Bitcoin Forum

Monero Ninja Launch:

The original Announcement thread was started in the wrong place so the dev team could benefit before most even knew it had been launched. Monero's history is scattered and obscured, the current Monero ANN thread is not the original ANN thread which is a immediate red flag for any crypto project. Some say the original name (Bitmonero/BMR/MRO) was changed (monero/xmr) to cover up the launch issues and association with the original monero scam developer named "thankful_for_today". He was an anonymous dev and was "supposedly" kicked out, but he could have just changed his name to something like "groove" or "puffypony" and continued.




Monero Cripplemine:

At least 6-7% of the total coin supply affected (Possibly 10-15%)
1.37 million plus monero mined with optimized miners while scam dev team led by thankful_for_today pushed a crippled miner on everyone else.

Minting Money with Monero ... and CPU vector intrinsics
August 28, 2014
"The original developers deliberately crippled the miner."
https://da-data.blogspot.de/2014/08/minting-money-with-monero-and-cpu.html




Monero Fastmine:

The monero cripplemine was bad but the fastmine is where the most unfair distribution took place.
Monero has a highly inflationary emission curve where around half the coins were mined in the first year and will have "Roughly 86% mined in 4 years".
By comparison, Bitcoin is almost 7 years old and only has 75% mined. It will take them another 4+ years to get to monero's 86%.
So it will take BTC & LTC 11+ years to get to ~86% mined and monero only 4 years. It will take DASH another 20 years to get to 86%.
What does all this mean? It means all the OG fat cats and fluffy ponies already own most all of the monero, centralizing future distribution.

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



They knew it was a problem but did nothing......
[BMR] BitMonero emission curve change (proposal)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=585480.0


[ANN][MRO] Monero - an anonymous coin based on CryptoNote technology
"It was said that this coin had a mining reward schedule similar to bitcoin. In fact it is twice as fast as intended, even even a bit more than twice as fast as bitcoin.
If you acquired your coins on the basis of the advertised reward schedule, you would be disappointed, and rightfully so, as more coins come to into existence more quickly than you were led to believe." Smooth, Lead monero Dev
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582080.0


Incentivised by the massive amount of fastmined coins spilling out, the coin was heavily Botnet mined....
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg7771469#msg7771469
See also: Monero Stealth miner issue


The fastmine experiment has caused other serious issues that are all starting to add up....
Monero [XMR] block reward plummets below 3 XMR per block
March 28, 2019
“Indeed sustained low block rewards will be a challenge.. AFAIK no cryptocurrency has entered this new « state » It seems Monero might be the first one. My anxiety level will be high in 2021:)"
https://ambcrypto.com/monero-xmr-block-reward-plummets-below-3-xmr-per-block/

"Until May 2022, Monero's "main curve" will produce a large number of new coins. After that, a "tail curve" will reduce Monero's inflation to less than 1% per year." All your monero are belong to us. Monero has been seriously centralized by the fastmine and hoovered up by the early fat cats and fluffy ponies of the world. monero for me - none left for thee.
https://www.bitrates.com/news/p/up-up-and-away-how-cryptocurrencies-are-dealing-with-inflation



Mining centralization issues:

Not only is monero's physical mining centralized and susceptible to 51% attacks but due to its lack of decentralized governance capabilities its mining algorithm itself is centralized and subject to change on a whim every 6 months or so with decisions being made by a small centralized cabal of unknown devs. The later would seem to violate the entire spirit and principles of cryptocurrency, especially for a coin like monero which claims to be based around such hardcore anarchist beliefs.

DOES MONERO HAVE A SERIOUS CENTRALIZED MINING PROBLEM?
RICARDO MARTINEZ | FEB 10, 2020
https://bitcoinist.com/does-monero-have-a-serious-centralized-mining-problem/




Major issue, Undetectable Inflation:
Warnings from monero's own website...

Posted by: Sarang Noether, Ph.D.; Justin Ehrenhofer
January 17, 2020
"If your personal use case requires an absolute, 100%, no-holds-barred guarantee of supply, and you understand the risks inherent with this, then you need a transparent asset." Dash not mentioned.

"the use of an opaque asset introduces the risk of implementation flaws that may or may not be detectable because of the underlying mathematics of commitments and more complex proving systems. The use of mitigating approaches like transparent migrations can assert eventual available supply consistency, but this comes with the risk of losing honest funds too."

"implementation flaws leading to undetectable inflation. Such flaws could arise in many ways, but are limited to opaque assets (like Monero or shielded Zcash) where it is not possible to simply count the currently-available supply. Such a flaw affected Zcash. In this case, it is worth noting that the use of transparent fund migration means that an attempt to move enough exploited funds through the transparent Zcash pool could be detected and would result in any remaining funds (including those of honest users) being permanently frozen. It could be possible to modify the Monero protocol to produce similar supply detection, but this introduces additional risks, reduces privacy and fungibility, and would still require a decision relating to fund freezing; there are no plans to do this."
https://web.getmonero.org/2020/01/17/auditability.html




Press reports on monero (Bytecoin/Cryptonote) privacy issues and other dangerous bugs:


"the Bytecoin/Cryptonote codebase is atrociously bad"
Peter Todd


May 29, 2023
There was a Privacy Bug in Monero for the last 3 years 😨
How Bad was the bug?
How does this bug affect users of Monero?
This thread answers all of these questions and more!
https://twitter.com/AnonIndustries_/status/1663229977456967681


A rather significant bug has been spotted in Monero's decoy selection algorithm that may impact your transaction's privacy. Please read this whole thread carefully. Another one! 7-26-21
If users spend funds immediately following the lock time in the first 2 blocks allowable by consensus rules (~20 minutes after receiving funds), then there is a good probability that the output can be identified as the true spend.
https://twitter.com/monero/status/1419852036913475587
CoinDesk: Bug Found in Decoy Algorithm for Privacy Coin Monero
https://youtu.be/7sTghOv4rCI



Privacy coins no more? CipherTrace files patents for tracing Monero transactions Nov. 2020
The firm claims it will be able to identify XMR used for illicit purposes to support criminal investigations.
https://cointelegraph.com/news/privacy-coins-no-more-ciphertrace-files-patents-for-tracing-monero-transactions


CipherTrace develops Monero tracing tool to aid US DHS investigations - 2020
https://cointelegraph.com/news/ciphertrace-develops-monero-tracing-tool-to-aid-us-dhs-investigations


Monero Privacy Protections Aren’t as Strong as They Seem | WIRED 2018
https://www.wired.com/story/monero-privacy/


Monero [XMR] Privacy Protection May Be Deficient - 2018
https://globalcoinreport.com/monero-xmrs-privacy-protection-may-be-deficient/


Monero has some real issues! 2018
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16688416


Monero Transactions History Can Be Revealed and Exposed: Research
https://cointelegraph.com/news/monero-transactions-history-can-be-revealed-and-exposed-research


CryptoNote Currency Bug Allowed Creation of Unlimited Number of Coins
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/cryptonote-currency-bug-allowed-creation-unlimited-number-coins/


Disclosure of a Major Bug in CryptoNote Based Currencies
Posted by: luigi1111 and Riccardo "fluffypony" Spagni
May 17, 2017
https://getmonero.org/2017/05/17/disclosure-of-a-major-bug-in-cryptonote-based-currencies.html


Warning: Every CryptoNote/Monero transaction in history will be retroactively exposed
https://steemit.com/cryptonote/@macrochip/warning-every-cryptonote-monero-transaction-in-history-will-be-retroactively-exposed


Fundamental monero security flaw, Chain Split attack
What chain splits mean for Monero - 2018
https://youtu.be/TlVsMTeT_nE



It Turns Out Monero’s Privacy Coin Wasn’t So Private After All
By Robert Johnson on August 2, 2018
Reports out today highlight yet another security vulnerability within Monero XMR, a cryptocurrency designed for optimum privacy. Now we already know of the associations between Monero and malicious mining, but this marks another example of how XMR traders and investors have been put at risk, simply due to the markup of the currency.
https://cryptodaily.co.uk/2018/08/it-turns-out-moneros-privacy-coin-wasnt-so-private-after-all/


US DEA ‘ACTUALLY WANTS’ CRIMINALS TO KEEP USING BITCOIN
Speaking about altcoins, specifically Monero and Zcash, whose privacy-focused technology has likewise come in for flack from naysayers, Infante said that even these were not beyond the DEA’s radar.
“We still have ways of tracking them,” she added.
https://bitcoinist.com/dea-wants-criminals-use-bitcoin/


On-chain tracking of Monero and other Cryptonotes 2019
Final nail in the coffin of Monero privacy
https://medium.com/@crypto_ryo/on-chain-tracking-of-monero-and-other-cryptonotes-e0afc6752527


FloodXMR: Low-cost transaction flooding attack with Monero’s bulletproof protocol 2019
The attacker could potentially trace nearly 50% of inputs at a cost of less than $2,000.
https://www.ccn.com/vitalik-buterin-eyes-research-on-privacy-coin-moneros-traceability
https://eprint.iacr.org/2019/455.pdf


A well-respected cryptographer released a tool called http://www.monerolink.com, where you can link all transactions from 2014-2016 with 100% (due to blockchain timing analysis apparently), and all transactions from 2016-2017 are linkable with a probabilistic distribution dependent on mixin size. So they have a table on the site, 1 mixin transactions are linkable 86% of the time, 10+ mixin transactions are linkable 22% of the time.
Monero has since fixed this bug going forward, but if you used monero on a Dark Net Market between 2014-2017, BEWARE!


