I did a little research, because mostly this price surge is argumented with DNM's getting in the currency, which i still do not believe. On Alphabay in median 1,9% 2737 are accepting XMR in drugs and chemicals from total 136877. On Oasis in median 6,9% 264 are accepting XMR in drugs and chemicals from total 3813. The last 0,018 hype on polo had over 100k BTC volume, with now residing somewhere at 0,014 with ~24k BTC volume. So if 3001 vendors are responsible for over 100k BTC volume, every vendor in median had to have ~33 BTC for playing wiht XMR, now somewhat around ~8 BTC each if every vendor is actively trading --> possible but not likely.Why, simply because these 100 BTC to 800 BTC buy walls would to have been built, in median, buy more than one vendor at the same time --> possible but not likely. Even if, let's say 10% of the active vendors are actively trading with the new XMR (multiply the figures buy 10) which i still do not believe, this would be more unlikely to happen at the same time on the same place. The lending figures intensify my claim and theory of a single entity playing around and making the market to the contrary argument of "natural" growth  Think about it  You are still not getting it (several others have replied as well): we most all agree this is speculation due to the DNM news. Obviously it has not (yet) seen any "real", "natural" use from that (or at least hadn't when the price started its crazy climb). Now, considering that, this claim: The lending figures intensify my claim and theory of a single entity playing around and making the market to the contrary argument of "natural" growth is still absurd. |
|
|
|
|
Councilman Luigi reporting in.
The plan is to open trading but leave the time paused, correct?
|
|
|
|
USB thumb drive...cheap...
I just bought a 128mb PNY at Walmart for USD 34, FYI. 2TB SATA-II, $509. Typo? 2TB spinning disk costs around $100 USD. Although a 2TB SSD around does cost over $600. 1 left...and it's gone. Spinning disks? Are those still a thing? You guys look at the 2TB SSD or HDD, while I can't help but focus on: 128mb I think you overpaid.  |
|
|
|
Well, when people say MOON, Rocket starting, the Darknet buys Monero now and so on, that's all a very optimistic sight of what is actually happening. Like mentioned a few posts earlier to this, insider information, large bags of BTC to play with, manipulating some markets --> plural (did you watch the other noname coins yesterday), is obvious. Of course i also would like to see XMR beeing the #1 cyrpto in the world used by everybody to do what everybody likes, but that is not the case, yet. This IS manipulation, maybe the cashout of the bitfinex hack, and that is obvious. If you tell me this is "natural" growth of XMR, i would like to discus your arguments guys What is "manipulation", really? What is "natural"? Of course a component of the rally is speculation due to the news on DNMs. I would even bet it is the largest component. These last few days are completely unprecedented in Monero-land; the correlation with the news is extremely strong. Is this speculation "manipulation"? There are of course other components as well. You seem to be assigning a high (nay, overwhelming) % to some other "manipulation" by those with "large bags of BTC to play with". The XMR market represents the current consensus on the price of XMR. Part of that consensus is "manipulation"; part is "natural"; part might be "other". No market participant is exactly like another. You do not and cannot *know* the intent of the market participants except yourself. You can thus only guess at what you think is going on. When you say in the affirmative "This IS manipulation", you declare that which you do not know. You request "our" arguments for "natural" growth, but provide none for "manipulation" beyond that it "is obvious". |
|
|
|
So, this artificial pump is over in a few days and XMR will have time to consolidate until December back to 0.0018 - 0.0024 I hope you guys are selling your coins and getting them back in December, because this was a Marketmakerpump starting with somewhat 1000 BTC and now ending slowly  How is it artificial? Care to provide proof of your claims? That said, I believe much good was achieved regardless of anything. It is possible that this was the first real upleg. Or even if we fall back, I believe 420k will now be a strong support. Even going to 180-240k, nothing new there. Not many thought it possible to revisit 100k, yet even that happened! The game is about how many you own and can keep in your possession. If you own 1000 BTC, you