Remember that the Rouen-RWWC windows auction DL is tomorrow noon.


Concerning University

We have decided that dwelling in bad memories is not the healthy way to go on. The University has a glorious future, and it is outlined as follows:

- The University will consist on private colleges, which may be incorporated or not. The accumulated SCI and CUL points will come to the owners directly. The benefit of being part of the University is additional points, resulting from the atmosphere of free sharing.

- The Borough 3 "Culture&Science" will be the site of the new University, with colleges scattered around wherever they find nice places. The University colleges are exempted from tax "haw". The King will arrange with the landowners that the land can be acquired at beneficial terms provided that the college is founded and starts operating without delay.

- The increased accountability and ownership is hoped to greatly increase Cul&Sci production, and boost the Borough 3 to become a green haven of free thinking and application, while increasing the commerce there as well.

- The existing college of Military Science reverts to the Army management and stays part of the University. School of Economics joins the University. Both are ineligible for bonuses based on the location in the Old Town.

- The Character University continues as the coordinating body, but its property is liquidated and reverts to the donators. The donators must file a claim in 3 days.

- The liquidation works in kind, eg. if stone was donated, stone will be given back. The year of donation does not count and interest is not paid. If the claims exceed the holdings, the loss is prorated.

- The position of Chancellor is open due to resignation. In the new model, Chancellor is still required, and his qualifications include storytelling ability and ability to coordinate the scientific efforts (soon, there will continuously be a host of new advances that people strive to unlock, and alliances can be made to share the profits - even competitive and/or proprietary advances may be open for research). I very much know the small number of current players and their insufficient time available to delve deeper into the game, but I also seek to compensate the ones who nevertheless do it. The Marquess Smooth is very eligible to apply the position if he feels the new coordinator/negotiator role fits better than the old fundraiser/micromanager.

The full potential of crypto is the replacing of fiat.

If we suppose that TPTB does not embrace private crypto, it is not likely that people who serve them will embrace it. This reduces the potential by 99%, yet leaves 1%.

That 1% is however wealthier on average, let's say 100k USD per person (world wealth divided by people is about 50k). From my own experience, holding ~50% of net worth in crypto is very much in the comfort zone. So that makes it 50k * 70 million = 3.5 trillion USD of wealth to be stored in private crypto.

The interesting thing is the process: as these people buy in, the old world money comes to people that already are in the new economy, increasing their wealth. With the wealth effect factor of 4...10 as previously postulated, we can conservatively estimate that 10 trillion USD marketcap would correspond to the dynamic "end state" where all people who want the new money have totally converted into it.

That would make about 500,000 USD/XMR.

This is the potential. The potential is not to beat DRK or beat BTC. It is to become free of debt money slavery, together.

I think it is not an unrealistic goal. If this is not the goal, why are you wasting your time?  

"Real economy" as a predictor of the value of a "money" is a total fallacy.

Study gold. It does not have an appreciable real economy, and measuring its flows is difficult and obscure based on the paper gold charade.

Same with XMR, or BTC. The market cap is based on the willingness of people to hold. As with gold, I actually could not care less if it is directly spendable. Perhaps I have to say it again, since it is important: I could not care less if I can spend my BTC/XMR on stuff.

As long as it is alive, it has value, and then it has a price, and then I can hoard/dishoard it. That's it. By definition, I can always do what I want. If it is better value to convert XMR to another form before spending it for goods/services, it is just a practicality. If I can pay directly, it is just a practicality. Either way, it does not really affect my propensity to hold, and holding (alone) gives money its value.

I believe the qualities of XMR are such that when people just learn about it, they are willing to hold it. The more they hold, regardless of wallets, regardless of spending opportunities, the higher the market cap.

Monero stands out among all the cryptocoins with such a margin currently Just "waiting" (=continuing the good work) and letting the bigger numbers convert based on the merits of Monero, is a valid strategy when you are in such a good position as we are.

The battle is in and about people's hearts and minds.

It is not even possible to comprehend the extent of brainwashing, except to the degree you have been delivered from it. I am more delivered than the most, so I also see more than the most. And I don't like what I see, it makes me sad and angry. Feels like young Moses

I have been in a friend-gaining crusade lately, because people living in the U.S. typically appreciate me and thank me wholeheartedly when I exhort them to MOVE THE FUCK OUT OF THAT SICK PLACE WHOSE ADMINISTRATION IS VISIBLY AND IRREPARABLY REPLACED BY NON-AMERICANS WITH INSANE AND DANGEROUS VALUES AND GOALS. BEFORE THEY PHYSICALLY FINISH YOU.

Well, I wish.