Devs disclose critical XMR-burning bug in Monero wallets 2018
Hackers could have tricked exchanges into giving up their XMR
https://thenextweb.com/hardfork/2018/09/25/monero-burning-vulnerability/


Monero security flaw could’ve seen XMR stolen from cryptocurrency exchanges 7-4-2019
Devs have just disclosed nine scary bugs in Monero code
https://thenextweb.com/hardfork/2019/07/04/monero-cryptocurrency-security-flaw-bug-hackerone-disclosure-hack/


Further Investigations
TLDR: Monero was never a real privacy coin. Multiple problems that Ciphertrace is currently exploiting were reported to Monero project in 2016 and remain unfixed since. To draw attention to the issue I will publish transactions, IP addresses and porn preferences of 100 "lucky" Monero users every day.
Monero "BADCACA" tracking project
Monero doesn't work. There is a dozen of known ways to track it.
Did you use Monero yesterday? If so, check the list below, you might be on it.
https://monero-badcaca.net/


Unveiling the truth over the major Monero scam
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=755840.0


Dash's privacy feature has never been broken - Turns out Monero's privacy feature has never really worked to begin with
https://www.reddit.com/r/dashpay/comments/65fz68/dashs_privacy_feature_has_never_been_broken_turns/



 :oFormer Monero Maintainer ‘Fluffypony’ Arrested and to Be Extradited for Non-Crypto Crimes :o
Riccardo Spagni, who was arrested in Tennessee, will be extradited to South Africa to face fraud charges.
https://www.coindesk.com/former-monero-maintainer-fluffypony-to-be-extradited-for-non-crypto-crimes

 :oMonero’s former maintainer arrested in the US for allegations unrelated to cryptocurrency :o
An arrest warrant for Riccardo Spagni was issued on July 20, 2021, at the request of the South African government. He was apprehended the same day in the United States.
https://cointelegraph.com/news/monero-s-former-maintainer-arrested-in-u-s-for-allegations-unrelated-to-cryptocurrency
https://www.saps.gov.za/journal/sdetails.php?jid=13981

Fluffy, you got some Splainin to do...
Dissecting the MyMonero Scam: Part One
https://librehash.org/dissecting-the-mymonero-scam-part-one/


DISCLAIMER:
I am a Bitcoin, ETH and DASH fan and I do not deny a conflict of interest. Nevertheless I endeavor to be factual and I suggest that readers consider the facts, check the facts, reach your own conclusions about what happened and how it matters today, and finally to avoid the temptation to attack the person stating the facts or the coin(s) with which he might be associated
EDIT: add disclaimer, various typos, writing cleanups, reformatting, add references.


They drew first blood. This thread was Creatively inspired by...
Why the darkcoin/dash/dashpay instamine matters
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=999886.0

Monero always kept their initial schedule and never changed it
(unlike other coins, like DASH which lowered their total emission several times and where more than 20% of the current supply was mined in the first hours: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg13017231#msg13017231)

Monero merely catches up with bitcoin emission, and will eventually have more coins than BTC, due to the minimum block reward starting in 2022:

https://i.imgur.com/W0WCDG9.png

Respectfully, I'd ask the Monero supporters to either stay on topic and explain why the premise is nonsense as I have done in the past (I don't have an easy link to the post but I broke down the specific chronology and cited sources showing how the crippled miner only accounted for a few percent of the coins at most, with well-documented non-involvement of the coin team) or just ignore this obvious troll thread.

It is no more legitimate to respond to this thread with comments about Dash, charts of the Dash instamine, etc. than it is for Dash supporters to respond to criticism of their instamine scam with comments about Monero.

EDIT: nice chart comparing XMR and BTC over a longer term view. It looks like from 2020 or so, XMR and BTC will be very similar in terms of coin supply and inflation, until XMR passes BTC in supply around 2040 and maintains its slightly higher <1% inflation going forward long term.

thanks smooth, i too have reported them for being off topic.

This is on topic.

I have not looked into monero. The things he claims "could" be true

HOWEVER - i would not trust one word mastermined710 says.

I was on the xcoin(dash) captive instamine launch. I was there in real time and watched it unfold.

He now tries to deny things that happened  actually happened  on that launch. He is not to be trusted.

Although, this is not a dash/xcoin/dark thread I will not go into it here. I will only say if you want examples of his lies then please contact me for details.

This person is either a total scammer or likes to try and destroy the truth with nuances that are laughable. His tactic is to say he is telling the truth so that the real truth that is a correct and proper picture is distorted and cast in doubt.

He is making this thread only to divert from the dash scam thread.

He is a scam protector and pumper.

These figures are all wrong because they ignore the fact that Monero has a minimum tail emission equal 0.6 XMR per 2min block. This has been part of the social covenant in Monero since the start indicated first as a tail emission of less than 1% and then finalized at 0.6 XMR per 2min block. The comparison with Bitcoin and Litecoin fails simply because both Bitcoin and Litecoin have a fixed maximum number of coins while Monero does not. The comparison with Dash is even worse because not only does Dash have a fixed money supply but the Dash maximum money supply was drastically reduced after launch.

There was considerable debate over the changing of the emission curve in the Monero community and the presence of a tail emission was a factor in that debate, and the final decision to leave the emission curve alone.

where you pull this out?

Emission till end of May was about 1 milion coins. I started mining about 20th may and difficulty was really hard and all miners were out.

At about that time, a bit before and latter, that guy David Andersen ( some professor on some USA university he is also on this forum and made post about it) optimized miner and rented lots of mining power to mine XMR and instantly dump it on Poloniex.

so if even he mined huge part of those 1 million XMR i have no ideas where you got 1.5 million number.


PS:
It is to hard to find his article where he posted all how it happened. i remember par of time he was on vacations with family. but i found this ethical dilemma he got into on 20th April: http://prntscr.com/arqyjz

Exactly. If 7 milion of Monero was mined in first year that means that there is not unusual to have 1 million mined in first  month and a half.

On other hand


I failed to find how much Dash was mined first year compared to first month and a half. Do you maybe have a link to some fully working "dash chain explorer"?

This thread is such a lie.  Anyone who investigates the truth of the Monero launch will understand that its release was fairer than 99% of all coins out there, and that the very, very small amount of benefit that certain people got over others early on was caused by the fact that it was initially forked from Bytecoin, and thus its miner was forked from a mining software who purpose was to fake a 2 year history of the coin.   

The ones who profited from this are not the current dev team, but rather a couple of individuals who optimized the miner and then mined and sold the Monero they made, putting these coins out into the hands of many.

While I don't necessarily disagree with you, as the Monero Devs have been pretty up front and honest about everything from the GUI to the low probability of any coin (including XMR) being successful enough to overtake BTC let alone gold, fiat, ect.), we should be fair to the Dashers as our estimates of what happened with their instamine are based on a probable case that they probably feel is a worst case--though Evan working and being funded by the NSA would be my worst case for that scenario. So just using numbers and facts, what is the most coins that could been mined with the crippled miners and who could they have belonged to? The worst case being one entity who mined enough to break anonymity using the research from MRL1.

Which won't work after the version 2 fork.

He's using the date range from the blog post from dga who worked for some whale miners to optimize the code and had a high network share until July or so (at a cost of $100K/month I think) and assuming all the coins mined up until that point are attributable to unfair cripple mining.

However, he is conveniently ignoring the other info (including from that very same blog post) that allows you to objectively reduce by a large amount the total coins, and also supports that the developers of Monero had nothing to do with the original probably-deliberately crippled code. For example, in the blog post it is stated that he didn't even start working on optimizing until after the first (most probable) of the alleged crippling had already been removed by NoodleDoodle, so that takes off the first 2 1/2 weeks, etc.

If you analyze it in the other direction and treat dga's group as being "known mining" and work backwards to how much of the unknown mining could have been captured by unknown parties using unfair means (possibly devs, possibly others), again you get a much smaller number.


That one has nothing to do with Monero since mentions memory use and he never optimized Monero's memory use. He also worked on a bunch of other coins (definitely PTS, not sure which others) so he must have been talking about one of those.

This part is surely bollocks. I'm not a big monero fan, but BS is BS. I've seen the launch from the very beginning and it was properly communicated, well known event. Everybody who wanted was able to take part.
BTW I still have a wallet what contains a few dozens of moneros what I've mined in the first few days with a doggy dualcore laptop. The emission curve was also subject of a long debate.

Monero - Cloning the premined uber-scam "Bytecoin" and avoid scanning the code for fraudulent algorithms
Monero - Insisting on having oh so much integrity yet irresponsibly/willfully shipping a crippled shit-miner to unsuspecting victims/"users"
Monero - Ninjamining an unknown shit-ton of coins within our inner circle through optimized miners while the public gets the crippled one
Monero - The perfect instrument for ninjamining because our CryptoNote-blockchain (aka copycat technology) is opaque
Monero - Projecting our fraud on DASH and yelling "instamine" because no one can see that we are the actual scammers!
Monero - Evan should have chosen CryptoNote for DASH to hide his 5 trillion DASH instamine like we did with our ninjamine!
Monero - Failing to come up with a single innovation of our own and yelling "stop playing the innovation card" when DASH is proven as superior (butthurt)

Monero - Cloning a scam, putting make up on the pig, hoping no one notices

Monero - Too little, too late

Monero -  :-[

It's a common practice of shitcoins that have their instamines and other scams brought to light to retaliate against any coin communities that don't observe the green wall of silence ("scam and let scam") using nonsense and overblown accusations. Dash isn't anywhere near the first to engage in such behavior and won't be the last.

Ah yes, that's a classic!
Anyone associated (most likely the devs themselves) with the people running an ultra illegal and morally despicable botnet to mine Monero will undeniably become subject to criminal investigation. And rightfully so.
Pretty sad that no one bothered to mine this shitcoin so they artificially inflated their hashrate by abusing innocent malware victims with this disgusting and pathetic tactic.

Monero - Is it a currency or a virus? Better scan your computer now!

Eyewitness accounts differ


But then, the entire motive and premise of this thread has been debunked by another eyewitness:

from smooth's post, he admitted it was at least 1.37 million.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=755840.msg13018553#msg13018553

Please read the linked post. That is "total coins mined" (by everyone in the entire world) during a two month time period, which is very different from your claim, in fact it contradicts it.

EDIT: Let's quote the entire analysis, since it is relevant here:

lol

Ive seen this tactic exactly in use in one other nick, blockafett.

confusing, so you are now saying there was not "1.37 million" monero cripplemined?
also, i'm not sure what "total coins mined" has to do with the cripplemine.

i'm claiming (based on your own post) that ~1.5 million moneros were "cripplemined".
i don't see how that "contradicts" anything that you yourself have not already admitted.

i'm not claiming that 1.5 million monero was "instamined" i'm saying they were cripplemined. i think you are confusing the monero "fastmine" with the monero "cripplemine". they are two different problems.

non responsive but apology accepted!

funny you should mention that. while there is no proof or even accusation that evan is working with or funded by the NSA there is this....
 
http://web.archive.org/web/20141106091836/http://www.cryptobang.com/2014/10/05/what-nsa-created-cryptonote-for/

Nice try to change the subject after your failed accusation that Monero people invented the instamine phrase to dovetail dash into that inglorious and shabby category of coin's that fail the distribution test, but as anyone who knows even the tiniest bit about the history of encryption will point out, the NSA had their hand in the development of most early encryption, so pointing to their involvement in any modern encryption that has stood the test of time is like pointing to the USA's rocket program after WWII and saying it's part of a NEO-NAZI plot because, "Look at all the Germans!"

