So, here is what's going to happen. In NXT, forgers decide what chain to forge on. NXT is all for decentralization. CfB is against a rollback, he said, but he sees not giving a choice to the community as a centralized decision on his part.That's why he's going to put a modified release for download, which rolls back the chain. If enough forgers download that release and forge with it and their chain is longer, then that chain wins and the hack is rolled back. If enough forgers stay on the old chain and keep it the longest, then the hack is not rolled back. That's how decentralization works in the PoS world. The equivalent in PoW would be 51% of the miners mining on the longest chain, it's same in PoS. Let's see how this drama unfolds  Right. This is exactly what decentralisation is. Like I was saying earlier in the thread. Coordination of peers/forger into a voting block is not decentralized. Not all Nxt holders will be involved in the decision-making process, and the smaller shareholders and retail partners will be alienated - even if such a measure reaches 51%. In the case of retailers, they could potentially face loses for services rendered or products sold. In view of that, what major investor or retailer would dare make any future commitments to Nxt if they know Nxt has a history of doing rollbacks? Would a major retailer be willing to offer a Nxt payment option to their customers knowing a rollback is a possibility? Exactly, going back in blockchain is an unwritten rule. It shouldn't happen. If this happens it clearly means that the miners which chose to do so act in a centralized way for their own private benefit(a real life revolution always has couple of central leaders without which the revolution would fail). The small miners will not have a choice. It will be mostly decided the by pools owners. Going back into the blockchain is a centralized decision no matter how you look at it and who takes part in it. Unless there is a major bug affecting all users, the rolling back shouldn't be an option. I do not get this logic - if a huge percentage of the forgers or whatever the fuck this is called in nxt decides to roll back, how is this a centralized decision? I think the proposal given is great - no matter how the forgers decide. |
|
|
|
Now we will see if NXT is decentralized or not rollback = centralized You're right! +100 ! to be fair - I like the proposal of cfb - if you think on a wider scale this could even be a feature. no more robberies possible |
|
|
|
|
thanks for your hard work - I was following the cryptonotes from the beginning here.
I think you are right regarding bytecoin and probably some of the merged coins.
What is and was hard for me to understand from the very beginning is the role of the cryptonote team. I have the feeling that there is a loose connection to bytecoin, but they are really interested in the development of their protocol. I was in their forum and it was full of high quality posts as well as serious discussions. Maybe you have better information but I do not think they are scammers, it is more likely that they are academics who are interested in developing the technology.
|
|
|
|
I smell a bet here....  have to think about it - if I only use xmr it is quite a win win  edit: maybe we can do it - give me 2-3 days. I do not have ltc but a few xmr. I am also an uberbull regarding xmr but I think this estimation is too optimistic |
|
|
|
|
progress regarding transparent forging?
progress regarding atomic cross chain trading?
difference to bytemasters dpos (?)
|
|
|
|
|
I was as well as brilliantrocket there when drk when you could buy 1k drk for 1btc - the projet was for a long time undervalued and then it rocketed, which was fine.
the point is: Evan was in a very early stage aware of cryptonote, even before monero started and at first he wanted to somewhat implement the technology due to its superiorty - I was very happy with that solution and it would have probably made all other cryptonotes useless. He finally decided not to implement it, which was in my opion the moment darkcoin died. He was aware of a superior technology and sticked to his half-baked solution for privacy - there are definetely on a technical level as well as on an economic level reasons for him not to implement: obviously masternodes and what he called economic policy would be useless, but he should as well as every educated member in the community be aware that privacy only works when it is as close to perfect as possible.
all the arguments that no one will care how it works are bullsh*t - you are not investing in a f*ckin television or a toaster where it really does not matter how it works. you are investing in a technology where the users are very sensitive to perfection.