Regardless I can't go to sleep without at least warning you. Read my latest posts for reference.

Of course they do. And simultaneously don't

A typical bank might have $100 billion deposits and $100 billion borrowed from the money market. It has $190 billion in loans and has a reserve ratio of 5%. As long as the loans are not bad, this is called a "healthy" bank even though it is insolvent if all depositors wanted to cash out. But they don't and cannot (if nothing else, because such amount of cash does not exist).

It is only considered a really insolvent bank if the amount of bad loans is higher than the reserve capital. Important to remember is that there is no difference in function between a "healthy" and an "insolvent" bank - both work exactly as well, and neither can ever pay the depositors at the same time.

In a way, because the economy was so successful that the banksters went desperate in their foment for war, and succeeded.

Cf. now - Internet and knowledge economy is such a success that there is no other way than go full berserk using the main bankster tool USA as the main terror engine.

The golden age of mankind in my understanding was about 1870-1912. The prices were not stable, there were +/- 30% moves annually based on natural factors, but the trend was that money (gold) gained purchasing power about 0.5% per year.

Since that is pretty much the only period in history when money has gained purchasing power, and I also happen to hold it as the best and most worthy of imitation, I also support the idea that money should increase in value.

It of course increases in value only if the economy using that money grows faster than the money supply.

What happened is that:

- A bank is an entity borrowing money from the markets and from depositors, and lending it to businesses etc
- It was believed that some banks were insolvent, ie. could not liquidate enough money from their lending side to cover their borrowing side
- In this case law says that it should at least be tried, and if not enough money is gotten, bank goes belly up and depositors and markets lose a part
- What was done is that it was not even tried, and one part of the bank's creditors (depositors) were just robbed of their money, to ensure that the other part (markets) could be made whole. The debtors were not touched.


It is only a test to check if people have a semblance of financial sanity left, expressed by global indignation and refusal to submit to it even one more time, and BTC price exploding because no one will trust in any bank.

It is like a pink flashing puma-like flying object that explodes in the air and the ripples find their ways to everybody's (who is not smoking a cigar) head, smearing them as if it was bubble gum. If people just shrug, even crazier things will happen next time.

I am sorry that your explanation did not inspire confidence to invest in it. Despite my totally non-tech background, I know reasonably well how Monero operates, and it should not be impossible to gain the same understanding from emunie, although not from that explanation 

Let him explain

People don't share their bearish insights before they first adjust their own position.

The magnitude of beartalk has increased by the day, and price has also declined. My occam's razor conclusion is that the slide is caused by people selling, and the increased beartalk is a reflection that they are short (either net short, or short of their base position).

The increased beartalk therefore equals to less chance of continued decline, all other things being equal.

Ironically, BTC's success is ensured by TPTB now. 

It's quite difficult to reconcile such opportunity with the influx of VC money. There is always a trickle of VC's or such funded companies who "cheat" and put a small or big part to BTC itself. I did that with all my companies in Feb 2013, nobody complained. (And probably soon the same with XMR.)

Because it's common knowledge now that BTC ownership can retroactively be made 99.95% public, I think the oldies are a little hesitant in buying more, since they don't yet see the prospects of exiting safely. I quit my trading a year ago largely for this reason. Who wants to incur unknown and undeniable liabilities in the hands of the taxmasters and the lawmaking apparatus? Not many. People are not that brave yet.

I will repeatedly ask you to concentrate on the truth, and that alone. Concentrating on people makes you vulnerable to the manipulation by media, and you will end up very confused. Of course all they do is to manipulate the truth as well, but it does not take much to see through it, and once you expose a few lies, you are not prone to believe anything else from that bunch anymore.

People are more complex. They have different opinions and lifestyles, and the controllers love to distort the public images of messengers.

If I am labeled "extremist" the problem resides wholly on the receiver side's poor understanding of history. As recently as 100 years ago it would have been inconceivable that United States tortured and raped worldwide, and confiscated citizens' property at gunpoint for the reason that it could be 'equitably shared', in plain English: domestic terror and looting under the color of law.

As recently as 100 years ago anyone supporting and propagating such actions would probably have been lynched after capture.

Now a person who rejects and utterly disdains such practices, is called 'extremist', driven out of the country, webpages censored.

H E L L O   W O R L D ,   W H O   I S   T H E   E X T R E M I S T   H E R E  ?

Wikipedia links to it.

Nevermind, the point is not to direct more attention to the few messengers, rather make people who are capable (and most are not) to question this with the old question: "Is it true?"

This has arrived safely! Looks wow

How does it work (mods - again please allow 10 lines)?

I like it when a soon-1-year-old plays so bossy towards a more-than-1/2-year-old