You can clean up the book a bit by removing this |
|
|
|
I doubt you can attract investors if something like this is not clearly defined.
I could make exactly the opposite argument. Namely that you won't attract investors effectively if something is too inflexibly defined before the long term effects of that rigid decision are understood. Sure BTC is doing okay, but really nobody knows what the hell is going to happen when the rewards run out. In fact every somewhat credible analysis I've seen suggests it will be bad. As an investor, I'd rather see some flexibility retained until a system that is clearly workable is invented, rigorously scrutinized, and well-tested in the real world. That hasn't happened yet. If you really want a 100% fixed or 100% locked-in supply then this coin is not for you. |
|
|
|
I'd like to point out what I think is a scalability issue that has been bothering me for some days. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
The current implementation of the daemon loads and keeps the entire blockchain in memory, thus consuming quite a lot of RAM (more than 700MB for me), an amount that keeps increasing as the blockchain grows. This issue is also present in Bytecoin's implementation (and all of its forks, actually) where it's getting really annoying. I think it's a waste of resources, and many modest machines (like cheap virtual servers) will soon be unable to run it well. Yeah, one could use swap space and to keep it running but it gets really inefficient.
I'm not aware if this issue has been pointed out by someone else, please let me know if it has been discussed previously. I'd like to know whether this is being dealt with and how.
It isn't just a "waste of resources" since there is also a benefit to storing the chain in RAM. You get more much faster and lower latency access to the chain for verification purposes. RAM databases are actually a thing now. Scalability yes. But that being a pressing issue is a long way off. |
|
|
|
You buying or selling ? New offer
0.10 / 5M / 0.5 / smooth (AON; expires end of day 6/2 UTC; you send first)
Selling, but I have a buyer already. New offer (selling): 0.15 / 5M / 0.75 / smooth ( AON; expires end of day 6/2 UTC; you send first) Price unchanged 0.15 / 5M / 0.75 / smooth (min 2m; expires end of day 6/3 UTC; you send first)Today's offer 0.09 / 10M / 0.90 / smooth (min 2m; expires end of day 6/4 UTC; you send first) |
|
|
|
Any paper wallets for Monero?
Just dump the .keys file with a hex dump program (for example hd on linux) and print that out. They are only 289 bytes. |
|
|
|
I agree with people who dislike the new logo. Things it reminds me of: a software company, a local skilled tradesman's logo (carpet cleaning, electrician, etc.), an employment agency, a corporation. In no way does it strike me as money. The site also has that very early 2000's vibe. It doesn't have that hip web 2.0 feel. Overall the branding is very poor in my opinion.
I'd also like to note that volume is falling and the price is flatlining while this coin idles away on Poloniex and Bittrex. I really feel that Mintpal should be a goal for this coin. "It's not ready yet" isn't an excuse. Blackcoin and Darkcoin are also not finished yet but they are still on there. When Darkcoin got put on there it was very early development compared to now. I feel there's some sentiment in this thread that people want the price low so people can accumulate the coin. Well if the price falls then the only people accumulating will be the hardcore fans and the idea that staying off Mintpal will improve distribution is faulty in my opinion.
I really like this coin and I'd like it to succeed but at least in the short term things are looking very rough around the edges.
There is no grand plan to stay off Mintpal. Mintpal just hasn't shown the interest in doing the development work to support cryptonote-based coins (totally different code base than everything else), as Poloniex and Bittrex did. At least not quickly. If you want it on Mintpal, go tell Mintpal. 1000 users telling Mintpal they want it has more influence on them than we do. Also, the web site will definitely be revamped. We had to put something functional (to host downloads and tutorials, etc.) up quickly and that's what we got. A better web site is in progress. |
|
|
|
I've seen this so many times. Miners keep telling everyone how good the coin is...but they themselves never buy any! The developer goes missing and the coin dies.
The only hope is for the community to take over the coin, but there is no community, only people mining.
Is there anyone here at all who wants this coin to succeed? If so you better do something soon.
Why bother? Seriously. The name isn't that great, the branding isn't that great. Okay it has a different emission curve, but nobody really seems to care about that much, and the argument has been made that produces higher inflation for a longer period of time, so likely a negative in terms of getting adoption. Other than pump-and-dump potential if you hold some of these, what is there really here that is worth saving? |
|
|
|
The first implementation was called Bytecoin but it was mined over two years (Ninja style) in secret with unchanging difficulty. Monero is our communities based fresh start.
It's not even clear it was two years. (No independent evidence whatsoever of its existence prior to late 2013 is available.) If it really were mined for two years with code implemented as was obviously intended by the design (using AES hardware in Intel CPUs), that would be less than 10 PCs mining it, which is somewhat implausible. It is entirely possible they gened the whole blockchain in a much shorter period of time on a server farm or cloud nodes. The whole thing is extremely shady and totally lacking even if the most basic transparency, which is why bytecoin is essentially dead now, and Monero is thriving. How would you generate the blockchain without mining it properly? You mean faking the timestamps in the header or something? Yeah you can put anything you want in the timestamps. Just scale them all by a factor of 100 and 2 years = 1 week. |
|
|
|
A thousand users at least? And why was the mining difficulty stagnant for two years?
Not buying this at all.