I kept a very small amount of my initial investment in drk - but I think it will fail and the assumptions given by brilliantrocket are wrong for the reasons given above.
|
|
|
|
|
do you guys have an idea how to measure the diffusion/ distribution of xmr OUTSIDE of bitcointalk - I mean this baby is libertarians dream and I have the feeling that it is almost unknown outside of bitcointalk.
|
|
|
|
Why? Focus on getting your coin to usability, at some point volume will reach a critical mass and exchanges will add it. Focusing on more exchanges while your coin is still just a speculative vehicle just makes it look like your priorities are in the wrong place.
it is kind of an equlibrium - if it is not well distributed, coins usability does not help |
|
|
|
What no wallet? Centralized BS... dumped all already for great profits. Thanks + Theres 100,076,305,166STR  don't you guys think a tad overpized atm? LOL https://www.stellar.org/stats/ does anybody know in what timeframe they are distributed? |
|
|
|
|
good enough privacy for xx% of the population is from an economics perspective not an argument. in the case one transaction is decrypted the utility of the system is no longer given - if this happens to darkcoin it is a worthless system. this argument holds true for all anoncoins.
we had the discussion on the altcoin observer regarding the utility function (in the economic sense) of privacy - the consensus was that half-baked privacy is useless.
|
|
|
|
for some reason I did not receive my coins  in the memberlist there is no account-id beside your name.. maybe you should contact the devs to receive your coins thank you - quite irritating because I posted my account number in the locked nxtl thread - anyway this will probably be solved |
|
|
|
for some reason I did not receive my coins |
|
|
|
|
looking here and in the polo trollbox it looks like a concerted action.
but maybe I should join irc to see if there is something fundamentally wrong.
|
|
|
|
Regardless, XCN price was last seen headed towards the moon. Confirmed, the worshippers of the moon are active. +60% in 24h... moonstruck pump? now it is officially a pump and dumb. anyway gl - it needs around 50 btc daily to keep somewhat around 0.0001 the idea was btw quite nice |
|
|
|
is my calculator broken or is this 3 day old ripple fork traded at a total market cap of ~500.000 btc?
Nobody knows how many exchanges all trade Stellar so nobody knows the total market cap. there will be a supply of 100,076,310,226 stellar according to stellar.org |
|
|
|
|
is my calculator broken or is this 3 day old ripple fork traded at a total market cap of ~500.000 btc?
|
|
|
|
Monero to 0.1 when?
I think this (and beyond) is very likely if BTC loses steam. Monero has solidified its position as the #2 coin (note: shares don't count), and it is the natural successor. The scenario that would dethrone BTC, is its lacking privacy, and XMR has fixed exactly that. Without problems with BTC, I think the network effects favor that one so that 0.1 is a little too ambitious for Monero , similarly as Litecoin has never reached better than 0.03 except for a moment. there is one scenario I would like to discuss, I think the price for xmr can be higer (even much higher higher) under this scenario: even now I do not think that there is a better way to store value, in case you do not want anybody to know how much you have. the untraceability makes monero the dark store of value. I do not think that today you find something like that in the real world: it does not have weight, it is liquid, spendable, unattackable, untraceable and accessable everywhere in the world. maybe I am completely delusional but if this somewhat networks I think 0.1 will be really low. |
|
|
|
Este Nuno, kbm
It's not completely unreasonable. The alt-coins dilute the value of the accepted currency. In other words, when they are first created, they have a comparative trade value which over time is either endorsed or abandoned, just like a foreign paper currency on the monetary exchange. When a foreign currency implodes, it drags down the value of all the other currencies because that currency was traded away for realer goods, which raises their relative value against all currencies. We'll use BTC as the example for illustration:
A new crypto-coin is announced, it is mined and exchanged (ie: dumped) for BTC establishing a relationship of relative value. Now, what happens when that alt-coin dies? This is the downward pressure we see in the price of BTC. The closer we move toward a global economy, the closer we move toward a natural monetary monopoly and if the world population decides that crypto-coin will be the preferred medium of exchange, why is it unreasonable to assume that one surviving coin will be it?
