Yes I agree. And the discontinuity in the rate of air conditioning adoption was likely tied to the energy crisis in the 1970s. These examples and others are why I don't accept that the outliers are necessarily due to centralization, in general.

Something similar may be going on with bitcoin, for that matter, but lacking the perspective of history, we can't see it yet.

I don't see a clear distinction in the data, and I also think your definition of centralized is somewhat strained. For example, I don't think laundromats are centralized for the most part, at least not the same way as electricity. And yet, electricity shows only a modest deviation from the S-curve. Telephones are about as centralized as electricity, and in fact influenced by network-effects, yet show a more extreme deviation. Again, you can fit almost whatever narrative you want to this data.


I think this is extremely wrong. Napster grew to 20-30 million users with people downloading a client and being somewhat technical (using an MP3 player or burning a CD was not a particularly user-friendly process at the time).  Bitcoin does not have anywhere near 30 million users, and the corresponding market (people globally with access to the internet) is far larger than it was in 2001, likely an order of magnitude, or possibly two orders. Bitcoin has perhaps 1 million users, probably fewer if one excludes coinbase-style services (see below), which is approximately 0%.

Whether it ever grows beyond 0% of the real market remains to be seen, but right now you are curve fitting on something that isn't really much of a curve.

I agree that coinbase-style services are more of a competitor than actual adoption of bitcoin.

Setting aside whether all the outliers on the graph are explained by centralization (I don't believe they are), I don't see what this has to do with Bitcoin or more importantly Monero.

Both are very much in the innovator phase. Most people have barely heard of Bitcoin and if they have, can't clearly explain what it is or what it does. I don't see curve fitting as being useful on the very first part of the cycle where all of these inventions are close to zero.

If bitcoin gets to say 30-50% then perhaps you can argue that it fits better with the adoption cycle of some of these inventions over others, since they do indeed differ at that point. At the very early near-0% stages, I don't buy it.


EDIT: changed relevant range from 20-30% to 30-50% since the latter is where we see serious deviations from the S-curve model on some inventions such as washing machines, automobiles, etc.

Yes, monero is an extremely hot topic right now, particularly among bitcoin users who largely ignore all other altcoins. For example:


so it stands to reason that Monero threads will be popular here. Furthermore there is zero paid promotion of Monero. There is no "altcoin marketing company" paid to promote Monero. 100% of it is organic interest.

If hypothetically you were to succeed in forcing them all into one thread, all that would happen is that would assure that the Monero thread would be right on top of the list virtually 100% of the time. 

If your coin attracts a comparable level of interest, then you deserve the same.

Sure, those are different, generally specific, topics, and most of them aren't really that active. For example, I happen to to run the FAQ thread and I know that it isn't active most days any more, so it generally gets buried and is only accessible via a direct link for reference purposes.

Or the monerotalk thread -- exactly one post over a month ago. Who cares?


Aren't these the same as the speculation and dev threads above?

As far as other coins doing it, I have no objection to other coins having multiple threads to discuss different topics, as long as there is sufficient interest (and if there isn't, then the threads get buried unless they are being deliberately bumped as with giveaway threads, which should be banned).

There is no "one thread per coin" rule. That would be a terrible rule IMO, and would essentially destroy the altcoin subforum as a useful forum for discussion. Many in the wider community wouldn't mind that though.

Those are quite interesting graphs.

As with all squiggly lines, you can attach a variety of narratives.

One thing that jumps out at me is a division of technologies between those that are adopted in subgeneration time scales (internet, cell phone, etc.), those that are adopted on generational timescales (TV, microwave, etc.) and those that are slower than generational (phones, cars, maybe electricity).

Also, the starting points seem arbitrary to me. The internet was not in 30% of households within 5 years of its invention. I doubt the starting year for PCs as well. I think someone chose some arbitrary starting years to tell a story.

Giveaways are banned because they are paying people to bump threads. No one is doing that here.


There is not a new Monero thread being opened for new news.


