I didn't want to withhold this from you guys, it is pretty hilarious in fact -> http://pastebin.com/pPNf8y6LMight have, next to the awareness Peter Todd raised, sparkled some of the rally.  I would have snapped it up too if I had been there at that time. That is hilarious. A fool and his money... |
|
|
|
If we could hand it over in English, I'd be up for it, maybe in collaboration with GingerAle (take the vital parts from his Digest), and David Latapies different writings. Depends on the scope.
It wouldn't be so hard. I think the Missives would be a nice update in Chinese from time to time. If China learns about XMR, I predict CCM... I mean, happiness!! Aight, next on to do list: learn mandarin. We'd need to get the missives transcribed then google translated. Though if we don't have anyone that can read the language, we could end up google-saying some stupid stuff maybe. re: digest - thats easy enough! I reckon that the digest is too much. It could be the most important points from the digest, with some of Latapies talking points mixed in there and also some of the missives (although ginger does a great job with those also.). So, like a shorter newsletter than the digest, where the talking points can mirror the monero missive. Go easy on the hardcore tech first, but rather explain the why's of why it's needed. Whadaya think? PS they do have a translator team I am informed. |
|
|
|
During the last XBT/USD boom LTC peaked at 0.05 XBT and stayed over 0.02 XBT for a good 4 months. NMC peaked at 0.016 XBT.
Well, I will answer my own question, because I think that Monero hands are or will be stronger than bitcoin hands. This is second generation holdings. People have learned from what can happen if you leave your old hard drive in a land fill, or if you buy a pizza for 10k btc (WITHOUT replenishing your holding), just spending it nilly willy. I understand that the aim for Monero is to be cash, but I surmise that a lot of holders are more frugal about their usage of their coins now and at least replenish their holdings up to a individually predetermined amount. |
|
|
|
|
If we could hand it over in English, I'd be up for it, maybe in collaboration with GingerAle (take the vital parts from his Digest), and David Latapies different writings. Depends on the scope.
|
|
|
|
yes possible is everyting, the same as bitcoin will reach $10k this year  by the time BTC hits 10k, XMR will be at $100 - bare minimum. I doubt it. If XBT hits 10 K USD, XMR will likely be way more than 0.01 XBT Are Monero hands even stronger than bitcoin hands? |
|
|
|
Now the daily emission costs around 12 000 usd which is peanuts.
How much are you buying daily? Why would anyone want to buy daily? Would you not try to buy the dips? Or buy when you get paid? I am buying every now and then. I do not need to buy any coins. I am buying more to support the coin rather than making money with it. My core position is bought in, but I just want to do my share in this community. I cannot code and I do not have connections like Risto has so my part is to buy a couple of coins to give the markets for the miners and other dumpers. Today I have bought around 100 XMR. But to comfort you - I am still underwater in terms of bitcoins (and especially in terms of fiat). I'd conjecture you "do your share in this community" better by less word salad, contradictions and trolling. I like that you write a lot, and often. But if you go over your posts over time, it's what I just described. You're of course free to do what you want, but it seems like a larger part of the community holds the same thoughts. We can of course only appeal you to do better. Besides that, great job with the DB devs. I like that the dev team keeps on trucking. Surely getting there. Pardon my french, but it's fucking professional. |
|
|
|
Nobody really knows for sure. There are a variety of theories including one or more botnets in a particular geographic area that only mine when people leave work at night, one or more botnets in a particular geographic area where the computers go to sleep at night when people leave work or go to sleep, instability in the difficulty adjustment (it takes 12 hours to adjust fully, so if difficulty goes up, miners drop off, it then takes 12 hours to come back down, miners come back, repeat), and probably a few others. Maybe some or all of these in combination. The difficulty adjustment part at least, is something we're working on improving (it is on the design and development goals document). Some places you can also bargain for cheaper electricity rates outside peak-hours (i.e. in the night time). Do you believe these large farm guys will turn off their miners during peak time? That means their miner are off 10-16 hours per day. There is little chance of ROI. I think smooths and magscas theories are most probable, and I wasn't talking against them. More just saying that someone also could be running off-peak. If I were to put XMR on it, I'd bet that it's uni/school/large organisations idle hardware that is being put to use. But I'm sure someone somewhere has calculated he can make a profit running his old gpu's (that were collecting dust otherwise) during cheaper hours. |
|
|
|
Nobody really knows for sure. There are a variety of theories including one or more botnets in a particular geographic area that only mine when people leave work at night, one or more botnets in a particular geographic area where the computers go to sleep at night when people leave work or go to sleep, instability in the difficulty adjustment (it takes 12 hours to adjust fully, so if difficulty goes up, miners drop off, it then takes 12 hours to come back down, miners come back, repeat), and probably a few others. Maybe some or all of these in combination. The difficulty adjustment part at least, is something we're working on improving (it is on the design and development goals document). Some places you can also bargain for cheaper electricity rates outside peak-hours (i.e. in the night time). |
|
|
|
"I value my virginity. But I'm not anal about it.." See how that works?
