Climate destruction deniers are and aways have been the paid shills of the fossil fuel industry
You got me dead to rights. Exxon mobil is paying me 7 dollars for this comment alone. |
|
|
|
They suffer crossed against bitcoin but they almost always do well in terms of fiat in these situations. |
|
|
|
Any reason for the price increase?
rats fleeing a slinking ship? |
|
|
|
|
I'm legit interested in this project, just do something cool and I'm here. I love proof of stake (definitely an improvement over proof of work in theory) and i love cryptonote. What do you guys have to prove that you are making advances in the space of bringing proof of stake to cyrptonote. I see a lot of promises and very little in the way of concrete advancement. Sorry for not doing exhaustive research, there are so many people promising so many things everywhere that i could never research all of the claims. A distillation in this respect would be greatly appreciated.
|
|
|
|
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. I have a feeling it will work out as you say. By now maybe 5? percent of DRK holders will have heard this news so I guess there will be a lot more dumping the coming week. Whales might try keep the price up at their own demise but not only would that be pretty stupid, also would it mean the majority of coins would end up in the hands of masternodes and a few whales. If the whales were to do that than they would be helping everyone who was rushing to the exits to leave without losing as much capital. If those people who were running to the exit did ultimately find their way here, it would be as if the whales had dumped their own capital into monero as well. That would be quite funny. |
|
|
|
Well. I submitted hodl to urban dictionary with the following definition:
hodl: A long term commitment to uncompromisingly retain possession of a thing without regard for any changes in sentiment or market conditions.
And the following example:
I know ill end up shooting myself in the foot if i try to day trade my bitcoins, so I'm hodling. I'll check back on price when it's time to retire.
They rejected it. I don't know why. If someone else wants to try to resubmit it, go for it.
That's an awesome definition! Why did they reject it??? I think I would change "thing" for "currency"or something similar, if you mention market conditions after. They probably rejected it because they didn't understand it. democracy  seems reasonable to people at the left side of the bell curve but eternally frustrating people on the right. Good definition! You can submit it to urban dictionary  haha ok i tried it, lets see if it gets accepted. it was accepted |
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
|
Anyone knows a legitimate way to short DRK when having 0 DRK?
A derivatives contract. You just put a bet out there, and see if someone else wants to take the other side of it. Go in the darkcoin thread and i bet you will find a bull who would take the other side assuming you offer him a greater return than he would get from simply holding dark. If someone takes you up on your contract than i would be happy to escrow for you guys. Check out my rep thread in signature. |
|
|
|
|
subscribing to this thread
|
|
|
|
Well. I submitted hodl to urban dictionary with the following definition:
hodl: A long term commitment to uncompromisingly retain possession of a thing without regard for any changes in sentiment or market conditions.
And the following example:
I know ill end up shooting myself in the foot if i try to day trade my bitcoins, so I'm hodling. I'll check back on price when it's time to retire.
They rejected it. I don't know why. If someone else wants to try to resubmit it, go for it.
That's an awesome definition! Why did they reject it??? I think I would change "thing" for "currency"or something similar, if you mention market conditions after. They probably rejected it because they didn't understand it. democracy seems reasonable to people at the left side of the bell curve but eternally frustrating people on the right. Good definition! You can submit it to urban dictionary haha ok i tried it, lets see if it gets accepted. |
|
|
|
What a great story! I'm so glad it had a happy ending.
Hank is afraid of femal coworkers for life and adria blamed hank for telling the world he lost his job and would do it again (the vibe I am getting at the end) OK... No one died, so it is a happy ending...  I was thinking more like, he has a job and she doesn't. Sweet sweet justice. As far as hank being terrified for life, perhaps he should have been terrified of woman all along and he just didnt realize the danger but now he has gained a perspective that is more in line with the real world. Fear is a good thing if it is rational. |
|
|
|
|
What a great story! I'm so glad it had a happy ending.
|
|
|
|
Less cool but still cool for all of the same reasons. Thanks. |
|
|
|
We're mainly interested in an improvement in overall complexity, and both schemes here are O(n). There is a sublinear ring signature paper that in O(log n) in size that we're looking at more closely.
I can't seem to find this paper. I found one that claims O(√n) but no O(log n). Anyone have a link? |
|
|
|
No way! That would be incredible. That would bring this project from secure and private to legit science fiction level anonymous. You could have hundreds or even thousands mixin partners. Correct me if im wrong but wouldn't this be the cypherpunk holy grail? Is it really within our grasp and just need "review"?
