ZCash founders reward is economically equivalent to a premine, but I guess it is only 10-20%, not 70%

Okay where is the thorough investigation to support the claim that was made here:


It doesn't exist because that claim is a crock of shit.

Nobody is claiming Monero is being actively used in every day life. Score one for lack of nonsense claims at least. Not that it is really helping the price these days.

I'm no fan of Coindesk's reliability generally but I've seen MANY instances of the Dash Venezuela usage hype being debunked including many times on twitter when it comes up and people who appear to be genuine ordinary Venezuelans saying the exact same thing that Coindesk did: that no one uses it, that merchants which theoretically support it generally don't even know how to accept a Dash payment and nor do they ever encounter real people paying with Dash, that total crypto usage is very small, and those who do use crypto mostly use Bitcoin.

Believe what you like or do homework.

All of the planned changes for the next release have been merged to master except for the fork height and any fixes that might be needed after final testing.

At this time, anyone able to build from source is encouraged to pull from master and test the code. Ideally try to test as many of the functions of the CLI and/or GUI as you are able, not necessarily just the common ones you normally use.

There will likely be a testnet rollback or restart at some point so the forking code can be tested as well as the post-fork consensus code (K12 proof of work and fixed ring size). Stay tuned for announcements on this schedule to help with testnet testing.

There is still a five minute timer.

This hype has been debunked repeatedly. Most recently

Mostly visibility. Sometimes it contributes to inclusion in indexes or funds.

They claim they were hacked. Maybe this happened, we really have no way to know. If it did happen, then your XMR balance isn't there, the hackers took it.

They want the Monero developers to cover what they claim to have lost to a hacker, which isn't going to happen even if the hack actually happened and even if it was partially due to a bug in the software, which again we really have no way to know. 1. See above link/discussion about the license terms explicitly ruling this out. 2. If the developers covered claimed losses by exchanges this would open up a vulnerability where any shady exchange could claim to have been 'hacked' and start making claims against the developers. Again, this isn't going to happen.

When it comes to crypto exchanges, follow the ABC rule: Always Be Careful. Do not leave coins on an exchange any longer than necessary for trading. Use only exchanges that you trust not only to not steal your coins themselves but to have the technical competence, experience and processes in place to guard against hacks. Etc.

For those who have lost coins to livecoin, cryptsy, cryptopia, MtGox, etc., etc. you have my condolences but also my suggestion to learn from these experiences and protect yourself better in the future. I very much doubt we have seen the last exchange hacks, 'hacks', and exit scams.

I don't think there were ever a lot of details but apparently he wasn't able to verify his account and was stuck with millions in there and no way to take it out. Of course this is the same Risto who claimed that he couldn't pay what he owed to Crypto Kingdom players because all of his paper wallets burned up in a fire, were lost in a flood, and to a robbery (bad week that was), so take all these stories with a mountain of salt.

Both more or less equally.

Nearly inevitable, the only issue is timing (for the impatient).

Was renamed to DASH. Not dead.

Stock to flow is just one over the monetary inflation rate. Don't get dazzled by the fancy wording.

I've noticed that but I don't know of any good reason for it.

I don't think odd or even makes any real difference.

That peak was likely the result of a single buyer or a small group manipulating the market, probably for the purpose of ripping off Poloniex through their dumb margin system (and given Poloniex's response to it, ultimately ripping off Poloniex's other users).

It you disregard that outlier pump CLAM is actually doing pretty well, considering market conditions. It's price in satoshis is actually higher than where it was late last year, which is not the case of a lot of well-known coins like ETH or XRP.

No, I'm sure it wasn't. It was some player who had been scammed but I don't remember which one.

I wasn't the one who created it and i don't recall who did.

Then the exchange has incurred a normal business risk for running risky semi-experimental software (all cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin), partially as a result of the bug, and partially as a result of lacking strict controls and audits on their own operations.

But in any case, no new coins were minted as a result of these bugs.


Math would suggest such (although my confidence in the accuracy of cointelegraph 'reporting' is extremely low, for good reasons, so I wouldn't reach any conclusions without a better source). I don't personally know but I would imagine the established process for vulnerability reporting is being carried out.

This part is wrong.

Cointelegraph has been running false anti-Monero propaganda as long as there has been a Monero, although in this case I don't know if the error is deliberate or just careless.

I mean how careless can you be before it becomes more likely to be malicious? If you click through the link on that article and read their other article, you find this from the original researcher who discovered the bug:


No new coins were minted. Guaranteed.

The bug could only be used to fool an exchange into falsely crediting a users account, not to mint coins. Unlike a previous similar bug, this one is not known to have ever been exploited to fool an exchange at all. (The earlier bug was reportedly exploited, but only after a careless exchange failed to upgrade after a fix had already been released.)