There's definitely a joke in there about anal, and the concept of maintaining one's virginity by way of it. So many layers.  |
|
|
|
In the case of the two poker players in Iowa, months after their money was taken, they reached a settlement in which most of the money —$90,000 — was returned. They told CNN they believed it was the best deal they could have made at the time. Now, however, they are suing to get the rest of the money back and have asked for unspecified damages. The state of Iowa isn't giving it back and is not backing down. This is the classic mistake: To settle for getting 90% of the money back. Now they are suing after the settlement. The question becomes are their chances of success more or less now? Edit: These guys are poker players yet they do not seem to understand the concept of bluffing. My bet is with the state on this one. Let's assume they are professional poker players. That being the case the $100K was probably essential to their livelihood. If you are a baker and your bakery is seized, you don't really have the luxury of waiting ages for the case to play out in court to see if you might get it back. They were pro players - they are also not the only poker players I know who have had this happen to them. I can think of 5 off the top of my head in the last 12 months all very similar stories. It seems just a little bit too coincidental to me. They took the settlement because 90% today is better than 100% in 2 years time. This stuff happens more often than hits the headlines. What I meant was that it's a bit too coincidental that poker-players in particular are being targeted. It almost looks systematic. Figure out who's a relatively successful poker-player and so forth.. |
|
|
|
In the case of the two poker players in Iowa, months after their money was taken, they reached a settlement in which most of the money —$90,000 — was returned. They told CNN they believed it was the best deal they could have made at the time. Now, however, they are suing to get the rest of the money back and have asked for unspecified damages. The state of Iowa isn't giving it back and is not backing down. This is the classic mistake: To settle for getting 90% of the money back. Now they are suing after the settlement. The question becomes are their chances of success more or less now? Edit: These guys are poker players yet they do not seem to understand the concept of bluffing. My bet is with the state on this one. Let's assume they are professional poker players. That being the case the $100K was probably essential to their livelihood. If you are a baker and your bakery is seized, you don't really have the luxury of waiting ages for the case to play out in court to see if you might get it back. They were pro players - they are also not the only poker players I know who have had this happen to them. I can think of 5 off the top of my head in the last 12 months all very similar stories. It seems just a little bit too coincidental to me. |
|
|
|
Now you're just using ad hominem. If you can't be open-minded enough to understand that you might not be 100% correct, I've nothing more to say to you.
Which is good, since this is really going off topic. I guess the point of all this is that there are obstacles for monero taking off mainstream, IF there are a significant number of people who aren't completely paranoid about their privacy. It doesn't really matter who's right or wrong, the result is that because these people don't have sufficient reason to use monero, monero is potentially losing out. For monero to achieve real mainstream use, there is a need to convince people that they really do need the privacy monero provides (or some other benefit monero has over bitcoin and other alts) for the particular purpose they're using it.
A very popular advice that I've been seeing a lot regarding building start-ups, websites etc, is how a lot of people have a "build it and they will come" mentality, and how it simply doesn't work that way.
I think that very much applies here, and to crypto in general. People need to be convinced of its benefits. It doesn't matter how beneficial it is. It really doesn't even matter IF it's beneficial at all. People will use it if they THINK it's beneficial, at least until they realize that it's actually BS.
