What I find really interesting about this market is that there are multiple large players on both sides of this market each waiting for the others to make a move.  So the size of this market is actually very deceiving.  What is important to recognize here is the fact that someone can make a move does not mean they will actually make the move. I also suspect many are not aware of the actual size of the hidden market particularly those waiting to buy. Like 20 XBT worth of XMR to get to 0.0005 in a matter of hours becomes 140 XBT worth of XMR to get to 0.0005.

This would support my technical scenario of a failed bear market with a truncated 5th Elliott Wave. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=753252.msg10493881#msg10493881. This type of pattern if broken to the upside would typically lead to a very sharp upward move. What is interesting is that this technical pattern can still survive a fair amount of bear activity. The bears need to make a strong stand below 0.0009 to break the pattern.

Emission halving is significant because of its psychological value, given that many XMR traders have an extensive experience with XBT trading. There is however in principle nothing special here because of the continuous emission curve. It is not as if the XMR emission curve is some propriety secret.

My take is that we are still in a bear market, but one where the bears are getting really tired and running out of steam. One the technical side there is a falling wedge developing. This actually supports my sub-wave count for wave V, since it supports the overlap between sub wave 1 and sub wave 4. This triangle is the one exception to keep this Elliot Wave count valid. No one has called me on this yet. A falling wedge is also an indicator of a turnaround.

The danger for the bears lies in the database that is already out there combined with the silence from the devs. My take is that if there is a breakout to the upside it will sudden and sharp.

Actually sideways for the next couple of weeks would be bullish, since this would mean breaking the downward trend line and strengthening the case for failed bear market with a truncated 5th wave. My take is that the bears have to make their case sooner while the bulls have a bit more time.

I posted my thoughts in the speculation thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=753252.msg10493881#msg10493881

Monero has https://mymonero.com which allows for the creation of online XMR wallets. 

Anything can happen but sideways implies a break of a downward trendline that goes back to June of last year.  The fundamentals also tend to support a break in either direction especially when one considers. 1) A database that has been stable for over a month. 2) No Missives for over 5 weeks.

Elliot Wave analysis of the Monero bear market since June on an log scale. I see two possibilities:

1) A failed bear market with a truncated wave V if the bulls can break out above the exponential trendline. The would lead to a very sharp move to the upside.
2) Continuation of the bear market with possibly an extended wave V if the bears can break below 0.0009. This would require relabelling the sub waves in wave V

No the NSA does not force this on manufacturers. The manufactures do this because they believe they can get away with spying on their customers and selling the fruits of their spying for profit to marketers. Another very common motivation for manufactures to spy on their customers is DRM and "intellectual property protection". Agencies like the NSA come in much later. They realize the manufactures have valuable data and make a deal with the manufactures for access to that data.  

As for blocking the outgoing traffic yes on can do this but one must take over control of one's network and computing devices. The best way to do this is using Free Software. What actually happens is that one can build a Free Software jail around the propriety software "appliance". This can allow the owner to then use the appliance while blocking or controlling the malicious features in the appliance’s propriety software. It then becomes a battle for control between the owner and the appliance with each one trying to control the other.

Edit1: This process is completely voluntary. The iSheep for example provide data to Apple on a voluntary (they clicked I agreee on Apple's EULA) basis. Apple also provides the data to the NSA on a voluntary basis to the NSA via the PRISM program. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29. This is why many libertarians simply do not understand the real nature of the threat.

Edit2:

Bill Gates did not just sell out to the United States. He also sold out to China and Russia among others. Ever wonder where all that Chinese hacking of Windows that has been traced back to the PLA came from? It is hardly surprising that Microsoft Windows has become such a cesspool of malware.

LED Spy Cams:

http://gizmodo.com/newarks-fancy-new-led-lights-have-little-spy-cams-insi-1525066594

Want to buy some?

http://www.aliexpress.com/promotion/electronic_light-bulb-hidden-camera-promotion.html

If it runs propriety software one should not trust it and assume that it will spy. If it supports DRM then it is almost guaranteed to spy.

... or simply by making a deal with the manufacturer. No fancy spy techniques needed at all.

I put it in a sandbox. VMs can work in some cases. The key here is to never trust it.