Would there be a decrease in mix-in costs as the available mix-in levels increased? No its just O(log(n)). Every additional mixin partner increases the size of your signature but less than the one before it.  look at O(log(n)) compared to other big o notations on this chart. Particularly look at it in comparison to O(n). Its a big difference. For example: If the limit(log(n)) < some reasonable signature size that can be affordably stored on the blockchain than you can use every single other key ever published on the entire blockchain to produce your ring signature. Infact if this were the case we could set a mixin minimum of like 1000 or something crazy. So in cost terms: if this is implemented, the costs of a 99 level mix-in would be less than the cost of a 99 mix-in as it currently stands? Correct? Probably. It's possible that this wouldn't be the case if n=2 in the new scheme were sufficiently more resource intensive than n=2 in the old scheme. But its highly unlikely that the difference between n=2 in the current scheme vs n=2 in the new scheme would be great enough to make mixin 99 in the new scheme cost more than mixin 99 in the old. Its a complicated way of saying that O(log(n)) only talks about the shape of the curve, it doesnt say anything about where that curve is placed on the graph. *edit* sorry that was needlessly complicated. yes. the answer is yes. i cant imagine that the authors of that paper would have even bothered to produce it if the answer were no. Thank you for the answer--enjoyed the complication. I was assuming a 99 mix-in would be located in latter parts of the O(log n) line for the sake of simplicity. Probably should have stated that. Ill need to look over that paper and see if i can understand any of it. Didn't bother yet because its too late tonight. Anyone have link? |
|
|
|
No way! That would be incredible. That would bring this project from secure and private to legit science fiction level anonymous. You could have hundreds or even thousands mixin partners. Correct me if im wrong but wouldn't this be the cypherpunk holy grail? Is it really within our grasp and just need "review"?
Would there be a decrease in mix-in costs as the available mix-in levels increased? No its just O(log(n)). Every additional mixin partner increases the size of your signature but less than the one before it. look at O(log(n)) compared to other big o notations on this chart. Particularly look at it in comparison to O(n). Its a big difference. For example: If the limit(log(n)) < some reasonable signature size that can be affordably stored on the blockchain than you can use every single other key ever published on the entire blockchain to produce your ring signature. Infact if this were the case we could set a mixin minimum of like 1000 or something crazy. So in cost terms: if this is implemented, the costs of a 99 level mix-in would be less than the cost of a 99 mix-in as it currently stands? Correct? Probably. It's possible that this wouldn't be the case if n=2 in the new scheme were sufficiently more resource intensive than n=2 in the old scheme. But its highly unlikely that the difference between n=2 in the current scheme vs n=2 in the new scheme would be great enough to make mixin 99 in the new scheme cost more than mixin 99 in the old. Its a complicated way of saying that O(log(n)) only talks about the shape of the curve, it doesnt say anything about where that curve is placed on the graph. *edit* sorry that was needlessly complicated. yes. the answer is yes. i cant imagine that the authors of that paper would have even bothered to produce it if the answer were no. |
|
|
|
No way! That would be incredible. That would bring this project from secure and private to legit science fiction level anonymous. You could have hundreds or even thousands mixin partners. Correct me if im wrong but wouldn't this be the cypherpunk holy grail? Is it really within our grasp and just need "review"?
Would there be a decrease in mix-in costs as the available mix-in levels increased? No its just O(log(n)). Every additional mixin partner increases the size of your signature but less than the one before it. look at O(log(n)) compared to other big o notations on this chart. Particularly look at it in comparison to O(n). Its a big difference. For example: If the limit(log(n)) < some reasonable signature size that can be affordably stored on the blockchain than you can use every single other key ever published on the entire blockchain to produce your ring signature. Infact if this were the case we could set a mixin minimum of like 1000 or something crazy. |
|
|
|
BID:
|
|
|
|
Well. I submitted hodl to urban dictionary with the following definition:
hodl: A long term commitment to uncompromisingly retain possession of a thing without regard for any changes in sentiment or market conditions.
And the following example:
I know ill end up shooting myself in the foot if i try to day trade my bitcoins, so I'm hodling. I'll check back on price when it's time to retire.
They rejected it. I don't know why. If someone else wants to try to resubmit it, go for it.
That's an awesome definition! Why did they reject it??? I think I would change "thing" for "currency"or something similar, if you mention market conditions after. They probably rejected it because they didn't understand it. democracy seems reasonable to people at the left side of the bell curve but eternally frustrating people on the right. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