I apologise for being obtuse. It was uncalled for. However, I still don't think your arguments in the post above (Edit: this one: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=753252.msg10781325#msg10781325) hold any water. They are simply nonsensical. Let me try to explain: - You wouldn't want your health insurance knowing your chocolate bar habits, they might raise your premium because of it. They might even refuse to take you on as a customer. A: I wouldn't want the government to know I'm a thief. Or a serial killer. I simply think that perhaps that information SHOULD be provided to insurance companies. It's only morally right to do so, just as public companies should not hide any deal-breaking info to potential investors.There is quite the difference between being a criminal and having a sweet tooth which leads to all sorts of health issues, which is expensive for an insurance company. If you eat 10 chocolate bars a day, every day, eventually you will get diabetes. You are not morally or legally obliged to inform them about your sugar-intake, nor should you be. You are not a public company. You will not have any investors in you. - If your boss knows your stopping your birth control, he might let you go. Maybe he doesn't want to pay for maternity leave. It would be mighty convenient to do that before you fell pregnant. Then perhaps you should find a different job.
That's not a thing and that's not how the world works. I am arguing that people might play minority report on your ass.- If a merchant knows exactly what you've been willing to pay for items before he will be able to charge different prices to customers. And charge you more.If you're willing to pay more, that's your choice.
Sure, but it's more convenient not to. Again, did you get the point? I'm not sure? - If your government isn't friendly towards free speech (as we see governments all over the world move towards) and you hold a political opinion that is against the powers that be, your existence in life can be very troublesome. (this is such deep subject so I will not go into it more).I think there should be a limit to freedoms. But yes, this subject is too deep, and your point does have some merit.
The goal posts changes as society progresses. Back in medieval times chemistry was illegal. Not a freedom everyone should have. Books could be illegal.
But it's not just that. It is hindering people in activism - because they are scared of repercussions from government, family, community, religious groups or whatever. Remember that the reason you can do chemistry and read a book or be on the internet or even do bitcoin is because of activism. Many things that are deemed trivial today used to be illegal and you would get persecuted for acting in that sphere. - If you run a little corner-shop and your customers can see what you pay for prices, they might just go straight to the source. Your competitors might be able to see it too. They can see your suppliers and the prices you pay. It's not necessarily good for your business. Uh, I don't know if you've ever worked as a store clerk. I have, and I can tell you that I was really surprised how people are willing to pay 2 or even 3x the price to support their local store than to drive 5 minutes to the supermarket to save that money. You don't need complete freedom of information to know that convenience stores charge more than Walmart.
Whichever store. It's beside the point. But I do agree a lot are willing to support the local shop, regardless of price, myself included. It's getting off-topic - If people can see that you went to a psychiatrist, and take specific meds you could for example risk not being invited to job interviews, or have that date you were going on cancelled, or..or..Again, hiding that kind of information is not ethical, in my opinion. If your date/employer really wants you, they wouldn't care. It is beneficial for you as it weeds out those who really care about YOU, or those who want someone that isn't you.Are we living on the same planet? You won't even get to the interview. You will be weeded out way before. You are written off before they get to know you. It's cool that you are YOU and they should care about you, and that you are a really nice guy and very skilled at your work, but alas, they will never find out because the HR lady flagged you in their system as "psychiatry-treatment/anti-depressants". - If you were running a local diner, and customers could see that other people were getting special deals (might be your frequent patronage), they would start asking for cheaper meals - or go somewhere else. Same point as the convenience store; this simply isn't necessarily true. Amazingly enough. I'm definitely one of those people that would go somewhere cheaper and couldn't imagine people who didn't; but I've seen with my own eyes.
Maybe it's a bad example, I can agree to that. But I don't get your refute?- The last one of my previous questions spoke for itself almost. If rogue elements (be it thieves or whatever) can see when you go to the movies, on holidays, go out shopping they can arrange for a house visit at those times. But not just that - they can see WHAT you are shopping - hey you shop for nice things let's steal that..! - and plan accordingly.)But there would be protection agencies that would've caught those "rogue elements" before they acted.
What?! Doesn't make sense.. |
|
|
|
- You wouldn't want your health insurance knowing your chocolate bar habits, they might raise your premium because of it. They might even refuse to take you on as a customer.
A: I wouldn't want the government to know I'm a thief. Or a serial killer. I simply think that perhaps that information SHOULD be provided to insurance companies. It's only morally right to do so, just as public companies should not hide any deal-breaking info to potential investors.
- If your boss knows your stopping your birth control, he might let you go. Maybe he doesn't want to pay for maternity leave. It would be mighty convenient to do that before you fell pregnant.
Then perhaps you should find a different job.