Does everyone in the dash community just throw shit against the wall and hope it sticks? Now that your instamine attack failed, you're on to the NSA, and now that that's failed, let me guess Monero Dice? Just an endless parade of BS. Here's a hint. If you can't make an accusation in a thread last past the first five two pages without being debunked, it's probably a waste of everyone's time.

No there are a few rational and honest ones, but MasterMined710, specifically, is a dishonest and often incoherent scam protector and pumper.

you're playing word games again smooth.
i could just as easily say...That it was "not accidental" is unproven.
it was not an intentional instamine in the sense that it was not "sold as" a instamine stlye distribution coin but that it accidentally happened and was fixed.

DASH fits TBCM's first definition of a (accidental) instamine.


TBCM's second  definition of instamine more fits with what i would call a POS fastmine but it's not clearly defined either way. when does a instamine become a fastmine? How many licks does it take to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Pop? the world may never know!

"Proven" is subjective, and I did not use that word above. When you "prove" something in court, for example, it is the opinion of a judge or jury that decides, based on some collection of evidence and a standard of proof.

However, if you were to say that one can not state "not accidental" as a "completely accurate" fact any more than one can state it was "accidental" as a "completely accurate" fact, I'd generally agree.


No.

Intentional vs. accidental is not directly observable. Again, it is, at best, your opinion that it "accidentally happened".

Perhaps what you are trying to say is that it wasn't explicitly advertised as an instamine. Which of course is part of the problem.


It is somewhat close, except that unlike some instamines (generally smaller ones, such as Litecoin), Dash's instamine produced a huge number of coins not only from the difficulty adjustment, but also from the block rewards being too high, relative to what was advertised (and also relative to the overall supply).

BTW, TBCM didn't say anything about accidental. It would fit his definition equally well if the initial difficulty were deliberately set too low. Not that I'm holding up TBCM as an authority on the definition of instamine. I just quoted that for the date, since you claimed that the term instamine was created or popularized by Monero supporters which is flatly ridiculous when it was widely discussed months before Monero existed.

Of course flatly ridiculous claims coming from you is not surprising at all. We all know why we are here:

correct, TBCM was talking about coins that were "intentionally" set too low (according to his personal preferences). there are plenty of Proof of stake coins that were "intentionally" instamined within a few days or weeks where "all" the coins were instamined/fastmined and then they switched to POS mining/minting. these were sold as/advertised as a feature not an accidental bug like DASH.

Was The Instamine A Positive Thing For Dash?
https://dashdot.io/alpha/?page_id=118

i don't think we know who first coined the word instamine do we? are you claiming it was TBCM?
you're definitely wrong that the term instamine was not "popularized by Monero supporters". iloveanoncoin was one as you yourself pointed out. monero supporters have used/repeated the term instamine more than all the other coin communities put together, they totally "popularized" it and associated it with Darkcoin/DASH. congratulations

As usual, more made up nonsense from you.

Here is his quoted post, in its entirety:


Please show us where he indicates "intentionally" "unintentionally" or anything of the sort.


No, I did not make any such claim. Please read my posts. I cited his post (among others) as evidence that the term was in common use long before Monero existed.


LOL. There are probably hundreds if not thousands of references to the term that predate Monero, including threads about the Darkcoin [sic] instamine that predate Monero. Hell, many of them predate XCoin/Darkcoin/Dash too.

As usual, every time you write a post, it is complete nonsense. Not at all surprising because:

This thread appears to be missing Exhibit A (http://da-data.blogspot.com.es/2014/08/minting-money-with-monero-and-cpu.html).

...the story of how Monero was intended to be a "fair" relaunch of bytecoin and ended up swallowing whole the very core of the bytcoin 'scam' code instead, thereby allowing it to be privately mined for months courtesy of "clown central" quality control.

Never mind. I'm sure it's all been washed through markets  ;)

yea we wanted to give it extra time to trickle down, so we voted to not reduce the emission by 75%  ;D

Yes exactly this. He apparently mined most of coins first 2 months so there is not much left for whoever OP accused to do a premine.

Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."

I especially like that he just copy/pasted the title from https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=999886.0

Why are all the Monero guys in here talking about DASH? This thread is about the questionable XMR launch. Let's stay on topic.

So the fastmine/high initial emission of XMR, combined with the refusal to create an official GUI wallet for easy public use does seem very scammy.

Also, the Monero devs claim they didn't know about the scam miner they were pushing off on the public. If that is true, what other parts of their copy/paste coin do they not understand?

It's one thing for novices to copy (well known) bitcoin, but copying something like bytecoin that is brand new, a scam, and includes fraudulent code is pretty irresponsible.

Smooth or one of the other Devs can talk about what happened at the launch, but the lack of GUI is one of the least scammy things ever--who builds a scam and makes it only appeal to those who understand opensource or are comfortable with line command? That would immediately put your coin under the scrutiny of those most knowledgeable about coding, as they are the people most comfortable with line command--so not exactly a wise move if you're trying to scam people--kind of like making a wine and only selling it at wine competitions (if it's lousy, it's going to be apparent all the more quickly, and vocally so). The first thing every scam ever does is put out some bitcoin wallet, slap their name on it and say "Look how cool our wallet is? We must be legitimate, right?" The Monero Devs are wise to build the coin, then the wallet, and then market it.

Interesting topic, it even has a bit of bad karma to it  ;)
  
This is why people who troll other cryptocurrencies (for example Dash) with their instamine history really should know better,
specially when Monero itself has a history of fastmine / instamine. Its bound to backfire at some point.
I guess we arrived at that "some point".

Lets also stop labeling everyone who brings up Monero's instamine / fastmine history as "a scammer", it is such a weak way of dealing with a discussion.
(and yes, i'm looking at you smooth)

The reason to make it harder to use (by not having an official GUI) is to keep the coins for insiders, and wait to release the official GUI until after coin emission has drastically slowed, which is exactly what is happening.

Is it? Because last time I checked there was a online wallet and most of the people who aren't comfortable with command line just keep there's on Polo.

Last time i checked people from your own community are advising against keeping large amounts on that webwallet and in general it is considered unsafe to keep your coins longterm on an exchange.  
From a safety point of view developing an officially supported GUI so people can store their own coins in an easy and safe way offline is pretty much mandatory from the start and most certainly should
not linger for more then two years .. and then still not have an ETA.

thats is bullshit logic.... i think this i all about cash.... be it FIAT or the next E-Cash/Digital Cash whatever.... so is it asked to much that people maybe try to learn sth if they want to buy something like monero?....  the CLI is as safe as it can be at the moment... how can you people handle to sign contracts IRL without a GUI?

You are fucking adults with responsibilities ... why do you need hand keeping when its about YOUR OWN MONEY..... the help in the CLI is good enough

Exactly. I suspect now that the XMR emission has slowed significantly that the official GUI will soon become a priority for the monero crew.

And they're right--they also advise using one of the many GUIs and wallet generators too--doesn't mean that people are likely to follow that advice. I'd advice learning line command, boning up on cryptosystems and how they should be built and becoming an early adopter not a reactive speculator, but do you think people will listen to me?

So this is your narrative: that Monero has eschewed the pressure to build an official GUI over many, many months only to keep out those people who are demanding an official GUI before they can validate Monero as an investment--sorry to say I don't believe this is the case, but if it were, I'd tell those people they are pricing-in their demand. It's kind of like blaming Oculus Rift for their beta kits being cheaper than the for-consumer model--though for all anyone knows Monero won't budge when the official GUI hits and those people can see the consumer model in all its glory for the same price it is today (or even less, who knows?).

My narrative is very simple, developing an officially supported GUI wallet seems to have been a low priority for Monero for a long time. From a safety point of view thats questionable as people who are not familiar with cli wallets start to look for and use less safe alternatives. Thats pretty much all my narrative at the moment.    

So your like the cryptocurrency safety police? Maybe, like experimental planes and other technologies, only those with a willingness to learn or who have the ability to understand the ins and outs of the technology should be using the new technology. Maybe instead of pushing out some wallet borrowed from another coin and slapping your name on it, the developers should make sure the coin works as advertised and there aren't hidden things like faulty algos or weird emissions or privacy concerns or OSPEC concerns, BEFORE they say they are going to change the world and go full infomercial with their untested and unreviewed crapcoin-- I mean for the sake of safety.

like i said that is not an argument ... you don´t leave your wallet at the window in front of the street either and wonder when you get robbed... if you invest in monero its your money... and like i said ONLY your responsibility how to do that secure... ur adult... some of you got kids ... they dont come with some fancy GUI or manual...

so act in the cryptoscene like you would everywhere else... with the bidden caution....

The Dash instamine scam itself is off topic and there are better places to discuss it. However, since this thread was created by Dash supporter in retaliation for legitimate criticism of Dash by Monero supporters among many others, it is important to remind people about the context, lest they not understand that the entire thread is dishonest trolling:

There is an online wallet and there have also been multiple GUI wallets since the first weeks and months for those who choose to use those, including the two that were developed for a bounty organized by the core team: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=589561.0

Since that time other GUI wallets have been developed and released, including lightWallet which is now on its second version and is prominently featutred on the project web site, again making it easily available for those who want to use it: http://getmonero.org/getting-started/choose

The focus of resources by the core team on other areas has not meant that GUIs were not available; they have been available almost since the original coin launch.

Of course none of this should be surprising because the entire thread is dishonest trolling by Dash supporters in retaliation for the honest criticism of their instamine scam and ongoing deception of investors about it:

It is well known what happened.

1. Bytecoin was coin with promising new technology that was announced with 80%+ of the coins already mined.

2. Aside from the fact that it was 80%+ mined, none of the other aspects of the Bytecoin scam were known at the time.

3. Some community members discussed, originally on the Bytecoin thread, and then later on its own thread, the idea of relaunching Bytecoin with some minor tweaks (mostly slowing down the emission curve and adding a tail emission)

4. Some anonymous guy went and relaunched it

5. The anonymous guy wanted to introduce merged mining with Bytecoin which the rest of the community didn't want. There was a vote, and despite obvious sock puppetry (especially in hindsight) in favor of the merged mining, by some miracle the vote was rejected.

6. The anonymous guy started adding merged mining code anyway, at one point breaking the coin in the process (mining got completely stuck on the whole network).