are well positioned, but it is expensive to gain that position if you start now. If you owned 1000 BTC five years ago, it is equally good as 1000 BTC now, only if you have managed to keep it from theft, hack, taxman, your own mistakes in storage, and most importantly from your urge to sell. Many reading this have 1000 XMR, or even much more. In five years, or less, it might have equal value as 1000 BTC now. Statistically, an extremely small fraction of people manage to do it, though. I believe it's prudent to budget in advance that half of the remaining coins are lost, every time the price rises x10. So the ones who wish to have the coveted 1000 XMR when the price hits $5k, should buy 10k now. Hmm... it seems that XMR is more mature now than BTC when I heard of it. It has 50 times higher market cap as well... Not much to add here. Why i believe this is an artificial pump by a marketmaker, is well explained by Risto already. Since XMR gained nearly 300% in value in a few days and seeing 100btc buywalls at 0,0080 on polo, i honestly can not believe in "natural" growth. The fallback will probably be as fast and deep as the upleg. You seem to be interpreting Risto's post very strangely -- verging on fantasy even. Risto is drawing the parallel to BTC in 2011 ie a pullback is still possible before another exponential increase. He advises the complete opposite of what you propose ie buy and hold rather than trade your holding away. And as Febo states, even your figures are wrong. Everbody reads what he likes to read, so nothing new to me. Interpret the writing as you like, regardless if it's Ristos or mine. My Figures are not wrong, weeks are filled with days, but i do not want to argue about peanuts. If it smells like a Marketmakerpump, it tends to be a Marketmakerpump Your figures are wrong. If you don't want to argue/defend them, correct them. A few days != a few weeks. Also, when using "gained", you should reference the correct number -- that is, 200%, not 300%. 0.003 -> 0.009 is a 200% gain. Of course there's a lot of irrational exuberance. There always is on large price rises. Trying to be a "voice of reason" while utilizing falsehoods is counterproductive, however. |
|
|
|
Will play as long as there is a game to play. While I'm tapped out as far as investment--I can contribute a couple hours a day to the project for as long as needed.
Would echo this. I'm still here. Still interested. I am surprised all the CON holders have not chimed in yet but maybe they are too busy basking in the XMR glow, enjoying their summer breaks. Hmm, I guess that's me. Months of no CON payments.  |
|
|
|
Clearly I have underestimated the force of this move. It appears as though stability will occur somewhere north of 0.01. I don't have enough info yet to estimate where. I gave up on market-making again, since these large impulsive moves are fatal to MMer profitability. Holding rather too much BTC right now, hoping for a dip.
Hard to get 'em back when the market moves wildly in one direction, eh? |
|
|
|
Ok thanks.
And why isn't this the same issue for other coins ?
I think Polo is just lazy WRT XMR; they don't sweep their wallet's dust and allow large withdrawals, and at the same time use a pretty hefty fee (higher than the average network fee for sure). Sweeping wouldn't reduce the actual costs though. As long as people make many small deposits and Poloniex doesn't impose any kind of fees on the deposit side (which aren't a standard in the industry so might be a tough sell) then those costs are going to be shifted to Poloniex or its trading and withdrawing customers. Guess which one Poloniex chooses? Paying higher than average network fees are another matter though. I have no idea why they do that. Oh, yes. I meant that to be an example of laziness rather than fee reduction. Random input selection plus tons of small inputs equals large transactions. I'm guessing 1,000 was chosen because they had withdrawals fail for being too large, i.e., some kind of shot-in-the-dark lowest common denominator. I bet with the new median from March most of those large tx issues are resolved. I re-reference laziness. |
|
|
|
...
Maybe you are thinking market cap? Price is not x40
When comparing different coins the relevant parameter is market cap, not price. The combined market cap of both Ethers is over 46x that of Monero. Yes, comparing price without accounting for supply is totally irrelevant and completely useless. Comparing market caps is somewhat more useful, with a large dose of caveats. |
|
|
|
Ok thanks.
And why isn't this the same issue for other coins ?
