Some have murmured against the distribution, but nobody has offered any alternative parameters!
- Should I make a more top-heavy one with a smaller number of holders in the lower rungs? Or less top-heavy?
- Should it be wider so that there are more holders in both extremes and less in the middle? Or the opposite?
- Are there 100,000+ holders that I don't know of? (power law = yes)
I would be surprised if there were so many as 100k. The more I think about it the more I would guess your total is probably good, though I would also guess it will be multiplied shortly if the current trend continues. |
|
|
|
|
Thanks again for doing this Risto. It is a great service to the community.
I am not sure if my total was clear. I sent 35 previously and 20.01 today making 55.01. Or perhaps you chose not to include the earlier 35?
Also there is a trailing quote tag after the address you added.
I know this is a hassle. I wish I could help you manage it.
THANKS AGAIN.
|
|
|
|
I just sent 20.01 .01 was to cover the tx fee.  Willl post tx number here when the exchange posts it. I have previously sent 35 sometime in the month of June. I would have to look it up for proof... your call. cAPSLOCK 2014-07-17 A suggestion: Even though it's a couple posts down, you might consider including this in the OP: Donations for general developmentXMR: 46BeWrHpwXmHDpDEUmZBWZfoQpdc6HaERCNmx1pEYL2rAcuwufPN9rXHHtyUA4QVy66qeFQkn6sfK8aHYjA3jk3o1Bv16em viewkey: e422831985c9205238ef84daf6805526c14d96fd7b059fe68c7ab98e495e5703BTC: 1FhnVJi2V1k4MqXm2nHoEbY5LV7FPai7bb |
|
|
|
Ah. Sorry, I did not understand you than. That dll is isn't in that package.
Why not to create two packages on the site: with dll and without? It would be much easier for new users.
Also you need a good FAQ for new users.
The dll file has nothing to do with Monero. The guys talking about the dll file are intentionally trying to cause fear, uncertainty and doubt. |
|
|
|
After taking a good look at this coin I'm really wondering why this hasn't been picked up by Cryptsy yet...
They probably don't know how to implement it It is most certainly the fact the CN coins require implementation as well as the fact they are currently a support drain. Seems Poloniex and HitBTC are battling it out in the CN space. HitBTC added ALL the other CN coins. |
|
|
|
|
Looks like BBR along with ALL CNs are on HitBTC now
|
|
|
|
Has a subsidized draw been considered? A minimum block reward paid when the fees cannot meet that minimum? This could be a flexible way to allow the health of the economy and value of the currency have at least partial determination over the inflation. Perhaps this is exactly what has been discussed and if so forgive me as I am getting up to speed.
This is similar to adaptive block sizing, which applies a penalty for generating blocks over the median size. The cost of the penalty is supposed to be mitigated by the value of the fees. My opinion is that this will not work well. Such a mechanism doesn't work for this reason: miners generate their own blocks and include whatever tx they choose too, however the smaller the block, the less likely it is to ever be orphaned. If there was an overlay PoS network (like for MC2) you could try and enforce tx being included into blocks even at some level of reward penalty, but naturally miners will just include as many high fee transactions as possible without destroying any of their reward. Such a method of securing a blockchain is highly experimental and may not work for other incentives reasons (that's for the MC2 thread). As PoW stands now, miners are free to manipulate the transaction volume/fees volume in the network as they desire, and so subsidy penalties will not really work. I suppose this could also cause voluntary transaction fee payment to dry up a little as well. If the network will pay the "fees" through inflation then miners might nnot be so choosy. I think I mostly like the idea of a convertible subsidy which can even disappear if the network no longer needs it, but one that reappears when it is needed. I appreciate the fact you guys are struggling through this decision. I think it could be one of the most important fundamental choices to be made. |
|
|
|
I think honor is enough for kyu grades. For Dan levels, you should contact the treasurer in advance and he will give you something that resembles a satoshimessage (or whatever that identifies you).
Please the ones who already donated, post your sum and donation day. Earliest date takes preference in the listing order, and the sum of your all donations count towards a level.
I love the idea, and want to support the devs. It is very important. I especially love the 4th kyu prize. I am struggling with making my donations public. Some cognitive dissonance for me. But I want to play along. Perhaps I will make a single 1 time donation of a small amount publicly separate from my private support. |
|
|
|
How much is required to secure the chain?
Also - have we discussed the theoretical issue of levying fees for balances, since it's mainly the security of balances we need to protect, and not so much the security of transactions. (The easiest way to levy a fee on balance is naturally the creation of new coins, diluting all balances).