Looks like 6 including this one.

Explain which of these does not constitute a single, well-defined topic that is distinct from the others:

Monero Economy. Macroeconomics of Monero.
Monero Support. Help with setting up software and welcoming newcomers.
Monero Mining. Mining questions.
Monero Speculation. Price fluctuations.
Monero Dev. Coding questions, the pendant of #monero-dev.

There is no reduction in credibility -- that as a bogus argument made by trolls who want to troll without interference -- as the original posts are always available on the mirror sites. It is quite impossible to use moderation to censor or suppress a viewpoint.

Moderation serves only as an organization tool making the thread a better resource for a particular target audience, and should be more widely used, not less. If the moderator does a poor job of serving a target audience, then the thread will die.

BTW, this discussion itself is off-topic for the Monero thread. If it question is one acceptable and/or proper use of the bitcointalk forum, that belongs on Meta.

 

Unless there is some guideline of which I'm not aware, I don't agree. The stated purpose for the "Alternate cryptocurrencies" forum area is "Discussion of cryptocurrencies other than Bitcoin." Every current Monero thread falls within that purpose, as far as I know.

Nowhere do I see a stated rule that each altcoin should have a single thread. That is insane. Threads should cover a single relevant topic. Multiple threads on the same topic could be viewed as spam, but (for example) new users looking for help setting up a wallet and discussion of the best embedded databases for use within the software are certainly not the same topic and don't belong on the same thread.

In fact although common practice it is kind of off-topic for ongoing discussions to take place within the Announcements subforum, since at some point the thread no longer constitutes an announcement of anything.

Reopening for new loan proposals. Minimum loan is 0.5 BTC.

Try /3GB

EDIT: Make sure to reboot after changing these settings. Both are boot options.

Moved here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=700400.0

I don't know about fleeing his home, but he clearly did cut off contact from the guy to whom he owed the money (and did indeed risk being chased by the police because supposedly a complaint was filed with the police), until contacted by another third party and apparently convinced to pay the money.

So whether it is hard to imagine or not, it happened (if OP is to be believed).

But as I said I don't rule out other possibilities such as being in the hospital or something along those lines.

Even if you find one to download you won't be able to load it without configuring your own windows to support a larger memory space (I think this involves PAE and/or /3GB), so you might as well figure out how to do that and then just sync the blockchain yourself. 17 days won't take long, especially since that is after the pool dust issue was fixed.

I liked PG and I found him amusing and useful.

However, to be honest this makes him sound like a scammer, though perhaps he is now reconsidering walking away with the money.

Unless there is a very good excuse (hospitalization, for example), it is sad to see a reputable member pull the take-the-money-and-disappear routine.

What is great about the approach being taken is that databases will be pluggable and it will be easy for others in the community to test their favorite databases and report. There is no reason to think the official build might not eventually use a database identified by the community as the best one, or that there will be different builds for different applications (pool node, high volume non-mining node, end user wallet, etc.)

 

I don't remember the number of confirms required by the wallet but it is the same as any other regular transaction, so some number of minutes. What happened is you had one output for 200, and you spent it (an output can only be spent once). 100 of it went to the exchange, and 100 of it went back to you. You are now waiting for that payment of 100 back to you to fully confirm.

You have to compare typical hash rates since the algorithms are different.

Convert to some normalized unit like CPUs (standard desktop CPU) or GPUs (typical miner GPU) and then compare. However, it is rumored that FPGAs are used for DRK, so even this comparison is questionable.

Because maybe not everything happened as claimed?

Anyway it doesn't matter. Monero is the clear leader of the group now, and is soon to be well established among the second tier of cryptocoins (first tier of altcoins). It doesn't share the murky history, doesn't have a premine/ninjamine, etc. Time to leave the past behind.

So in truth it can only be said that they claim not to be behind it. But without any independent evidence or verification we don't really know anything about what happened there. Thankfully the community has moved on to Monero from that whole shady scene.