I think Polo is just lazy WRT XMR; they don't sweep their wallet's dust and allow large withdrawals, and at the same time use a pretty hefty fee (higher than the average network fee for sure). XMR itself has higher than average fees. This is mostly due to (1). disincentivizing spam/paying for block space, (2). anonymity not being free, and (3). Monero's price in fiat being at the upper end of its recent range. If its price continues higher, fees will be adjusted downward (measured in XMR). |
|
|
|
Lets not forget there are things called compression algorithm's as well if need be. I think the bloat bullshit is being BLOWN way out of proportion!  Yeah, we'll need this at the network level before we'll need it at the storage level, at least if comparing to Bitcoin. From what I've read, the higher priority for the Core devs hasn't been hard drive space, but network throughput. There needs to be various protocol solutions to maintain the network's decentralized state as much as possible and which don't rely upon a centralized relay network to propagate blocks sufficiently for the miners. The miners have already resorted to using a centralized block propagation system for profitability reasons. I suspect that as Monero becomes more popular, a similar situation will arise. While it's probably true that a decentralized network can never directly compete with the throughput of a centralized solution in this respect, there still needs to be an improved solution at the protocol level that's more thoroughly decentralized, if only as a fallback option. The BTC miners have been using the relay network for quite some time. Only more recently have decentralized solutions (Xthin/Compact Blocks) been released with comparable (but of course slightly worse) performance. Of course these solutions are not compression, and there's little hope for any meaningful compression anyway. |
|
|
|
Relevant comment from the ANN thread: Excellent. I could've sworn that they said it wasn't possible. Nothing wrong with promising less and accomplishing more, though.  This new functionality is in line with what was previously stated on the subject. Nice that it's functional now! |
|
|
|
|
1DRoMJM1s8xso6MciZzFsoSDLpGBmrzJin
|
|
|
|
Is it necessary for the global economy to implode for XMR to grow exponentially? Or will people be able to see the merits of fungible cryptocurrency without calamity?
Yes. Edit: Sorry I can never resist answering questions like this like that. |
|
|
|
My outlook for XBTUSD is up intraday for a while, then down through the weekend, to a new low for the week, probably below 640, where my order ladder lies. The implication for XMRBTC is favorable over the weekend, as XMR tends to USD stability during BTC fluctuations. I'm anticipating a daily high in XMRBTC on Sunday or Monday, and may sell into it with some fraction of my very small trading position -- too small to make a significant price impact, so don't bother trying: Almost all of my XMR was lost in a boating accident in 2014, and is unavailable to the market barring some heroic recovery.
Feel free to mock my predictions after they are proven false. Any sufficiently precise prediction is invariably false, so I won't feel bad about the occasional public whipping; as long as my long-term average privately demonstrates an edge which is scaled correctly to my trading risk, I will find some way to console myself.
No mocking has ensued. Now, does that mean you're more or less likely to be correct? |
|
|
|
Thanks, I missed that update from NoodleDoodle. Do you happen to have a source?
Yes. NoodleDoodle. Hah. Well, I actually meant if there's like a forum post or something offering more details on that. Anyway, cool to hear some news on that front. Nah, it was in a direct conversation. |
|
|
|
i would like to donate to the devs working on the Trezoro. can you please point me to the devs names or their groups' donation address?
thanks!
It's just NoodleDoodle's work. I can ask if he'd like to accept donations for it. He said he doesn't want to release the source for the current version with RingCT coming so soon tm. Thanks, I missed that update from NoodleDoodle. Do you happen to have a source? Yes. NoodleDoodle. |
|
|
|
Just stopped by to say hi I have enjoyed the summer break, and the opportunity to reset. Development is going on by the wizard all the time, and I will re-join active duty soon as well. Post your greetings here likewise! Aloha! Your pic makes me happy Hello, YM. Glad to hear all is well. |
|
|
|
i would like to donate to the devs working on the Trezoro. can you please point me to the devs names or their groups' donation address? thanks! It's just NoodleDoodle's work. I can ask if he'd like to accept donations for it. He said he doesn't want to release the source for the current version with RingCT coming so soon tm. |
|
|
|
I didn't say it is dead, i'm saying theres nothing special about it, no pump potential be it artificial or well deserved. No chance to be used alongside bitcoin, or after it dies, because it would have to wait in a really long waiting line. So, it's good only for speculation, but unless youre a day trader, i dont see why would you invest in it. It's like investing in trumpcoin, no real profit potential unless theres a blatant manipulation and you exit in time.
Another demonstration of a lack of understanding of fungibility and the fact that Monero (and some of its cryptonote family members) are the only functioning fungible* cryptocurrencies. * - caveat of blockchain temporal association and ip broadcasting problems. The latter easily fixable with i2p, the former somewhat fixable with RingCT and maybe some better output selection algorithms? I speculate that someone has a really good solution to this problem and aint telling anyone. RingCT almost perfectly fixes that, since only one output per tx goes to a single destination. Better output selection now could also diminish the effects significantly. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