On a real note, you are missing the key work here, "users". Not miners but users. Guys, news flash. It's dead. The strategy might have worked, but it didn't. Just stop. Hey, I support both Monero and Bytecoin. Since the first day this was on the forum and the first day Monero posted an ANN. I have no bias toward either, but one should not forget their roots, no matter how bad the conditions. So to come here is disrespect this coin and what the devs have done (which in turn Monero would be nothing) seems almost silly. As we speak the devs are working on something new, to come here smooth and make a mockery of the coin shows poorly on Monero in my eyes. I respect your views and what you are trying to say but you may need the Bytecoin devs one day. I've already said many times (including within the last page), that I respect whoever developed this code and technology. Monero will, until the end of time, give proper credit and respect to the original developers. I think I said several pages back that I rate them only a notch or two below Satoshi in the significance of their contribution. I have no idea who that is or what their connection (if any) might be to the sleazy and failed BCN promotion tactics (and it is the latter to which I refer as dead and futile). As for what they might do in the future, if and when they deliver, if it is something valuable, I will give due credit. For the moment, anyone can promise vaporware -- not worth much. |
|
|
|
The first implementation was called Bytecoin but it was mined over two years (Ninja style) in secret with unchanging difficulty. Monero is our communities based fresh start.
It's not even clear it was two years. (No independent evidence whatsoever of its existence prior to late 2013 is available.) If it really were mined for two years with code implemented as was obviously intended by the design (using AES hardware in Intel CPUs), that would be less than 10 PCs mining it, which is somewhat implausible. It is entirely possible they gened the whole blockchain in a much shorter period of time on a server farm or cloud nodes. The whole thing is extremely shady and totally lacking even if the most basic transparency, which is why bytecoin is essentially dead now, and Monero is thriving. |
|
|
|
A thousand users at least? And why was the mining difficulty stagnant for two years?
Not buying this at all.
On a real note, you are missing the key work here, "users". Not miners but users. Guys, news flash. It's dead. The strategy might have worked, but it didn't. Just stop. |
|
|
|
So is this an actual new code base or is it using Bitcoin code somehow? Meaning did they recode from scratch? Totally distinct code, not a bitcoin code, though it borrows some ideas from bitcoin (the concept of a proof-of-work block chain with a p2p network primarily). It originally surfaced as bytecoin, but that was premined to death and lacking a coherent development team, so the Monero team recognized the potential and adopted it. |
|
|
|
Excuse my ignorance but what is a "MRO" or "Monero"?
Worth reading post #1 on this thread. |
|
|
|
|
10 MRO
But shouldn't this be for tacos?
|
|
|
|
How about respect their privacy and leave them the fuck alone? The work is impressive and if someone wants to (credibly) come forward and take credit fine otherwise stop with the amateur tabloid "journalism"
You spent so much time talking shit about this coin and spreading an increadible amount of hate and now you care about the devs? Now you care about the coin? No more pre-mine talk? There's a difference between calling out a shady premine for what it is and respecting the technical work of the developers (who may or may not even be the same people behind the premise) but more than that respecting their privacy as human beings. Smooth, every time you post your new shit here - a little kitten dies somewhere in the world! Yeah I hate kittens. You figured me out. |
|
|
|
How about respect their privacy and leave them the fuck alone? The work is impressive and if someone wants to (credibly) come forward and take credit fine otherwise stop with the amateur tabloid "journalism"
You spent so much time talking shit about this coin and spreading an increadible amount of hate and now you care about the devs? Now you care about the coin? No more pre-mine talk? There's a difference between calling out a shady premine for what it is and respecting the technical work of the developers (who may or may not even be the same people behind the premine) but more than that respecting their privacy as human beings. |
|
|
|
|
How about respect their privacy and leave them the fuck alone? The work is impressive and if someone wants to (credibly) come forward and take credit fine otherwise stop with the amateur tabloid "journalism"
|
|
|
|
It's open source. Why not fork and launch your personal revolution? One could argue that's the point of open source. You could even put in the emission change instamine you were demanding earlier.  Currency is a natural monopoly. Forking is a form of defection. Thus I consider it immoral unless there is a compelling justification which outweighs the defection. This isn't specifically detected at you but I think people get somewhat confused about concepts like natural monopolies and network effect. These are largely descriptive concepts rather than prescriptive. If it is a natural monopoly then in practice one will drive out all others, but the one that does survive has to do a lot right to make it in a (temporarily at least) fiercely competitive environment. I don't discourage or resent forks -- even worthless ones -- the way many of the bitcoin uber alles crowd tend to do. Only by surviving the hits do you demonstrate your fitness. |
|
|
|
Sorry guys, but Im not happy with how things are going! The logo is dull and plain as hell and doesnt stick out among 100 generic insurance company logos you can find in any phone book. Thats not even the troubling part. What really grinds my gears is that apparently you tackle the "professional" approach to run this project from the wrong end, submitting to some BS ISO compliance codes and choosing generic company logos for a project like this in a community like this is clearly the wrong way to go. You are supposed to think outside the box and not try to fit in it! This is the Crypto Revolution and not some credit card scheme 2.0. Please take the courage to be original, the community will thank you for it.
I like the Missives post and hope to see more of it regularly to keep us in the loop. Thats where Monero could shine over Bitcoins detached development team. Pls go on!
It's open source. Why not fork and launch your personal revolution? One could argue that's the point of open source. Because I'd like to give some input into this particular project to make it better. To fork everytime you get upset about some trifle is not the way to go. Im voicing my concerns even of it means to critique. If I have come across a bit harsh, I'd like to apologize because it was not my intent to hurt but to remind everybody what chance we have to turn this project into something unique and powerful. Not the rebuild a rehash of overcome systems. It is indeed constructive input and will have an impact. Decisions have to be made and not everyone will be happy with every one but you are definitely heard. |
|
|
|
On the contrary, I demanded a longer emission schedule and even offered to slack my stash in half to keep it fair as an early adopter to give Monero a longer lifespan.
By the way, I am 100% for reducing emission and slashing our stake.  It'll build a stronger price in the next couple of years and we'll get more money per coin than way less money per coin if not. I vote for reduced emission and slashed stake. I vote for an entirely new coin called, Polymero, with a reduced emission and slashed stake. Please do. When you fail you make Monero stronger. Oh wait it's already called QCN. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