- If a merchant knows exactly what you've been willing to pay for items before he will be able to charge different prices to customers. And charge you more.
If you're willing to pay more, that's your choice.
- If your government isn't friendly towards free speech (as we see governments all over the world move towards) and you hold a political opinion that is against the powers that be, your existence in life can be very troublesome. (this is such deep subject so I will not go into it more).
I think there should be a limit to freedoms. But yes, this subject is too deep, and your point does have some merit.
- If you run a little corner-shop and your customers can see what you pay for prices, they might just go straight to the source. Your competitors might be able to see it too. They can see your suppliers and the prices you pay. It's not necessarily good for your business.
Uh, I don't know if you've ever worked as a store clerk. I have, and I can tell you that I was really surprised how people are willing to pay 2 or even 3x the price to support their local store than to drive 5 minutes to the supermarket to save that money. You don't need complete freedom of information to know that convenience stores charge more than Walmart.
- If people can see that you went to a psychiatrist, and take specific meds you could for example risk not being invited to job interviews, or have that date you were going on cancelled, or..or..
Again, hiding that kind of information is not ethical, in my opinion. If your date/employer really wants you, they wouldn't care. It is beneficial for you as it weeds out those who really care about YOU, or those who want someone that isn't you.
- If you were running a local diner, and customers could see that other people were getting special deals (might be your frequent patronage), they would start asking for cheaper meals - or go somewhere else.
Same point as the convenience store; this simply isn't necessarily true. Amazingly enough. I'm definitely one of those people that would go somewhere cheaper and couldn't imagine people who didn't; but I've seen with my own eyes.
- The last one of my previous questions spoke for itself almost. If rogue elements (be it thieves or whatever) can see when you go to the movies, on holidays, go out shopping they can arrange for a house visit at those times. But not just that - they can see WHAT you are shopping - hey you shop for nice things let's steal that..! - and plan accordingly.)
But there would be protection agencies that would've caught those "rogue elements" before they acted.
What's that old song called? "You don't know what you've got 'till it's gone.."
Perhaps. Or maybe you don't know what you're missing out until you have it.
I don't plan on convincing you. As I said, I do value my privacy. I'm not anal about it. Well you certainly won't. You make no sense in your rebuttals? As in, it's nonsensical what you write. Stop trolling. "I value my virginity. But I'm not anal about it.." See how that works? |
|
|
|
I have to say that I really don't, and I think the vast majority (or at least a good number of ordinary folks) of the world doesn't. More important things to care about.
It is actually pretty clear you are correct, if you look at how the whole commercial and government spying industry has developed. It's not the case that people aren't aware of it, but most really and truly don't care.I think people care, its just that they feel powerless to stop it. Kind of like "yeah, but what are yah gonna do?" I guess the answer would be to use cash for everything, but for some people they don't feel safe or for whatever reason there's a combination of things that outweighs the lack of privacy. This is another very valid point. People feel powerless, they don't know how to so they just close their eyes and ears and go about their life the best they can. The other points I was making in my other post was that people do not think the scenarios through. When you explain the ramifications the lack of privacy potentially will have in each scenario, people start paying more attention. |
|
|
|
I have to say that I really don't, and I think the vast majority (or at least a good number of ordinary folks) of the world doesn't. More important things to care about.
That said, I guess I can see that some people might care about such things, which does give it value. Is it enough to make monero mainstream? Only time will tell.
