Your little sister, does she have an upcoming IPO perchance?  Any shares available?

I was addressing the case of a hypothetical miner who purchases hardware with no expectation of ROI.  What proportion of miners this represents, from 0% to 100%, I did not venture to opine.  Now I will: I know that it is neither 0% nor 100%, but beyond that I have little useful data.  I rather suspect it is a very small percentage, less than 1%, but that's just a guess.

Crypton.  Just because its the only concrete proposal which doesn't pun on cryptonight, which is a completely different thing and should not be mis-associated to XCN.  Also, since it works with XCN so there's no major problem for exchanges.

I think his point was that any miner who pays more for the kit than will allow for a positive ROI is obviously not under pressure to sell.  They are happy to pay above market for future bitcoin. They are clearly not requiring a positive return, so they must be finding utility in other factors.  They are clearly very interested in acquiring bitcoin, and there is no reason to think they will sell them, unless perhaps to introduce others to their hobby.

I was thinking of users.  I put larger error bars around price, and consider that the pricing dynamics may differ substantially from bitcoin, so I tend not to re-purpose bitcoin pricing models to xmr, at least until there is enough xmr data to reparameterize them empirically.  Consequently I don't draw any strong conclusions about pricing from the adoption curve, just yet.  I am content that there is a strong bias towards appreciation, and refrain from making long-term central tendency estimates for the time-being.

I think a rolling window of active users is a better reference on this.  XMR is growing much faster than BTC.  I expect it to overtake BTC in 3 years.

Terabit bandwidth will be available to fixed locations in that time-frame.  Mobile bandwidth isn't really an issue, because thin clients will be used for mobile, exclusively, for the foreseeable future.  I just don't see bandwidth as an issue for XMR, ever.  For some users, always, but for network strength and integrity, as well as capacity?  No.  Lower consumption would aid in decentralization, but unless your hard requirement is to maximize decentralization (as I suspect it is for AnonyMint) it's not a problem.

I mis-spoke when I suggested flash was necessary to the blockchain.  Magnetic storage is quite cheap and adequate for full nodes, and will already scale 10^3.

I take some comfort in knowing that your loved ones are looking out for you.

One big problem with Zerocoin was the massive bloat, as I recall.  It makes ring signatures look like an anorexic supermodel in contrast.

The size issues are bandwidth and storage, not computation.  The law is not broadly applicable to bandwidth, and scaling will not end with the end of process shrink.  Moore's law will apply to storage in the near term, however, as it will be essentially determined by flash densities.  It appears to have enough headroom left to fully accommodate XMR.

I use the neutral term "size" instead of "bloat" because bloat implies the content does not add value, which I consider misleading.

Zerocoin Zerocash has shown that no one knows how to make a trustless currency with better anonymity characteristics than ring signatures allow:  Zerocoin Zerocash requires trusting the mint.  It has also shown that vaporware trades at a severe discount to a working cryptocurrency.  The market wants private liquidity, and isn't going to wait for Zerocoin Zerocash.  I doubt that the market will tolerate the trusted mint.

That is an unsubstantiated allegation.

That has been proven false.

EDIT: Corrected misuse of Zerocoin where I was talking about Zerocash.

This being the bitcoin price movement tracking and discussion thread, that was my intention, yes.

Russia has gradually escalated the invasion of the Donbass to the point (estimated 3 to 5 thousand uniformed) where the Ukrainian government considers it an outright invasion.  European governments (except for Honnecker Merkel) agree. Europe has a backbone composed of over-cooked pasta, but they do remember Hitler, and the parallels to Putin are pervasive, profound, and indicative. I am wishing that I did not have so much New York travel planned, at this point:  A pre-emptive strike by Putin against the allied west is the likely end of any military escalation track.  I should acquire an off-shore life insurance policy in case my domestic one should prove unsuited to the circumstances of my death.

All of this, I consider bearish in the short-term, on risk-aversion, and bullish in the long-term on the fundamental technical capability of crypto to provide value storage and liquidity transfer when other systems break down.

You should really check out the list of wonders that James has innovated.  It's quite spectacular.
If I thought something was a threat to XMR, I wouldn't short it, of that I can assure you.  

I can get up a goodly amount of bile when I perceive a threat to the pocketbooks of the naive.  Yet I am not above seeking to benefit personally by shorting that threat, as I consider it an essential part of price discovery:  The sooner fair price is discovered, the less damage will be done.

narcissistic megalomania is in a bull trend.  personally, i am shorting it.

my theory is that ww3 is short-term bearish, long-term bullish

Didn't you hear?  jl777's SuperNET is going to unite all the crypto, so every crypto now has equal value.  It's the greatest arbitrage opportunity in history.

Weak minds are incapable of vision, conviction.  Weak minds connect to weak hands.  Thus does wealth gravitate to those who are able to form sound conclusions and retain them in the face of an onslaught of deceit.  With strong hands we scale the mountains of adversity.

XMR is being used in commerce.  It is not feasible to know how much until its use achieves a scale amenable to available survey methods, but of the on-chain transfers I have personally observed  (roughly 80, amounting to about 500k XMR),  about 10% have been purchases of goods or services, and the remainder financial transactions.

that sounds like a bumpersticker.


China is an interesting case.  Say what you will about the CCP, they are pragmatic about retaining power.  Increasingly, the leadership is composed overwhelmingly of engineers.  In part this is because China pushes the best and brightest into engineering.  In part it is because engineers know how to get things done.  Evidently they are not sufficently good at deciding (or enforcing) what should be done, however.

My own institutionalized training was in physics, mathematics, computer science, and philosophy (in increasing order of institutional credit).  Finance is my current application domain, chosen because it offers value leverage.  I have found much of the value-add in my career to derive from the synthesis of ideas from mathematics and philosophy, subject to a process framework which is defined by the methodologies of physics and computer science, which are very closely allied to engineering principles and practices.  While the leading threads of economic - at least econometric - and financial theory provide fodder and content for data-driven semantic software, they provide little to no methodology or process.



 

Too much angst to trust with great wealth, perhaps.  Sell me your XMR.