7. The community met up on IRC and via PMs and decided to fork the repo to a community-controlled repo to prevent this from happening again.

8. At no time during this process was the issue of undertaking an independent effort to independently review and develop Bytecoin's code on the table. None of us had the time for it, nor did we set out to develop a new coin. It was all done strictly to remove the ninjamine/premine, slow down the emissions, and have community control over the repo to prevent any further rogue changes. The expectation was that any further changes would just be merged from Bytecoin, the way many coins merge changes from Bitcoin. Everyone involved including the people mining it, and later buying it, knew that it was (at that time) a minor fork of Bytecoin, and anything good or bad about Bytecoin would be inherited.

8. Later, this new coin started to became popular, and a formal effort was organized to develop and improve the code, led by the Monero core team. This included, among its first steps, discovering and removing the apparently-deliberately crippled mining-code stating 19 days after the original launch or 12 days after the repo fork and concluding either 10 or 14 days following that, depending on which commit you believe removed the last of any apparently-deliberate crippling.

The later of the two dates of the end of any apparently-deliberate crippling 33 days after launch, meaning approximately 825K coins had been mined, not 1.5 million as is incorrectly and dishonestly claimed by the OP: http://moneroblocks.info/search/50000

There is no evidence that anyone exploited the apparently-deliberately crippled minor prior to the first fix 19 days after launch, although it could have happened (most likely by the original developer who was "fired" by the community) on a relatively small scale. There was some documented exploitation of it (though not by the original developer) during the following 14 days. In any case the number of coins mined in this manner would be much less than even 825K.

The issue of the alleged "fast" mine has already been addressed on this thread here:


and here:


In fact, because of the tail emission (and coupled with the lack of any instamine whatsoever; blocks were precisely on schedule to the minute starting with block #5), Monero has one of the slowest overall emissions schedules of any of the major coins today (possible exception being DOGE, which also has a tail reward). Monero slow emissions will continue to distribute new coins long after Bitcoin, Dash, etc. have seen their emissions dwindle to insignificance (and eventually stop, but that takes much longer). Arguably this has already happened with Dash, since so many coins were created right up front (instamine) and the mining rewards have been cut so drastically thereafter to what is merely a trickle now.

Of course none of this should be surprising since the entire thread is dishonest trolling by a Dash supporter, in retaliation for calling out their instamine scam:


And with that

/thread

I would not even call it exploitation, as the only thing that happened is that someone made his own very improved miner ( happens with every coin with a new algo btw ;) When there is money to be made people are on it )... lessening the effort of this thread to make this a big thing even more .... would not make that difference with the improved miner if the "solo" code was crippled or not difference is only a tiny share of the profits of dga and his group back than

Optimizing is not the same thing as exploiting an apparently-deliberately crippled miner. When dga started working on it, only the first of NoodleDoodle's fixes were done (though even that reduced any advantage significantly), which meant his early work on improving it did involve getting an advantage from that the remaining apparent crippling. What he did later with highly optimizing it, creating a GPU miner, etc. had nothing to do with any crippling.

Once upon a time, years ago, the monero core devs understood the importance of a official GUI.....

Bingo. smooth was an early miner. how many monero did you cripplemine smooth?

oh great, a centralized web wallet, what could go wrong. lol

You'll all be pleased to hear that i have updated the Thread with citations and quotes to back up all my claims.  8)
Special thanks to smooth for providing the quotes. There will be more to come!

Can you provide some examples of rational and honest people in the Dash community?

Mastermine has reading difficulties, so he missed why I though his narrative was so f'ing stupid.

When we jump from that date to present date, there is one simple fact that remains : there is still no official GUI wallet
Information from Monero itself indicates and support that :

http://monero.org/faq-items/where-is-the-monero-xmr-gui-wallet/

https://i.imgur.com/3X6MuTL.jpg

Sure there are several unofficial versions but those are not supported, maintained or even further developed by Monero itself and therefore Monero can not
and will not be held responsible if anything happens to these wallets. Something that smooth "forgot" to mention when he mentioned the onofficial GUI wallets.

So whats left for the Monero community to safely use is a cli wallet, coupled with no official Monero policy to warn people not to use the webwallet to stall large amounts on
and not use exchanges to stall coins longterm on (exception being daytraders that need their coins on exchanges to trade with them of course).  

I already answered this also:

So your like the cryptocurrency safety police? Maybe, like experimental planes and other technologies, only those with a willingness to learn or who have the ability to understand the ins and outs of the technology should be using the new technology. Maybe instead of pushing out some wallet borrowed from another coin and slapping your name on it, the developers should make sure the coin works as advertised and there aren't hidden things like faulty algos or weird emissions or privacy concerns or OSPEC concerns, BEFORE they say they are going to change the world and go full infomercial with their untested and unreviewed crapcoin-- I mean for the sake of safety.

Yup, that's why both GUI wallets and pool code were developed using bounties. Both efforts successfully concluded in mid 2014

That web site is a domain squatter.


Monero is not an entity so your sentence is misconstructed, but in any case regardless of what wallet you use, no one else is responsible for your use of open source software provided at no charge with no warranty. Use at your own risk.

Maybe a good idea to mention that on Monero's website somewhere. So with regards to Monero's Cripplemined Fastmine history, is there any official thread where this is pinned down
and for all to read ? Is there a birth of Monero where this is described ?

How you even dare to compare a faulty miner that was not spotted first on an got fixed fast with your coins shady history even??? you think people reading both stories are stupid and cannot see which one is shady and which one not?

i think i will wait for a more mature and on topic reply on my previous post. i'm sure someone out there is typing it into cyberspace
right now... i will just need to have patience.

In terms of "fastmined", nothing has changed so the formula in the ANN OP (and possibly something on the web site) serves a complete and accurate description of the one emission curve that has ever existed.

As far as "cripplemined" that term doesn't even have a well defined meaning but the full and accurate history of the mining code is here: https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/commits/master

We've never created a "Birth of Darkcoin Monero" post to try to spin and obfuscate; it is all there in the previous paragraph.

There is a history writeup somewhere (I think by fluffypony) that describes the background, creation of the core team, etc. I don't know where it is though.

Well, thats just dandy...  so to summarize :

* there is no official record or pinned post to inform newcomers about Monero's Fastmined / Cripplemined period and if people really want to know more they are directed to look at code on Github?
* third party (non-official) GUI wallets are linked at Monero's official website without any reference to use them at people's own risk, as they are not officially supported by Monero's dev team ?
* No official information regarding the risks of using Monero's webwallet and the risks of storing coins on exchanges for longterm ?
* no official GUI wallet after two years and still no ETA ?

Only one thing comes to mind when i think about it :

https://i.imgur.com/q6GMsEu.png



    

  

Good, stay away. It dangerous experimental technology. Unless you are an expert capable of evaluating everything carefully and an extreme speculator, and in all cases capable of securing your crypto coins properly, you shouldn't buy it. If you have a short term use, well you still need to be able to secure your crypto coins properly, and no that doesn't mean GUI. Bitcoin is overflowing with GUIs, yet people get hacked and lose coins constantly.

If all coins gave that advice instead of shill threads full off "positivity" and "nation building", many tears would be prevented.

LOL. Bitcoin technology is being used IRL in retail. "Experimental" or "dangerous" only applies to CraptoNote which was written from scratch in a failed attempt to re-invent the wheel by your copycat wannabe Satoshi "Saberhagen". Even the most insignificant shitcoins ever forked from Bitcoin are theoretically more secure & robust than CryptoBloat. If your product is shit you can't make it look good by pulling everyone else in.

QFT:


Monero should be relaunched for its cripplemine scam at the beginning.

QFBullishit.

There is no evidence at all of Monero developers having anything to do with slowing the miner down (in fact they sped it up). None, zip, zilch. (Not surprising, since it didn't happen.)

There is also no proof that the miner was deliberately slowed down by anyone, though it is a reasonable supposition. It was fixed after 2.58% of the initial emission were mined (though with infinite emission this will be further diluted eventually), and again there is no evidence anyone ever exploited it before the Monero developers started fixing it.

Fortunately Monero didn't have a massive instamine on day one, or this could have been a real problem. This is one reason it never makes sense to distribute massive numbers of coins in the first hour or day, when the hashing code is new, comes unoptimized from another project, and could possibly be exploited unfairly. That would be disastrous.

Monero should be relaunched for its cripplemine scam at the beginning nonetheless.

Plus we can clearly tell there are provably scam victims from the Monero cripplemine as the optimized mining code wasn't available to the public, who had to put up with the scammy crippleminer. Anyone who ever tried to mine Monero with the first official miner was financially defrauded and that's a non debatable fact.

The despicableness of the botnet mining should be re-iterated as well.

Not provably, no.

You can't prove such optimized mining code that you claim "wasn't available" existed at all (nor can I -- if it did, I'm not aware of it).

It doesn't count when miners optimize their own code, that is fair game.

EDIT:

Also, if you're putting together a fraud claim against those who did have such a miner, sign me up, since I mined with the first official miner and according to you I was defrauded. Most of the other team members did too, maybe all.

Citation needed (but of course we all know it won't be coming)

Dash liars on this thread:

MasterMined710
ceti
Not sure Macrochip has specifically lied yet (just illogical and incorrect nonsense), but he's getting close.

The FAILERO scam protecting in here is pretty desperate. Deflecting away the accusations by mentioning off topics is clearly a sign of guilt.

Moanero cloned a scam coin (Bytecoin). Why you ask? Because they KNEW, like everyone else, it was a scam
And yet didn't bother to check for scammy code? Is that feigning of ignorance credible? Definitely not.
Why? Because they claim to have so much integrity:


Advertising "fair launch" and yet they pushed a scammy crippleminer onto the public


Only when an outside party noticed the scam that was going on:


they bothered to make efforts to fix it.
Monero devs filled their pockets with optimized miners no one else had access to at the time and just when someone else noticed he could fix the scam miner himself they had to come clean. Too bad for him they had already a shit-ton before before anyone found out.

Conclusion from evidence:

SCAM CONFIRMED.

Monero should relaunch because of the cripplemine scam at the beginning.

Yeah, you guys should really stop. The Dash instamine is very well known, no sense even trying to deflect attention from it


Clear lie, since "millions" had not been mined even by the latest possible date of any miner optimization.

Congratulations, Macrochip, you have been added to the documented Dash liar list!

Dash liars on this thread:

MasterMined710
ceti
Macrochip NEW

The following applies to all of them:

Stop trying to deflect from the intentional Monero cripplemine scam by mentioning off topics.