The quantity required is an open question, and it depends on the value of 1 XMR in 10 years time. If 1 XMR is $10k USD, then 0.1 could be very attractive. If it ends up at $10 USD, it will be very unattractive, but then the price of fees will be low so transacting on the network will be cheap and can be used to pay the miners if sufficient volume occurs. If the price of fees is high ($10k USD per 1 XMR), then a small subsidy like that will likely be essential in keeping the chain secure in my mind. Without a secure blockchain, the entire system will fall apart. In regards to the second question, the other way to do so is FreiCoin's system, which over time destroys the balance of all accounts equally through demurrage. The FreiCoin devs insist that this is totally different from inflation, but I haven't been able to follow that argument (and it diverges into a lot of economics I'm not well versed in). One thing we can do is make an official merged mined currency alongside Monero with exponential inflation, to provide a fiat-like adjunct that can one day be traded in a decentralized manner with a two-way peg. Has a subsidized draw been considered? A minimum block reward paid when the fees cannot meet that minimum? This could be a flexible way to allow the health of the economy and value of the currency have at least partial determination over the inflation. Perhaps this is exactly what has been discussed and if so forgive me as I am getting up to speed. |
|
|
|
Interesting! I was waiting for something like this  Subbing. I have donated some already. But will do more. Is there a way to verify donations with this privacy based currency or do we use the honor system? |
|
|
|
My take: XMR needs to bootstrap. It can't bootstrap if no one will take it. If it is inflationary, no one will take it. The only way to get people to accept an inflationary currency is to hold a gun to their head. Crypto has no guns.
I could not agree with this statement more. It is just another way the black swan of cryptocurrency is blowing up the way we understand finance. Folks keep trying to appy the limitations of current systems to this new one. I am curious what your thresholds are for it being inflationary/deflationary/stable. |
|
|
|
Speculation inherently runs the risk of being wrong. That's no excuse not to participate. Stop beating around the bush and make a price prediction, Stolfi.
A couple of months ago I tried issuing a daily ~20h prediction based on a hunch that I though might work (the "Chinese Slumber Method"). But in the end it was not significantly better than the trivial method "tomorrow the price will be the same as today". So my prediction for tomorrow at this hour on Bitstamp is 621.18 USD. Also for next year on this day, too. I will lay 10:1 against your prediction for Jul 16, 2015. Will bet up to 1 Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Results:
10,000 or more: 23 holders
1,000 - 10,000: 435 <=half of the XMR are owned by this group
100 - 1,000: 2,300
10 - 100: 3,000
1 - 10: 1,050.
Questions, comments, what parameters to change in order to get a more realistic calculation?
I wonder for the amounts of folks we see in the 1 to 1k realm... if you are right about your estimates this implies an escalating general knowledge about Monero out there. I have thought up to now it has been a fairly strong insider community. If we are starting to see any "mainstream" alt crypto interest it could mean the current price direction is somewhat sustainable. |
|
|
|
Hitbtc reminds me of Bter for some reason. Both good exchanges nevertheless.
I hold accounts at both and do arbitrage at times. I execute lots of trades. HitBTC is simply superior. They seem highly reliable, fast, and the overall fees are better. |
|
|
|
Estimate 1:
Parameters:
- Largest holding: 100,000 XMR
- number of holders: 6,800
- j value = 0.58
- power law: no
I don't doubt the other numbers but how did you extrapolate the number of holders? I was checking the poloniex accounts and estimated how many of them have bought XMR. Do you think the largest holding is realistic? It would have to be a guy that we know. Myself, I don't have nearly that many Yes. I would imagine that is possible. I think it is also (somewhat) possible a semi connected (to the project) botnet master might also have mined to keep rather than sell. If this is so they would be sitting on a possibly bigger holding. |
|
|
|
I hope this was sarcasm, as the sheer amount of abject stupidity in this post may bring this thread to a critical mass, creating a spacetime singularity, a void which will consume us all.
If that were possible your posts would have snuffed out the universe long ago. |
|
|
|
If you just want cheer leading, I will leave. (and I think that is best. Bye)
Oh goody. My favorite part is when you leave over and over again. I really do like you SM III. You know you and I may be related. Are any of your ancestors from the Appalachians? |
|
|
|
He was arguing against a constant % rate of perpetual mining rewards (a.k.a. debasement). He conflated this with the exponential growth of the value and adoption of the coin.
This is not at all what I read. I understood him to mean he favored a fixed constant block reward (ie 1 coin) as opposed to the exponential growth from a percent inflation (ie 1% total coins per x time). The "1 coin per" scenario keeps rewards flowing while effectively reducing the value of the reward via the greater total coins while the percent ends up ramping up the coin supply on an exponential curve. Was it not clear? |
|
|
|
Are Mintpal withdrawals coming through yet?
I did get mine finally. |
|
|
|
its pretty difficult for a whole community to be racist
what about germans? AAAAAAAAAND we did it! Congrats on bringing the troll straight down to it's inevitable end. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