Very interesting site. It does add to the how of the NSA exploit. It also shows how this could also be used for another nefarious purpose namely DRM (preventing disk cloning). Yes this could be used to re install malware after the server was cleaned up, and this attack could work on a GNU/Linux system. The practical reality is that the attacker would need either root on the server / and or physical access to the hard drive. So it come down to the question how does the attacker get root in the first place? It is at this point where propriety operating systems provide a huge advantage to the attacker. Microsoft regularly provides access to the source code and advance knowledge of vulnerabilities to agencies such as the NSA, PLA and FSB. This creates a hugely uneven playing field since the attackers have access to the source code and vulnerabilities while the defenders do not. Stuxnet is a prime example of what can happen. In addition operating systems that support DRM must have hidden and obtuse parts to support the DRM. We must not forget that DRM and malware are in reality accomplishing the same thing. It is easy to spy on a user of say Windows, OS X or IOS  when those operating systems by design treat that same user as an adversary not to be trusted.  With GNU/Linux everyone has access to the source code creating a level playing field, and the operating system does not treat the user as an adversary not to be trusted. Big difference.

Here is a link to the actual .pdf http://25zbkz3k00wn2tp5092n6di7b5k.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/files/2015/02/Equation_group_questions_and_answers.pdf. My response is very simple: Ditch MIcrosoft and ditch Apple should be the first step.  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=958270.msg10485500#msg10485500

I have read the .pdf and none of the malware works on GNU/Linux. It does work on Microsoft Windows, OS X and IOS. The simplest way to mitigate this risk is to: Ditch Microsoft, ditch Apple and run Free Software.

Here is the relevant part of the .pdf.


In order for the malware to get at the propriety hard disk firmware it needs Microsoft Windows or OS X. There is a reason why Edward Snowden uses GNU/Linux for his personal computing.

Edit:


It is way simpler to avoid NSA infected operating systems and the hardware will not get infected in the first place. Focusing on the hardware ignores the real risk which is operating systems which by their very nature are very friendly not just to the NSA but also to the PLA and FSB.

The massive ninjamine the market has confirmed by comparing the 24 hour volume. 764 USD for Bytecoin vs 23,133 USD for Monero. http://coinmarketcap.com/

Sure but they have more often than not involved poor password security, overall poor server security and not OS specific malware. Yes of course security is a mind set but it begins with picking the right OS. The types of attacks that targeted the banks and many hacking attacks involve planting malware on Windows desktop computers that is then used the steal credentials. These stolen credentials may actually be used to attack, a GNU/Linux server, but even in this case the fault lies with Microsoft Windows. This is possible not only due to both the design of Windows but also because of how Windows is marketed particularly to consumers. The latter is what makes possible the massive fertile ground of vulnerable Windows computers that allows Windows malware to breed. How many Windows computers are sold to consumers that treat security as an up sell? The economic incentives in propriety software distribution actually encourage the end user to seek the Internet for gratis alternatives. They also make it easy to install software on Windows, while forcing users and administrators to have to seek software from all over the Internet. I have seen very experienced Windows administrators get fooled into installing malware. The alternative to this malware cesspool that is provided by Apple and Microsoft is an Orwellian lockdown where only applications approved by big brother can run. This leads to yet another problem since it encourages users to break the security of the OS wide open to get the freedom they deserve.

Now compare this with GNU/Linux where users and administrators are provided with a trusted software repository with 99% of the software most users will need is available gratis. Getting software to run from outside the trusted repository is possible but nerdy. It invloves in many cases compiling the software from the source code. Even if an executable is available and it matches the right distribution it still involves manually changing a set of permissions on the executable file. So Joe novice tries to install a malware executable on GNU/Linux. The most likely result is that he gets an obscure error and contacts technical support who promptly sets him right.

Security is not just about the user or the OS, it is also about the entire ecosystem.

Edit: GNU/Linux is about source compatibility since it is designed for FLOSS. Microsoft Windows is about binary compatibility since it is designed for propriety software. Malware does not spread very well if it has to be compiled by hand.

It is about risk mitigation pure and simple. Yes there exist a few proof of concept GNU/Linux malware. Now compare this with the literally millions of Windows malware in the wild. I do not claim that GNU/Linux is immune to malware but the risk factor is lower by many orders of magnitude.

O and has Turla actually been found infecting systems in the wild? According to the article quoted above apparently not