Prove it. Oh wait you can't, a CryptoBloat Blockchain isn't auditable.

Scam reconfirmed.

Lie #2. Mining is transparent.


It isn't deflecting when one responds to documented lies by explaining why the lies are occurring. That is more on-topic than continuing down a nonsense conversation built with lies.

Start being truthful and there might be something to discuss, but then if that were to happen, this whole thread would not exist.

I'm still waiting for evidence for your claim "a number of the core devs have bragged about how many zombie machines they control".

Chirp...Chirp...Chirp...

The true evil is the oligarchies that pervade the trustless space of cryptocurrencies pretending to be decentralized and invoking the name of Satoshi so they can fleece more peasants with their paynode schemes that reward their ill gotten gains over and over and over and over.....

Instamines exasperate the problem of old world political leeching, but they don't create it--it's the paynode scheme that creates the oligarchy.

Trying to compare a crippled miner to a 30% instamine in two days is a sad equivocation, but failing to see why that isn't even the real problem (at least politically) is reprehensible, but I suppose when you're an oligarch it is tough to see the technology from the fees.

^ Posted by 'Chessus' who was outed along with 'Hexah', his buddy on that thread, as being sock puppets run by the Bytecoin scam. Very reliable source. NOT

ceti most likely knows that thread is not a reliable source but is posting it anyway, as yet another malicious lie.

Attack the attacker, much?
Monero cripplemine scam is an objective fact, even if Hitler himself reported on it I would believe him.


Copycat coin with zero innovation and just as much of a long-term future.

No, I point out specific lies from you guys, along with evidence backing up that they are lies.


At least that is a valid opinion, I'll give you that. Better than posting outright lies like "millions of coins" mined or core team members having bragged about how many zombie machines they control.

Haven't seen any of that alleged "evidence". Only evidence in here so far is that Monero was intentionally released as a cripplemine to the public rendering it a scam.

The evidence for your lie about millions of coins mined is on the blockchain. Mining is transparent, the on chain privacy doesn't give you a technically valid excuse for that lie, as you attempted (another lie, trying to defend a lie)

The evidence for ceti's lie claiming that core devs bragged about zombie machines is that no such brag was ever made. He's welcome to contradict that with some sort of evidence, but he can't and won't, even when asked to back it up.

I'm waiting for evidence backing up his accusation of criminal conduct against fluffypony, but of course he has none, because that too was a lie.

I guess it is time to remember why this thread exists.

Do you have evidence that it was intentional?

Do you have evidence that it affects the coin negatively, as in invalidating any of its claims of decentralization or privacy?

If you don't have evidence of one, then you're left with the thread's title being false and a complete waste of time. As an example: I can show that dash is an oligarchy, whether intentional or not, due to the way their paynode scheme works. These systems are designed to work trustlessly, so any hiccups (intentional or not) should be invalidated by the design, not left-up to the good or bad intentions of those who are engaged with it.

LOL. Any retard with the tiniest hint of common sense could deduce the Monero cripplemine scam was intentional. Forking a scam and acting surprised when the code is revealed to be a scam. "Oops we scammed the public by accident!"

^ Confirmed. He has no evidence it was intentional. So he's lying about it being intentional. I'm losing count by now.

+1 for conscious reason.

The subconscious reason this thread exists is the psychological phenomenon that it is better to destroy everyone, than to fail alone.

"I dropped my ice cream in the mud, so now I am throwing mud on your ice cream so we are the same, because God hates us equally".

This is what socialism built. Equality is prosperity, because fairness is the uniformity of nature's Gaussian distribution. Equality is a human right! Didn't you know that!

They would rather waste the time of important coders whose time would be better spent coding a solution for humanity, so as to satisfy their inability to accept their mistakes and jealousy.

Yep, they most certainly should.

Monero : not such a perfect launch after all, in fact its anything but perfect.

As of now, not one of the dashers has proved the following (or even attempted to, saying the equivalent of, "look yourself" isn't walking us through the evidence), which is when your assertion that they should relaunch would make sense.

Sigh, does your doodle affirm either of the bolded questions below?

Yes:
Releasing crippled miners without checking them first but claiming to be honest and have integrity doesn't fit. Either they fucked up, something they will never admit, because only Evan Duffield has the moral integrity to admit to that. Or, and that's the only remaining possibility: It was intentional. There is your evidence.



Who cares? Complete strawman. The devs ninjamined Monero in a criminal attempt to fill their pockets. That's enough to dump it for any investor.

Also, Botnet mined Malware-Coin:

^ Look carefully. Do you see any evidence of intent?

Wrong. No one represented that it had been checked, nor promised to do so. The reasons for the forking of the repo were clearly stated at the time, and they did not include anyone stepping up to volunteer to do code reviews. There weren't even any real developers, until later, when the group organized to do so.  No one was misled in any way at any point in the process.

That's not what happened. Monero didn't exist. Some shady guy cloned it, to create Bitmonero. Then the shady guy starting making shady changes and broke it. The community had a meeting and tacotime decided to fork the repo using the shortened name Monero so there would be a stable source base that shady guy couldn't mess with any more (he could still push changes, and was invited to do so, but they would have to go through public review like anyone else). Later, it was decide to organize as a team and engage in further development.

Your whole narrative, while not backed by any evidence, also collapses on the basis of logic because it would make no sense for someone trying to "intentionally" exploit a crippled miner to voluntarily publicly release not one but three improvements to the miner within a short period of a few weeks. If the Monero developers wanted to exploit it they would have either released nothing or released just the first fix (which was sufficient to address the issue as far as was known at the time) and then gone and secretly mined away for months and months.

So a group of incompetent people "too lazy" (which is the gist of your excuse here) to check the scam code they just cloned (and they KNEW it was scam code from day 0) is definitely "no scam", but one guy launching a coin by himself, all alone and in his spare-time with buggy but proven non-scammy Litecoin code definitely is!

Clearly no intent here, no sir!

Pathetic.


Monero should relaunch because of a) the despicable botnet mining it clearly endorses and b) the even more despicable intentional cripplemining scam at the beginning.

since monero has no real working wallet yet i would assume the development team never changed, they just changed username account.

anybody in the altcoin scene since with some experience knows how monero is raped by botnets from the usual people and that the coin is basically a rebrand of bytecoin plus some wealthy investor willing to pay an army of troll posts

Do you have evidence of those claims? I ask knowing you don't.

Bytecoin was a scam so they had to rebrand to Monero and now that Monero is exposed as a scam will they relaunch? Probably another rebrand with another CryptoNote coin. Is that was "AEON" is for? Backup for the inevitable?

I just explained to you that no group cloned anything. One guy cloned it, with the stated purpose of changing some parameters and relaunching, and he was later "fired" by the community.


This isn't even true really. No one knew it was "scam code". Bytecoin had a very fast emissions (twice as fast as Monero) and had already been 80% mined. It was claimed that it was launched two years earlier but not in public. Some of us believed it, some didn't (I mostly didn't), but it didn't matter because enough people just wanted to relaunch it regardless. Not much if anything was known about the extent of the Bytecoin scam at that point (until this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=740112.0) four months later).

So no, nobody KNEW it was scam code.

Nobody claimed it was anything but a relaunch of Bytecoin.

No one promised to review or improve the code.

No one was misled.

If it really bothers you, still, go right ahead and relaunch Monero. It was already done as AEON, BTW. That launched after the miner fixes. Maybe you would prefer to support the AEON project. You're welcome if you can manage to stop lying.

"I ask knowing you don't."
Do you have evidence of those claims?

Considering that he's responsible for a large portion of what you are likely calling troll posts, and he probably knows that he isn't being paid, then yes, he does. I would say the same.

tldr. You're full of shit.

AEON was launched by some other anonymous dev, along with a large number (dozen or more) of other cryptonote clone coins launched around that time. I don't know his intent in doing so (nor the others).

I mentioned it because I'm maintaining it (most of the others are unmaintained now) and it also happens to be the one that is closest to Monero without other fundamental changes such as variable rewards, merged mining, etc. and finally was launched after the miner fixes.

Well, I know that I'm not paid, but it's really impossible for me to prove that, but on the other hand, if you had proof of those claims there is a better than good chance that you would have already provided proof, so therefore, I can pretty much claim knowledge of the absence of proof using common sense and the knowledge that it was/is in your best interest to provide proof with the statement as to strengthen your claim to truth, but then again, you are a dashtard, so maybe what's obvious to most anyone isn't so obvious to you....

Do you have evidence of those claims?

lol you have no idea who am i, and what i own, and if i even have an agenda.
well, we know more about you i must say.

ps. i now own 12 dash, yes i'm really really dash lover lol

and you are even telling me that you do this 24/7 for FREE?!
wow, you are a kindest crypto knight i ever met, the monero community should start a fund to build a statue in you honor, or maybe to smooth? who deserves more?

you are funny, too bad is late night and i cannot continue to reply, for free

I agree Monero is mined quite quickly (within a few years). For that reason the price has been pretty low and it still is low. That being said, it offers a great opportunity to enter with the funds that you can afford to lose (this is a risky project) without losing your mental health. Actually I was in favor of cutting the emission in 2014 but the Monero community disagreed with me and that is pretty much also the reason why the price never rose big time and those who were early adopters and couldn't afford to cost average it down are underwater with the current price tag.

Also one problem with XMR is it has been owned by whales who like to dump their coins every once and while. Those whales basically are looking a way to kill any bullish trend Monero has attempted to enter, so this fact makes Monero not too attractive for investors.


Summa summarum:

These are the pros and cons for Monero:
The pro: price is pretty low
The con: there are apparently big whales who do not want to hold Moneros at too high levels thus making the entrance of bull trend pretty hard.

I am being very honest here and not telling that Monero is "perfect". I am willing to speak also the weaknesses of XMR. That being said, I own a stake of Monero that enables me to get rich if Monero gets adopted by any wider user base, but if XMR will drop to 0.001 I am not also losing my nigh sleep...

@TrueCryptonaire: Any thoughts on the lack of actual innovation? Ring signatures weren't invented by Monero, neither the announced to be implemented Confidential Transactions. Can you name any (killer) feature that didn't exist before Monero came to invent it? And if not, why are you so ardent to support it?

This is an honest and neutral question. I don't have beef with everyone who likes Monero, even though one might think so.

Apparently it's impossible to trade cryptocurrency without being registered to this looney bin of a forum. ::)
What a crock of shit you're spilling here. Another nutjob for my ignore list.

