The new database doesn't store the data all that compactly. Some amount of extra space being used is reasonable to improve performance but the 9+ GB does seem a bit excessive and is something we plan to look at in the future. BTW the 5 GB isn't that efficient either. If someone has an export file they can report on the actual size of the blockchain. It's smaller than both of those.

You are right there are a lot of different arms of the Monero ecosystem and different on-ramps for development. We also have people making crowdfunding pitches. Right now that is somewhat centralized in the sense that it goes through a forum (though still decentralized in the sense that any developers and sponsors are eligible), but who knows in time that can perhaps be done in a more decentralized manner too.

In a lot of ways I feel that the sustainability of a project and its associated community matters more than it's current feature set. We all know every viable coin will be quite different in five years than today. Arguing about today's feature set and implementation is silly.

You make some good points that there is no one silver bullet feature. I think few if any would disagree with you on that. Coins and projects each have to find their own way and deliver value to users. Thank you for pointing out the new CT feature in Bitshares, I don't think I was aware of it.

I'd draw a picture for the laymen.

Without CT

A ---- 3.1 BTC ----> B

With CT:

A ----- ?? BTC ---> B

There is no difference in terms of tracing.

Not completely. It deliberately includes some extra coins in the transaction and then sends them back as change. You can't tell which outputs go to the recipient, so you can't identify the amount. Some sort of range or candidates can be inferred.


Neither A nor C address tracing at all. Every connection in the blockchain is still 100% visible.

Read what Greg Maxwell and Blockstream has written about transaction metadata, since they invented the thing. CT doesn't solve it.


As I said they are not comparable. Neither is more anonymous than the other in any objective mathematical sense. You are entitled to your opinion as to qualitative superiority of course.

The problem seems to be disconnection. If your connection is really good and you never get disconnected from the pool then it is fine, but once you get disconnected it can't recover. Wolf posted a few messages back he will be working on it.

CT plus stealth is not "more anonymous" than Monero. Mostly the two aren't comparable (both do something the other doesn't), although Monero is arguably somewhat more anonymous, as I will explain.

Privacy/anonymity consists of:

A. unlinkability (can't tell two transactions are to the same recipient): stealth (or just not reusing addresses)
B. untraceability (can't trace paths between tranasctions): ring signatures (or coinjoin, coinswap, though with many complications and hazards, etc.)
C. content privacy (can't see amount being spent): CT (or limited ambiguity of which outputs are change)

Bitshares with CT gives you A and C, but nothing at all for B. Monero gives you A and B, and somewhat C (via ambiguity of change outputs). Monero with ringCT will give A,B, and C, for a comprehensive solution.

Sure, there are a bunch (thousands if you want to be technical about it). Decrits and eMonie are vaporware. You won't find them on a list of actual coins so I ignore them. Not very good as names either. eMonie slightly better maybe. Ethereum I think is pretty bad. As a platform name if targeting developers, it is maybe okay, but as coin it seems terrible. People don't want their money to be ethereal. Huge wtf. Counterparty. Blah. Too descriptive of their asset token orientation. I mentioned Nxt I think (included within totally generic names that evoke nothing). Most of the rest are just terrible. e-anything is about as bad as "coin" and "bit".

You can try #aoencoin IRC on freenode. Sometimes moneromooo is on there and perhaps he would have time to help, but no guarantees. You can get on via the web interface here if you don't have an IRC client: https://webchat.freenode.net

You asked which coin had the best name, not what is the best possible name.

If you eliminate coin- and bit-based names there aren't really that many left.

Ripple, Stellar, Dash, BitShares (I think "shares" is also a terrible base for a coin name), Nxt, TRMB (wtf?), Getgems, etc.

Some of these have some merit as names sure, but none of them are great.

Ripple is actually one of the worst because it is derivative of the original ripple chained IOU concept which has little to nothing to do with the current system. It's actually confusing to people who have no idea what rippling has to do with it. At least most of the rest are starting out neutral (so any meaning would have to be established via brand development).

Please try to avoid personal attacks. I didn't create the plurality 13 votes from people who are "not interested in your shit" (your words), I merely noted it.

As you say code talks, and bullshit walks. Where is your code?

Why are two threads and one or two polls (I don't remember if the other thread had a poll too) needed just to discuss them name of your vaporware coin that doesn't exist?

The point is there were already chained hash algorithms. On another thread someone posted a chronology. It is disputed whether the other 11-hash variant (with the order of one of the eleven hashes swapped) was before or after Dash, but it is not disputed that there were certainly other chained hash algorithms before x11.

I don't disagree about whether choosing SHA256 or Scrypt would have produced different results, and perhaps using a multi hash was a great decision. That doesn't change the fact that claiming a change to the number of hash algorithms and/or their order as an invention is a huge stretch.


My comment was in response to a posted list of mostly technical (at least to varying degrees) items. On the separate question of whether growing an maintaining projects and communities is also important you will get no argument from me.

But realistically it is also pretty pointless to build a project and community if the technology is no good. That has to be the foundation or the emperor has no clothes.

I agree but "Inventor of x11" is in the thread title like it is a major accomplishment. I didn't put it there.

Opinions differ on which of the other items are worthwhile and which are snake oil.

Yes because changing the number of hash functions is fucking brilliant.

WTG Evan!

"Inventor of x11"

The airdrop was bullshit. As he proposed it was going to pay 2 million coins to an address that he controlled, which he would then distribute as he saw fit. Use your imagination. Read up about how other airdrops like Stellar have turned into massive scams.

Yes if you create three new threads a day you are usually in your own thread.

What is that thread spamming accomplishing?

Now that I think about it, I wonder if you were Moneroman88 after all. We know you do like to create new nicks and spam threads.

I'm not sure what you are even talking about. You seem to be foaming at the mouth a bit. There are 13 votes for GTFO in my screen shot and 13 now.

Build a coin, and come back. Your credibility can be rebuilt. Now you just seem like a thread spammer. Moneroman88 2.0.

This forum means nothing in the bigger picture.

Furthermore you are a nonconformist, so something becoming popular (say within this community) is a negative to you. Most people in the world are conformists, making popularity self-reifnforcing. As a successful marketer you know this, but you are allowing your personal feelings to intrude in this instance.

Anyway, I don't necessarily think that Monero is the best possible name, but I don't know of an existing cyptocurrency name that is better, and looking down the top 100 list, I don't see any, other than possibly Bitcoin within the context in which it was created (no other such coins existed).

The reason for running out of money and the pressuring was being almost a year late with little to show for it. The release wasn't what hurt the project, the release was the result of the project being run into the ground by mismanagement.

Also, ETH has nothing to do with XMR. Stop reverse trolling, it's blatantly obvious.

Nobody's controlling anything. A lot of people are telling you to change your approach in that poll. Ignore them if you like, but don't kill the messenger.

It is probably Monero. The only objection it ever gets is from English speakers (mostly Americans I guess) who don't like that it sounds foreign, like a Taco chain or something. Other than that little bit of xenophobia, it is nearly perfect in that it evokes money in many languages and doesn't sound too geeky nor like a rip off (aka every ___coin after Bitcoin). Bitcoin isn't bad though, considered on its own.