That's why we should consider monero type of currency the bitcoin complement and not it's competitor, If and when they could become somehow conjugated..

O yes he does

These figures are just a mirage, with a $ prefix. Nothing more. I wonder did really more than 10 real "$"  ever changed hands there? Faked mining making fake walls performing fake trades that never change hands...

Seriously? If I were a multi-millionaire BTC investor I'd hire a programmer to make the gui myself. This is a non issue. Front-ending is the easy part. The back-end is the hard part. As for BBR I doubt it's the "instamine" as it wasn't been pumped prior to the revelation of the GPU miner either. So, again the question remains.

BBR was never instamined. The hashrate almost instantly rose to a high level with plenty of miners after launch. Difficulty at block 50 was in the same area as block 5000. If anything XMR was instamined, 150k XMR was mined in the first week with network hashrate less than 5 KH/s.

cbuchner1 has stated he doesn't have more than 10,000 BBR at any one time, he is selling them off. That is why the price has been kept down. Also it's possible there are other GPU miners.

A lot of BTC has gone in to sustain the 0.001 price of BBR.

I think GPU miners will be being optimized, so botnet effect will be less apparent...

As I look at example pool, http://hashinvest.net/ , network hashrate is 13.55 MH/sec now, pool's hashrate is 670.78 KH/sec or 0.67078 MH/sec, this pool hashrate is shared between 45 miners, and because 13.55 MH/sec = roughly 20 * 0.67078 MH/sec, there are just roughly 45 * 20 = 900 miners in the whole net, i.e. in the world.

This assumption is more accurate than seen at first glance, because Cryptonight algo gives roughly the same performance amoung CPU and GPU. So one can analyze data from the all officially mentioned pools (at 1st sticky post of this thread), and compute total number of bots in all botnets. I think one obtains value roughly 100 i.e. there are not more than 100 computers in the whole world, infected by XMR mining botnets.

Am I correct?

It's a fair approach however one part of my mind doesn't like the underlying assumption that buyers are somehow guaranteed to buy the extra coin supply at something like current prices. There are too many PoW altcoins acting as a living example that marketcap is steady or declining as new pow coins are issued. Of course coin prospects are intertwined with buying interest, so a crap coin will naturally face a much larger problem finding buyers for the long-term sustainment of its inflation. Inflation is generally a huge issue with altcoins.



DRK has someone that that I call the "primary buyer". I estimate it's someone with vast BTC resources - probably 100k-500k BTCs or so. I don't know if these BTCs are legit or hacked, but he can spend them like no tomorrow. This guy has bought millions in DRKs. This same buyer (as I can see from his buying patterns) has also gone to diversify himself in XC, Vericoin and other "pumps & dumps"... however the money he used for Moneros is tiny compared to all other coins. I believe he was more actively engaged in the first run up to 0.007-8.

If pumping & dumping was his sole purpose in engaging with all these coins, it only makes sense that he would be better served pumping a coin which he can then "sell" to others based on its superior properties. Otherwise how can he dump without crashing the market and everyone running away from the "crapcoin"? He would need adequate hype that the coin is "solid" rather than crappy. So, Monero, in this regard, given what everyone is saying, should be better pump material. One can buy more and hype it as superior, actually convincing buyers that it's a good coin to have. Once that happens, he can dump in waves - if his intention was to profit from the p&d, instead of HODLing long term.

But this didn't happen. And it has sparked my curiosity as to why. What does the multi-million guy (who buys all anon coins except the bytecoin ones) know? Is it inflation that is the problem? Is it that he has somehow independently assessed the bytecoin coins as severely problematic in other areas beyond anonymity? What is it that makes him avoid them like the plague, creating market paradoxes where Boolberry is surpassed by bitcoin-based clones that only offer a whitepaper for anonymity and not even the features for it?

I'm not much of the investor but I'll address this instamine and botnets in the context XMR and BBR.

Firstly, why do you think that that XMR is in any different position than BBR  regarding botnets?

Secondly, if a guy come forward telling that he has optimized private miner for BBR does not mean that none is having optimized GPU miner for XMR. CriptoNight is not exactly new thing, so assuming that none has optimized miner for it is naive.

Speaking about optimized NVIDIA miner for BBR, autor's condition for opensourcing the miner is actually doing very good thing for BBR project, but that is not the theme of this thread.

Oh ok Ill edit it from is to was.

Well, she already has the D.
So disappearing the V to show more D is not fair to the people who want to see the V.
We must have BOTH the D and the V, or else something went wrong.

On the latter, as the resident fan of both XMR and BBR (but with more of a financial interest in BBR, full disclosure):

BBR is a good hedge against XMR in isolation, because it's the only other non-BCN cryptonote with an independent and active developer.  There are not a lot of developers in general out there yet who are capable of fixing bugs and improving upon the Bytecoin source.  Hopefully, with some success, that will change, but for now, the XMR and BBR teams are the only serious games in town.  It also has some advantages as a hedge in the way it's departing from BCN/XMR in its blockchain management -- *if* blockchain size becomes one of the biggest limiting factors (unknown, and betting against moore's law has not been a historically great idea), for example, it has a head start.

But, of course, BBR is a poor hedge against risks from outside the cryptonote family, such as one of the bitcoin carbon-copies actually managing a strong anonymity solution in a way that can easily integrate to the existing bitcoin ecosystem.  While I don't think it's likely in the short term (the existing mixer solutions are relatively poor compared to the CN ring signature mixins), such an event would hurt both XMR and BBR.

So, as with all hedges -- it depends what you're hedging against.

(Re #2:  HitBTC offers market maker contracts with fee redemptions and cash incentives for maintaing particular spreads, but I don't know of other markets that do this.)

Banned for incorrect hyphenation.

Banned for arbitrary ban reason

That's disingenuous - Bitcoin wasn't under the radar. The whitepaper was announced on an archived mailing list with tens of thousands of readers all over the world. A while after the Genesis block was mined, and the code was released on the same mailing list.

Bytecoin is premined shit, and the market has rejected it. No amount of purchased Bitcointalk accounts, shill accounts, or wishful thinking will make the piece of crap that is BCN successful. Give it up.

Banned for 3 identical referral links in signature

Because of the propaganda.

Those coins you mention have an army of people convincing noobs to what they want. All X11 coins are essentially a  scam. Instamine aside, I think that most of the GPU miners of those coins didn't yet figured out that they are fighting against FPGAs.

Banned for being a "member".