Monero should relaunch because of a) the despicable botnet mining it clearly endorses and b) the even more despicable intentional cripplemining scam at the beginning.

Hello,

To be honest, I have no idea if XMR lacks innovation or has innovation. I am investing into it because of the community. Money is a social contract and if there are enough people thinking a commodity X is money then it is money. Gold coins has not that much innovation but I guess there are still some people thinking it is money. Surely it has been perceived as money no more than around 100 years. You can still buy those coins from dealers and ebay.

Money doesn't need innovation but it simply needs to be usable, safe and secure and above all, it needs people who are willing to collect it as much as possible (greed - yes it is a healthy thing despite some people might find this controversial).

Thanks! With that specific set of priorities I can comprehend your decision of investment. Do you have any other coins that meet your criteria (no, this isn't a "Dash bait", any other coin)?

To be honest, I do not have.
But that might be also the lack of time to research every coin of coinmarketcap (like hundreds of cases).
Bitcoin obviously still has the majority of followers, then I think Monero has also people who are at least interested in the coin...


Edit: Etherium has a community and that is reflected by the trading volumes. Therefore I am interested in it but personally I am not investing into it at least for now... There is way too much volatility and the last thing I want to do is to buy and then get dumped instantly (this has happened with XMR btw many times).

lol, crypto knight, that's perfect. i think i'm gonna start using that as it accurately describes smooth and icebreaker and the rest of the  monero marketing team  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1233817.0).
i can't even make a  mocking (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=999886.0;topicseen) thread without them trying to take it over and crypto knight. they start these CJW (Crypto Justice Warrior) threads for all the coins not just DASH.
they've been called the crypto police many times before but crypto knight is perfect.

the topic of this thread is the monero cripplemined fastmine and how it will affect the coin. it is a response to a  CJW thread  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=999886.0) started by hypocrites from the monero marketing team.

So basically you're pointing out that your rambling is off-topic? Because I don't see anything in your post that could be construed as proof of an intentional miner crippling or that that indeed affects the coin, maybe you need a refresher on what you need to do? At this point, I'll probably have to post it every other post as you and your buddies seem easily distracted.

they reply any thread they get paid to troll, there is a contract to respect!
or would they really do this 24/7 for free?!
 ::)
unless they admit to be kind of mentally ill and so obsessed with monero (like one of their main investor), i don't get why this people cannot get a life and instead post the same shit over and over for months, oh wait i know why = $$$

I smell projection.

Actually, and this insight is free of charge, I'm an INTJ and am more motivated by being right than anything else--you can look up the personality type and read for yourself that money isn't much of a motivator for people like myself. I suspect that some people are motivated out of a sense of duty and fair play also--though I'm not discounting that some are motivated by money, though I doubt they could maintain the type of continual back and forth, correcting faulty logic, pointing out holes in designs and argumentation, ect., that goes with a Free Open Source project such as Monero without having a better motive than greed. But you're entitled to your opinion, and I'm entitled to correct it, enjoy correcting it, and point out the flaw of projecting your own motives onto others (if that happens to be the case). It's a big world with many types of personalities, and I know this is tough, some people's motives will be as strange to you as another world if you ever stopped and considered their reasoning without the restrictions of myopia.  

Though, again, is anyone pointing out a flaw in Monero or an intention to scam by analyzing motives without evidence to back up their assertions?

Don't quote the trolls  ;D

So much talk from the monero gang about "proving" a cripplemine.

Its completely unnecessary because there is doubt, a lot of doubt. Coupled with the other facts, this coin is doomed.

Just dropping in to mention that Monero, the cripplemined, botnet-mined, ninjamined, innovationless, one trick pony, provable scam (which financially defrauded victims of the crippled scam-miner) should be relaunched.

The market obviously hates Monero, look at the charts, whenever the ninjamine-scammers try to manipulate the price to attract new victims another whale dumps a giant deuce on them, rushing to the exit. Or should I say: flushing  ;D

Forgot the artificial barrier to entry (to keep noobz out and increase insider sharing) due to the ...cmd-line nature of the coin...

Monero - Cloning a scam, putting make up lipstick on the pig, hoping no one notices

there i fix it for u  ;)

Dear god think of the offspring.  Wear protection,  folks.   

man, it's easy!

what would you do if you get a few monero for every troll post? you would post endlessly, 24/7, more posts = $$$

it's not about personality, it's not about passion for code or math or whatever, it's about cash

and it's clear that there is 1/2 people behind 15 accounts, pay close attention to the writing style

i dont think monero inflation has enough coin to pay all those troll ???

maybe i was wrong... hummm...

but monero was never been a scam, it was awesomely honestly mined by the dev and their super duper enhanced miner. that is it, or have i been wrong again ???

how many bitmonero, bmr, mro, xmr monero were mined the first 3 months? 

Why don't you check a block explorer? Or you could estimate from the published emission curve. Since difficulty adjustment worked properly, the latter is pretty close.

In the first 3 months, exactly as many xmr were mined as mathematically specified by the reward algorithm.

That's what all honest, competently tested, and fairly launched coins do (in glaring contrast to Dash's massive "accidental" instamine and subsequent drastic emission cut).

Actually it is somewhat less because of the adaptive blocksize limit penalty function, which makes the actual reward dependent on changes in the blocksize.

Edit: Take block 10019 for example. https://minergate.com/blockchain/xmr/block/100019 (https://minergate.com/blockchain/xmr/block/100019). The actual coins emitted are less than the base reward because of the penalty. This slows the emission down by a very slight amount. If one compares the actual emission with the emission calculated from the reward algorithm alone one will notice a systematic effect of a slightly lower actual emission rate.

"Exactly" is a bit extreme. There are always some variations due to random block production and other details (hash rate adjustment isn't perfectly instantaneous, etc.). The point is it was damn close.

The right question is who was able to mine at multiple efficiency compared to ordinary (crippled) miners... Who was gaining disproportionate amount of coins due to the cripplemine.

That is one question but the total amount of coins mined during the time period in question is also certainly relevant as an upper bound and is objective.

Also relevant that the emission was not later reduced as some wanted to do, which would have magnified the effect of any early irregularities.

Another question is how much was the size of the financial scam for those buying the non-cripple-mined coins (or those generating cripple mined coins).

It's one thing if mined coins cost 0.000001 BTC and another if they cost 0.1 BTC.

The existence of customized private miners does not imply the public ones are "crippled."

Using public software, I had no problem pool mining very early XMR on Vultr VPS and solo mining on some laptops.  I still have the solved blocks sitting in their wallets, so I can prove the previous claim (unlike Duffield's dubious claim his instamine was "accidental").

All your bluster about "zomg cripplemine" is an attempt to create and appeal to supposed hypocrisy of those taking notice and making public warnings about Dash's instamine and subsequent radical emission slashing.

Appeal to hypocrisy is a logical fallacy, but we all know the DashHoles of the Evan's Gate cargo cult don't care about such trivial details of rational thought.

dga posted that they spent $100K+ per month on their mining operation. I have no reason to doubt it.

Very early mined coins (a relatively small number of them, due to the well-behaved emission curve) were very cheap, of course, no different than any other new and relatively unknown coin. iCEBREAKER just posted about mining blocks using the public miner on a $5 VPS, I did the same on my own equipment, etc.

I was using the term "reward algorithm" in the broad sense, which includes the penalty function.

If I intended to exclude penalty function, I would have said "reward schedule" instead.

You could also complain I didn't explicitly account for the block spacing compression effect from rising hashrate, but I think it's obvious my statement was made ceteris parabus (a neat Latin phrase that means "while waving your hands" and also ameliorates smooth's niggling over variance).

No implication needed.. it's unfair and we all know it (no matter who does it)
You guys know that line is a complete crock of shit.

It speaks volumes you would go even further than down playing it but saying it's not even a problem.

Pure Retarded .

Disclaimer:
I have never had nor will i any Dash or Monero coins.
I offer my observations + opinions objectively.

congratulation!

with a single line you just invalidated your ~1200 troll posts

you are complete nonsense

Miners use souped-up versions of cgminer.

Therefor, plain vanilla cgminer is crippled and CK is a scammer.

[/your especially stupid kind of fake logic]

Let me guess, you also believe Bitcoin was instamined, because only Satoshi and a couple of others cared to mine the very early blocks....   ::)

Oh that myth, the one always dragged out by instaminers who want to throw up the "but Bitcoin" defense (which would still be nonsense even if it were true). Should really be added to "Lies Instaminers Tell Themselves" thread.

When do you plan on trolling the STEEM topic and their premined/instamined scam where they state no premine/instamine in the OP? I would love to see it.

Or is it off-limits because Smooth is invested?   :-[

how many bitmonero, bmr, mro, xmr monero were cripplemined the first 3 months? 

the question they don't want to answer. 

Ask an objective question (in which case you can answer it from a block explorer, etc.) or might as well just make up your own answer.

That miner comment again Icebreaker is bullshit an you know it.
Often in crypto we have seen a wide range of unfair stunts pulled with miners.
I have a million stories..

I could make a coin then code a GPU miner around it's new algo *mod*
Then only post a CPU miner and rape the shit out of it ..it's been done ..lots ..and YOU KNOW IT TOO !

Or how about making obstacles for windows user to have to try and fail to compile a miner
after the coin launched when Linux private miners are optimized compiled and running by the dev & friends on launch.

You guys making coins have pulled every fucking stunt in the book and played dumb every single step of the way.

Couple years back i had a jab and laughed at iGotSpots on a Troll Box..
I said to him ya ya you had 80+ GPU's mining you told me before.
He laughed back at me and said "i got far more than that" LOL

He made how many coins ?

Do i need to go on ? ..probably.

You guys love playing dumb (for the audience)

This isn't fucking FUD or Trolling either you whiny shilling corrupt greedy manipulative deceitful pricks.
This is ACTUALLY what happens behind closed doors 24/7 !

The situation is worse than you think. For years, almost every CPU coin is actually cripplemined (to different degrees). The reason is that all the "sse, avx" ets enhanced miners, do not use packed commands / SIMDs.

This means that if a hash has like 3 steps (usually lot more than 10), a sequential-non-packed version will go like

1. 5-10 cpu cycles : first step of hashing
2. 5-10 cpu cycles: second step
3. 5-10 cpu cycles: last step of hashing

If you load 4 different hash candidates simultaneously, in the same thread, you can "pack" them with AVX/SSE and go like

1. 5-10 cpu cycles: first step of hashing for ALL 4 hashes
2. 5-10 cpu cycles: second step of hashing for ALL 4 hashes
3. 5-10 cpu cycles: last step of hashing for ALL 4 hashes

Again, that's in the context of the same cpu thread btw. It's kind of parallelism within the same core/thread.