So the statement then is more that bitcoin would be reserve currency. While I wouldn't mind that at all, due to owning bitcoin, I'd have to make the point that there are still massive political and physical barriers that need to be dealt with that people are still grappling with today (I believe BRICS just met and formed something to bypass the fed pretty recently). The only way the current reserve currency for the world got to its current place is with guns and resources. Crypto doesn't have guns. Who is going to support it as a world currency? There's no political affiliation therefore nobody is standing behind it with guns and resources saying it's going to be worth a lot throughout your lifetime. What does crypto offer? Lots of hopes and resources saying it's going to be worth a lot in my lifetime. No guns, or imposition of will. Only investors, and their word that it will be worth more next year. I'm not currently convinced that without some serious political endorsements (not just regulation - and more like the entire country of Argentina) that any of this will ever go anywhere unless some country with a metric shitton of both guns and resources happens to start using it. (edit: anywhere besides lowering transaction fees to almost zero -- that's still extremely valuable and was the main reason I've invested.) But which one of them would let themselves be at the mercy of the various mining hardware scattered across the entire world (mostly not in their control) that's required to get that sweet inflation in their money supply so they eventually don't have to pay $.01 for 50 loaves of bread? Who would be the first to jump on that train? This is the basis of my statement - nobody would voluntarily do that, they would make their own fork and run on that chain, where there would be a very large amount of niche-filling currencies. despites the technical superiority, the network is (close) to neutral from outer influence on a world wide scale. the monetary supply is known and (almost) unalterable and what is most important: it is neutral in that sense that the network does not mark your transaction - the moment this will be changed I am out. this is not some libertarian bullshit dream, this is the real value of this network and that is the reason why it has a huge potential. |
|
|
|
Opinions on Cryptonite, the first coin implementing mini-blockchain? Whitepaper here. Interesting that someone is trying to create something new for a change, but I feel like the PoW algo selection will make it BCN2 or BBR2 as there is/will be a private mining group with GPU miners whereas there's no hope of mining with a high-end desktop CPU. Maybe this won't be an issue as only half of the coins will be mined within the first 10 years, and you can't really mine with a 1 video card desktop anything anyway these days? Another coin forking from Cryptonite with an established PoW algo and miners and pools ready at launch could steal its thunder though, similar to BCN vs XMR. Who happens to mine these fungible coins is irrelevant. If other people want them, they simply buy them from those who specialize in optimizing and running miners, or trading. Cryptonite is a Very Big Deal, representing the third great innovation in cryptocash (minichains) after Bitcoin's blockchain and CryptoNote's ring signatures. Vertcoin's private addresses come close to making the list, in a distant fourth place. Proof-of-work may have been a candidate for fifth, but is made obsolete by minichains, so it loses to Primecoin's cool/trippy factor. Forget those other trash coins. All that matter right now are Bitcoin, Monero, and Cryptonite. (Litecoin is also valuable as a hot-swappable replacement in case Bitcoin breaks, ditto Namecoin and DNS.) It's fascinating how Monero and Cryptonite are fundamentally incompatible and splitting Bitcoin into private Monero and public Cryptonite niches, like a speciation event! Economically it makes perfect sense to remove Bitcoin's blockchain bloat to be more efficient for public transactions, while simultaneously putting other bloat to work by ensuring privacy for Monero. As I finish this post CN is nearing an ATH. Nice. Now just wait until all the kids realize they've been conned by their closed source and/or kludgey CLOAK/DARK/BLACK/XC FailCoins. See ya'll on the moon... Any other opinions on cryptonite? I have to admit that I share icebreakers point of view - that said, xcn is very young, buggy, quite expensive already. compared to other coins it offers something new which indeed has value and potential, but I also think that bitcoin can simply clone miniblockchains once they are proven (non-technical perspective). this is the beauty of xmr, there is quite a big niche which probably will never be filled by bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
it is getting somewhat rediculous regarding unfair launch - afaik the whole team of developers are holding together an amount of around 50k xmr; the otc started immediately; cryptonote shortly after then poloniex. I followed the project from the very beginning, maybe I am dead wrong but I do not think that there are miners who a) mined huge amount and b) hold them for the entire time.
same holds true for bbr, but in that case there was a miner with an unfair advantage, but he stated to dump anything above 10k bbr.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
