that CZ has come to rescue on a few occasions - most recently by finding the CN exchange bug last week that could have ended XMR - he is not and has not worked with XMR development.

XMR simply does not have the best CN developer on their team and that's just the facts.

Moving forward with BBR's upcoming new development plan - once its released to the public - people will start to see the gap between the direction of the two coins more clearly.

And, it is my opinion, that eventually - sooner or later - both coins will not be in the same discussion.

I just leave this here

Nonsense. I am not some sort of sockpuppet of any of the users you've listed there. You're looking for patterns where there are none

Man, BBR is stuh-ruggling.  Am I a bagholder?

For the moment apparently yes. Let's hold this bag together.

These two are the best of Cryptonote currency.

XMR won the fight.

*rolls eyes* it ain't over till the fat lady sings.

If he is true Kevin should know that anything can happen till last second. I played game where we was wining by 11 in last minute and lost at end.

Price has fluctuated so much that its hard to determine a winner, but BBR has some great things heading its way, where Monero has had great things coming its way for months and we are still stuck with nothing new. BBR has succeeded in creating all that its put its mind to.

nothing fight, nothing war, get out from talking about this.

Average price thru all this months was 1:8, and is still about that.
What was done at Monero you can easily see if you go thru Missives. Not that much to read. You can compare that with any other cryptonote and see the difference.

They're just trying to get you riled up again for the next few weeks.

look for the signs and tell me I'm wrong.

Placing both this thread and obvious retard on ignore, sorryforthat

haha see wat I did there?

Bitcoin vs Litecoin

DarkCoin vs DarkNote

Monero vs Boolberry

What next.... Quazercoin vs Bytecoin??!?

War's over - they all lost.

both have stupid dumb name, boolbery and monero. lol

... says someone called benthach ...

Monero means money.