In this way, Haswell can go from something like 8cycles per byte to ~2.5 with AVX2 for SHA256 and down to <1cycle/byte with AVX-512.

I initially thought coins who use memory hard algorithms are more immune, and they are to some extent, but since memory use (reduced scratchpad) can be traded for more processing work (shortcut), if the processing work is multiplied -say- by 8x, then the underlying assumptions of trading less memory use (shortcut) for (supposedly waaaaay) more cpu performance could be invalidated (to some degree). Because the assumption of what cpu power levels are, is based on ...scalar and not SIMD use.

I really thought you are an expert in making own assumptions and giving your own answers after all that bullshit i read from you on dash ... how often did you tell us eduffield has mined almost every xcoin within the instamine days? *facepalm* (or are you in blockchain analysis now, and can prove any of the "instamine scam" - "eduffield mined almost 2 mio coins" bullshit?!)

I really hate people throwing shit, and then if the shit hits the fan, and comes back to their own face, they just say, "hey that's something totally different" LOL

Questions:

How many dash were mined in the first two hours?

How many xmr were mined in the first two hours?

How many dash were mined in the first two days?

How many xmr were mined in the first two days?

How many dash were mined in first two months?

How many xmr were mined in first two months?

How much emissions were cut from dash's total supply?

How much emissions were cut from xmr's total supply?

Do the early mining totals potentially affect dash's power centralization (yes/no)? And if so, to what potential degree?

Do the early mining totals potentially affect xmr's power centralization (yes/no)? And if so, to what potential degree?

do you have a link to where this info can be easily found?
i need to recalculate the monero cripplemine. as i'm sure you know it's worse than previously disclosed.

  

"This info" meaning what? You made up the the term Cripplemine, haven't defined it clearly, and now AlexGR is telling us that pretty much every unit of every coin that has ever been mined was Cripplemined.

So, no, there is no link I'm aware of that will take you to Here are the Monero Cripplemine stats.

Yes... CPU-coins... X11 has been gpu-mineable since mid-Feb 2014. Darkcoin issued a hefty bounty veeery early on (20 days old?) to have a GPU miner online as to avoid hidden GPU miners in the wild - I think the bounty was something like 2-3k DRK.

Wait, so coins that are highly GPU mineable but don't have a public GPU miner (it would have to be a public highly-optimized GPU miner, right?) for at least 20 days are not also Cripplemined by your definition? How many coins were mined in those 20+ days?

Where do you draw the line here?

BTW, your comments about SIMD optimizations were almost completely wrong when it comes to Monero's hash function. A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

Are you actually suggesting that in the long-run DASH has a more fair emission rate than BTC, LTC, and XMR?  This is an incredibly disingenuous statement to make because you ignore the fact that masternodes allow the original instaminers to approximately maintain or even increase their share of the total percentage of DASH in existence, year after year.

I don't remember making a comment about Monero's hash function in particular, but I did make a comment on memory-hard hashes, having scrypt in mind. Cryptonight might also fall into the same category, or not, I haven't checked it. If its approach is doing it like scrypt, it might be equally vulnerable.

Quark, with just 5 of the hashes, was a "cpu coin" for months. It took the "crowdfunded" GPU miner of darkcoin to then be used for quark also.

Actually what Darkcoin did, I doubt anyone has done in terms of mining fairness. "We are funding the development of GPU mining before anyone gets to develop it in private"... Who does that?

As for cripplemining, well, the issue with Monero was

1) it was intentionally crippled to be slower.




 :'( :'( :'(

2) There were people mining with at least double the speed and the devs were ok with it:


 :'( :'( :'(

+

3) There was a known cpu miner going much faster:



Hope dies last  :'( :'( :'(


And we also have a "catastrophic" problem with PoW:


Monero #REKT  :'( :'( :'(

INDEED

"... The reality is community takeovers are garbage. The problem is they are taking over something that is always a scamcoin on one level or another. They have no motivation but cashing out and profit..."

Still waiting.....

Monero #REKT  :'( :'( :'(

Still having delivered. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to re-iterate what a shitcoin Failero is.


Monero - Cloning the premined uber-scam "Bytecoin" and avoid scanning the code for fraudulent algorithms
Monero - Insisting on having oh so much integrity yet intentionally shipping a crippled shit-miner to unsuspecting victims/"users"
Monero - Ninjamining an unknown shit-ton of coins within our inner circle through optimized miners while the public gets the crippled one
Monero - The perfect instrument for ninjamining because our CryptoNote-blockchain (aka copycat technology) is opaque
Monero - Projecting our fraud on DASH and yelling "instamine" because no one can see that we are the actual scammers!
Monero - Evan should have chosen CryptoNote for DASH to hide his 5 trillion DASH instamine like we did with our ninjamine!
Monero - Failing to come up with a single innovation of our own and yelling "stop playing the innovation card" when DASH is proven as superior (butthurt)
Monero - Failing to deliver a fucking GUI after 2 years of cleaning up code disguised as "development"
Monero - Cloning a scam, putting lipstick on the pig, hoping no one notices
Monero - Too little, too late
Monero -  :-[

Quoted for massive ownage/exposure of hypocrisy and general REKToning:

It is not the same category as scrypt and it is not equally vulnerable (in fact that difference is addressed in the white paper).

It also ignores that in the long run Monero's emissions become very flat over time due to the tail reward. Bitcoin will eventually become more front-loaded the Monero, and Dash already is of course. See chart on the first page or two of this thread showing the effect.

You are also correct that paying coins to existing owners is not distribution and should really be factored out of the curve. That applies not only to Dash but various other PoS-ish coins that pay interest, stake-based rewards, etc.

No, it you read what I wrote it was a hypothetical, modified version of AES which does not diffuse to all of the output bits, which is specifically not what real AES is designed to do. No one has identified an actual problem.

Ok, let's make it more practical then. Citing the experts below:


Monero #REKT  :'( :'( :'(

As I said above, no one has identified an actual problem. His concerns are theoretical and other experts disagree. No one has identified an actual problem.

EDIT: I'd add that the DoS issue is a potential problem, but is somewhat mitigated by the optimizing of the algorithm and the code that occurred. Initially (when that comment was written), it took hundreds of milliseconds to verify a hash which is indeed a lot of time and a big DoS vulnerability. These days with the optimized hash code and multithreaded verification, the effective time is well under 10 ms, which is close enough to network latency to serve as an effective throttle on DoS.

how many monero were mined between the launch and july 1st 2014?
seems like an easy question for you monero experts to answer.

moneroblocks.info, as with all questions about the blockchain.

"paying coins to existing owners is not distribution" ... what an argument ... do you care to explain why this not applies to every coin? - you do realize that almost every miner is not just mining one block, but instead uses his miner to mine for a certain time - which means that he is already an existing owner ...

so how do you distribute coins in your view? - do every user needs to verify his name and DOB, so that we can distribute new coins only to verifiable new users?

Sorry, that was not as clear as it should be. I meant not paying to existing "owners", but proportionately to existing ownership. That is effectively a "stock split" and does not distribute anything. There are other issues with how Dash does it but they are out of the scope of the overall rate of distribution so off topic for this thread.

With mining, it is not in any way proportional to existing ownership. In fact your example demonstrates this as if you continue mining (without selling) your ownership goes up but your rate of mining does not.


There are many different ways to do this with various positives and negatives. As long as they are not proportional to ownership, they actually accomplish something, at least.

ok, and not ok :D
"your ownership goes up but your rate of mining does not." - i do not exactly agree with that ... i guess i see what you want to say with "ownership", so if i mine bitcoin i have bitcoin in my ownership and if i buy new mining hardware, to mine even more bitcoin, i decrease my "ownership", right?
But that seems only like a word play.
In the end the profits from mining are also increasing the hashing power because you could buy new hardware, even if the ownership is going down for the purchase of new hardware it's just a question of time until you got a 100% ROI on the new mining hardware and so in fact your ownership and your mining rate goes up, too !!

No, not right, because in a proportional system, everyone else with a similar number of coins receives a similar payout, whether they mine or not. Second, mining has costs, and only your profits (which might not even be positive, but in any case probably not the same as every other miner) can be reinvested.

So they are not the same at all.

What you seem to be skipping here is that competition for cheaper electricity and hardware costs may or may not result in you getting your reinvestment back--AFAIK, Bitcoin has proved that early miners lost that competition to Chinese miners. With a coin like dash that uses a paynode scheme, all you need to do is keep reinvesting and you are guaranteed a greater percent of the stake--unless of course you can attack other node operators to lower the masternode count and increase the ROI%--which gives you the problem of having an inefficient system bent on cannibalizing resources.  

There are masternode costs involved, security and technical know-how costs (if you don't have the skills, you have to pay others to do it for you) as well as investment dilution by PoW mining.

This is not proof of stake where you have 1000 coins and they are giving you interest, 'just because'.

Actually, my bad, this was a point that should be posted in XMR #badcrypto thread. Anyway. The reason we are here:




"Fair launch"  :'( :'( :'(

"Disgusting"  :'( :'( :'(

"You can instamine too"  :'( :'( :'(

Monero #REKT  :'( :'( :'(

In other words, people complaining about the unoptimized miner 19 and 20 days after the launch, when approximately 2.7% of the base supply had been mined, and one day before NoodleDoodle released his optimizations (which were his own work and his to do with as he saw fit) on github.

How is this news?

EDIT: Actually first quote above was after NoodleDoodle had already released the code on github.

You mean people aren't just cutting most of these costs out by using Amazon hosting services? Also, these costs (as usual) skip the fact that 30% of the current coins were mined in two days at minimal costs, so not taking that as a factor in the centralization we are discussing is plain old ignoring the facts that matter most. We can see that Bitcoin's early adopters were replaced by the Chinese, who through competition, won mining power--with dash we have to make assumptions, and a lot of them, in order to assume that it is or isn't being redistributed through competition. I'd assume not--since it makes a lot more sense to hold the initial cheap coins and get a 10-50% APR. But my guess is you are assuming that people use OSPEC for hosting nodes and sold their coins without rebuying at lower costs--I would call this "the strategically incompetent redistribution plan" or "after the fact rationalization of best distribution."