It's good that you can see that some see value in it. I think more and more people will see value in it. I agree and disagree with smooth at the same time. I do think that too many people are complacent, agreed. However, at the same time I think that the vast majority of people simply do not know how much spying is going on (be it from official bodies, contractors or just third party companies selling big data). Especially the latter. Very few outside the field knows this is going on. It's hardly ever covered in the mainstream media. We surmise though that it will be a larger and larger issue when people see the ramifications of it. But let's break it apart a bit and spell it out from my rhetoricals: - You wouldn't want your health insurance knowing your chocolate bar habits, they might raise your premium because of it. They might even refuse to take you on as a customer. - If your boss knows your stopping your birth control, he might let you go. Maybe he doesn't want to pay for maternity leave. It would be mighty convenient to do that before you fell pregnant. - If a merchant knows exactly what you've been willing to pay for items before he will be able to charge different prices to customers. And charge you more. - If your government isn't friendly towards free speech (as we see governments all over the world move towards) and you hold a political opinion that is against the powers that be, your existence in life can be very troublesome. (this is such deep subject so I will not go into it more). - If you run a little corner-shop and your customers can see what you pay for prices, they might just go straight to the source. Your competitors might be able to see it too. They can see your suppliers and the prices you pay. It's not necessarily good for your business. - If people can see that you went to a psychiatrist, and take specific meds you could for example risk not being invited to job interviews, or have that date you were going on cancelled, or..or.. - If you were running a local diner, and customers could see that other people were getting special deals (might be your frequent patronage), they would start asking for cheaper meals - or go somewhere else. - The last one of my previous questions spoke for itself almost. If rogue elements (be it thieves or whatever) can see when you go to the movies, on holidays, go out shopping they can arrange for a house visit at those times. But not just that - they can see WHAT you are shopping - hey you shop for nice things let's steal that..! - and plan accordingly.) What's that old song called? "You don't know what you've got 'till it's gone.." |
|
|
|
I don't see monero being needed in day-to-day services. I really couldn't care less if that Aero bar I bought was anonymous or not. I think monero's niche is in *cough* blackmarket *cough* (quite unfortunately), but also in some large items that might garner public/friends, relatives and neighbour's interest. For example, buying/selling a house. It is also likely to be used as a store of value, since it is convenient in that it hides your net worth. I think this is where monero is stronger than bitcoin.
Perhaps in the future, when/if monero's market cap is significantly higher and more liquid, it could be an easy way for lottery winners to hide their assets, at least the ones who are/want to be anonymous. Lottery winners probably don't have the prowess, knowledge or network to effectively hide their winnings, and monero might offer a surprisingly easy way to do so. We've all heard of stories where lottery winners receive thousands of letters begging them for money, distant relatives who's great-great-great-great parents were cousins and "friends" they've met once at a coffee shop all come out to pester them with business opportunities and so on. They certainly have an incentive to use monero.
So what I'm trying to say is, I'm not even sure monero needs services, at least not the same services that are trying to make bitcoin mainstream, because I don't think monero's place is to function as a currency but as a store of value.
Really? Sorry for the rhetoricals, but do you want you health insurance to make statistics on your chocolate bar consumption? Do you want your boss to know when you stop buying prophylactics, or what you're buying at the pharmacy? Do you want merchants knowing your willingness to pay a certain price compared to other customers? Do you want to be censored/excluded/persecuted because you supported the democrats (insert any other political fraction) or wikileaks? Would you like for your customers to see the price you pay for the goods you sell them (and where you buy them)? Would you like that people can see you're visiting the psychiatrist - and which medicine he/she prescribed because of price correlation? Would the local diner like to see that all customers can see that some of the regulars get discounts? Do you want people (thieves e.g.) to see not just that you go to the movies - but when you go to the movies (so you are out of home), or that you are paying for things overseas (i.e. you are away on holiday). The examples are endless in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Is the consensus really that the selling of the last couple of days was this scammer? We had a 200% increase in 2 weeks, a correction was overdue. I'm not sure if it's reasonable to assume the stolen units are absorbed yet...
No.. But it is a speculation thread. |
|
|
|
OK, Off to the casino. wish me luck guys! Good luck, the next XMR rise depends on your gains, as we know only you and rpietila buy the coins Yeah, go double our college money. If there's a big dump we know you lost |
|
|
|
Any reason for the price increase?
This currency is just very unthervalued and now discoverd by big investors I think. This is just a correction for the low levels we have seen and I say keep you XMR and do not take short therm profit. For no reason,no new wallet,no big surge of net hashrate.  The bad thing, of course, is the lack of hashrate increase - I mean, good for me and my miner, but bad for network security. I'm still freaked out about my calculation that it would only take 6 million USD in nvidia 750 ti's to double the network hashrate. Is that retail prices? Because no one buying that amount would pay close to retail prices. |
|
|
|
DRK just broke 0.01 on the downside
I wonder if Dark community is joining into Monero community. they clearly got into dark because they were looking for a particular product. if dark doesnt deliver on that promise they will probably come knocking on our door. monero will end up consuming darks capitalization. if dark commits seppuku we all in this thread likely stand to benefit very very greatly from that. ........., also would it mean the majority of coins would end up in the hands of masternodes and a few whales. I argue that this is already the scenario. But of course, do your own research. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