The costs are negligible, as I think it was you who stated that a $5 VPS was more than sufficient. In fact you can probably run many masternodes on a $5 VPS with some knowhow.


Actually it is. There is dilution, yes, but you would have dilution either way. The coins paid out in proportion to existing coin ownership is the portion of coin supply that does not count as distribution, which is exactly what I said earlier.

If this is not clear, imagine a corporation with 1 million shares. There is a 2-for-1 stock split on Monday, "distributing" (but not really) 1 million new shares in proportion to existing ownership, followed by 1 million new shares being sold to an outside investor on Tuesday. The effect here is distribution aka dilution of not 2 million shares, but actually 500000 (of the original-pre-split shares).

This is relevant in comparing between emissions of different coins. Since Monero has no coins-for-coins PoS-ish scheme, the full amount of ongoing distribution dilutes earlier holdings (including "cripplemined" coins). In coins that do have these schemes, ongoing distribution is in effect greatly reduced.

Amazon is pretty high-end and not economical for a small masternode owner, unless they are using Amazon's free tier.

So the fact that many masternodes are observed on Amazon says one of two things: 1. Small masternode owners are using the free tier, meaning there aren't hosting costs; or 2. Many masternodes are owned by large masternode owners who can justify Amazon's higher hosting costs. Maybe some of both, but I suspect mostly 2, since the free tier runs out. Scamming is possible, though.

thanks but i can't make heads or tails out of that.
is there an easier way to tell how many monero were mined between the launch and july 1st 2014?

there's some excel spreadsheet that I can never seem to find.

ah here it is

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qXi7zUSIh7F6UuSuhOryyFbHEy_LJuym3I3neAga_2s/edit?pli=1#gid=239466694

why is july 1st being used? I haven't been following this thread.

according to the dude that actually optimized the code (well, the second time around), he found his code release on May 28th, and as noted elsewhere, like in dgas blogpost, noodledoodle had already found one optimization like two weeks into it or something.

https://da-data.blogspot.com/2014/08/minting-money-with-monero-and-cpu.html

So by May 28th, there was 986k coins emitted.

here's a good discussion with dga about optimizations

https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/2evd3z/was_the_default_monero_miner_slowed_down_on/

Christ, i guess i'm gonna get updated on this thread all the time now. I guess the point of this thread is to try and equate monero's unwitting inheritance of a de-optimized miner with dash's instamine. Sure, have fun.

Oh I just read your OP. So this is just abject fud. Well good on yah. have fun.

You can't fastmine almost 13 million coins in the first 2 years and not expect volatility and big bubbles to form. Monero is proving to be very volatile due to its mining emission curve and lack of masternodes.
https://i.imgur.com/VWxQZgs.jpg

LOL yeah Monero is the only crypto that has "volatility" and "big bubbles"...

What don't you also mention the first 48 hours of Xcoin? I think that fits your "fastmine" scenario a bit better than monero.  ;)

Masternodes don't make a coin secure. Math/cryptography that has been very well vetted by world class cryptographers is.

Aha aha ahahahaha, are you high?

A fast-/pre-/insta-/whatevermine looks like this:
https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/download/attachments/19759164/Darkcoin%20distribution%20chart.png?version=1&modificationDate=1451132881689&api=v2

10 - 15% of the total supply in the first 24 hours...

best regards,

Yes all coins do suffer from volatility but over time masternodes should make dash more stable than coins that don't have them.

Do you deny monero was fastmined? What would you call it?  I mean it was lauched after dash and even with the dash instamine monero has almost twice as many coins already mined. It was fastmined and cripplemined. It is what it is.

Yes dash had what is commonly referred to as a accedental instamine as opposed to some coins that have a planned instamine where lots of coins are mined in a very short period of time. These are usually pos coins and they mine all the pow coins in a few days to a few weeks or more.
Monero is a good example of a fastmine but it could be considered a instamine too, which I don't think applies but who's to say.

Okay so admit Dash was instamined.

That is all I need to know from you. All the rest is just fluff.

Have a nice day  :-*

2.25 years = insta?

lol please send me what you are smoking.

Look, I get that you're invested in Dash, I get that you want to defend that investment and that's allright... I do like some aspects of Dash, the governance system is nice and all... But your writings above are on the edge of delusional. An investor/enthousiast should always remain objective, you sir are not anymore and for an investor that is very dangerous...

Don't get married to your investment...

best regards,

All the interesting coins have 'history', legends and myths!
As with all good trolls and FUDs there is usually some glimmer of truth out there.
The question is; does the team/community have what it takes to learn from the past and embrace transparency now in the present?

One has to look at where a coin/dev team/community is now. History is done with. If a coin is right for now, is autonomous and distributed  and breaks through noone gives a stuff about history lessons. Just watch Ardor!  ;D

Totally opposite. Monero was impossible to manipulate exactly because of higher emission in first 2 years.  Manipulators got reckted by miners dumping their coins. That is why none pumpers group ever liked Monero.

High emission also keeps price of Monero low until now.  So everyone had more then 2 years to buy cheap coins. Since coins are still cheap i can say 3 years, maybe even 4.  But i doubt 5th year with daily reduced emission Monero will still be a cheap coin.

i was wondering what happened to this thread, and here it is.. its almost like the one who bumped this thread read my mind.

It's amazing how when people are desperate their little insect brains scurry to the same tune.

Yeah keep bumping. I want to buy in some more.

So 24-48 hours is instant?

 I personally think instamined coins become fastmined after 2-3 weeks but I would not argue with someone who said the cut off was 3-4 weeks, especially if it was a pow to pos coin where all the pow coins were mined quickly and then they switched to pos.

When does a instamine end and a fastmine begin?

We'll see, said the Zen master. So far the last few big monero pumps turned into big dumps, bigger than most pump and dumps.

nobody denies dash had a instamine or whatever you want to call it.

Okay so admit xmr monero was ninja launched and had a cripplemine and has a unusually high mining emission curve that is best described as a fastmine compared to bitcoin, litecoin and dash etc.

That is all I need to know from you. All the rest is just fluff.

Have a nice day  :-*

lol oh the unoriginality...love it.

And no I will not admit to what you claim about monero.

You obviously are butthurt hence why you keep bumping this thread as if it is doing anything but making you look foolish.

Bump on  :-*

For all intents and purposes, a 24-48 hour mine is absolutely an instamine.

ok cool, what about 3-4 days where millions of coins are mined... all the pow coins actually and then they switch to pos? or how about 1 week with 4.5 million coins are mined or 2-3 weeks where 6 million plus (out of ~21 million) coins are mined and then they switch to pos. are those instamines? most people would agree those are what is traditionally considered a instamine. i would probably classify those as "POS instamines" because there are so many and they deserve their own category.


do you disagree xmr monero was/is fastmined? what would you call it because that's the only thing i have heard it called besides a instamine (by a small number of people) but i don't think it fits a traditional instamine. the only reason they would call it that is because of its highly inflationary emission curve combined with the crippled miner launch issue. that and the scam dev that was supposedly kicked out but could have just used a new/different username like smoothy or fluffyponzi or something like that. monero had ~750,000 coins mined the first 4 weeks (btc ~210,000) which is way faster than normal but i would not say instamined per se. but when does a instamine end and a fastmine begin?

i think a cripplemined fastmine best describes monero.

720k Moneros was issued in first 30 days. Exactly as it was scheduled. If it would less, price would go even higher. Remember that price hit 0.01 after 60 days at end of June 2014. If emission would be slower, ATH would be way higher. This emission curve was just perfect. So you can easily name it as a perfectmine.

If you want to learn more about XMR emission compared to BTC, you can check this spreadsheet. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qXi7zUSIh7F6UuSuhOryyFbHEy_LJuym3I3neAga_2s/edit#gid=239466694


I started mining about on day.40. As you see from spreadsheet on day.40 daily emission was about 24k XMR. On first day emission was 25.3k XMR.  So not a huge difference. And on 40th day every miner was allready mining Monero.  Difficulty was already so high i barely got any. Probably would get more if would mine few months ago.

I do disagree, as we have covered countless times on this thread and others. There are numerous fastened coins that distribute all their coins in a few weeks or 50% per month or even 50% per six months.

With 50% every 18 months, Monero is somewhat faster than Bitcoin, offset by the fact that it gets slower than Bitcoin later, when the rewards stop dropping in half every 18 months, but Bitcoin's continue dropping by half every four years until reaching zero.


A PoW-distributed coin with half of the remaining supply distributed every 18 months, plus a perpetual maintenance reward.

Whenever I have described it that way to people, I've had not one single person respond by calling it a fastmine. They might reply that it is slightly faster than Bitcoin or just consider it okay and reasonable and not comment further at all, one or the other.

so a cripplemined perfectmine?   ;)
that makes sense, how about a cripplemined fairmine? that's totally not contradictory right.

Or a cripplemine as planned mine--which means there was no "accident" that shot out a couple million coins in a day and it wasn't followed by a coin reduction. You're trying to make a comparison between a guy who had a one time affair and Charlie Sheen. Dash is epic in its whoreness--I need a penicillin shot just talking to you skanks.

@MasterMined710

I used more words, but not so many, so carefully read them.

In really short i said, that Monero emission curve was perfect.   So if you need an name for it, you can use Perfectmine.

OP just wants people to dump Monero and invest in dash coins, simple :D :D

so this thread is the first time you heard monero called a fastmine? because i've always heard it called a fastmine in the forums going back long before i even knew of monero.
i definitely wasn't the first person to call it fastmined but it is what it is.

it seems very fast to me when compared to normal pow coins.
you say "slightly faster" but i pointed out it was actually 3+ times faster the first 4 weeks. only one of those statements is factually correct... 

Monero has a highly inflationary emission curve where around half the coins were mined in the first year and will have "Roughly 86% mined in 4 years".

By comparison, Bitcoin is almost 7 years old and only has 75% mined. It will take them another 4+ years to get to monero's 86%.

So it will take BTC & LTC ~11+ years to get to ~86% and monero only 4 years. It will take DASH ~ another 20 years to get to 86%.

so a planned cripplmined fastmine?
great job g, i think we have a winner!

the funny thing is that's exactly what happened with bytecoin and monero.  :-[

how dare you sir!  >:(
how dare you question my integrity as the new crypto sheriff after my mentor and inspiration  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=999886.0) smooth was  stripped of his crypto justice warrior badge. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1513252.0)

after i'm done investigating the monero mining scandal i will go after zerocash and shadowcoin and the whole world of crypto (well except steemit) just like my CJW predecessor did.