If the IPO ends at 15,000 bitcoin, you'll need a market capitalisation of about 30,000 bitcoin to be break even.

This assumes that the eventual supply around year 4 is taken into account on the free market (It probably will be) and also assumed around 25% inflation year 1 and less than that for each year after. The reason why it isn't less than 30,000 bitcoin is because of the founders share, if the founders share is massive then you'll need a lot more than 30,000.

This only really holds of course if the IPO ends at 15,000 bitcoin,

If the IPO ends at 40,000 bitcoin, you'll will need a market capitalisation of about 80,000 bitcoin for the investors to not lose money.

Litecoin is worth over 300,000 bitcoin, so put that into perspective.

However, IPO's always fall down in the first weeks of trading, so if you're a small fish, buying on the market after IPO will be your best bet. The larger amount you want to buy the more chance you'll move the market and end up paying more than IPO.

If you want about 50 bitcoins (or less) worth of Ether, you're going to get a good deal once this trades on the free market. However if you wanted 1,000 bitcoin worth of Ether, this IPO might be your best chance.

Also remember that even though Litecoin will fall from grace, the top spots are going to belong to increasingly competitive and useful coins, I'm not sure what coin will be number 2 to Bitcoin, I have bet on Monero because its utility is immediate and worthwhile. Ethereum could settle above Monero or close.

I think long term holders of Ether from this IPO will be safe, but the short term ride will be rough.

It's all about the market perception isn't it? At the moment Bitcoin is becoming more and more popular, with new businesses accepting it everyday. If someone started dumping even 3,000 bitcoin per day, would everyone start selling?

A rational actor has to run the logic; is the current selling enough to overcome Bitcoin's growing popularity and potential? Many people would in fact hold, because dumping might be the worst possible thing you could do. Once the price rises many large buyers (banks and governments) would start buying faster, because the days of cheap Bitcoin are over. This has to at least factor into your analysis before following the miners into a dump, most of whom are probably dumping in this scenario because of the need to pay bills and equipment costs, rather than for any major speculative reason.

No idea, perhaps Wolf will show you? He had a bounty going for a while I think. I think he has some of the most powerful private miners.

I don't think so.

I think he means this:

So no matter the current difficulty, if no blocks are found within 20 minutes, the current difficulty is set to 1.

Now if someone starts mining using TH/s of power, nothing will stop the difficulty rising from 1.

So it's not forced at 1 whilst people are mining, it's just a change applied once every time the criteria of {no blocks for 20 minutes} is reached.

I hope that explains it a little more.

I'm sure other miners exist, but no one is releasing them. There was a bounty to make an open source GPU miner for both Nvidia and AMD, but hardly any money went into the fund.

So for the display driver hackers, they can either make thousands of dollars in profit a day, or give the miner to the community to win a weak bounty.

For everyone in this thread complaining, put your money where your mouth is and make a massive bounty for a comparable open source miner.

This is out of my depth, but here are my thoughts:

A GPU is different from a CPU mainly because a CPU is fewer more powerful cores, and a GPU is many slower cores. If this is the main difference, then building a CPU only algorithm seems like an impossible task.

In fact this race to create a CPU only coins only serves to give display driver hackers a chance to get rich.

I'm not seeing any benefit to a CPU only coin.

Several people have already said that they know people mining with botnets, so botnets are likely a thing, however how much of a problem botnets are remains to be seen.

Also, I think that FPGA mining would be the best spot for us to be in. Anyone can get hold of a FPGA and the code can be loaded from an open source repo, much like today's GPU miners. However this might pull power away from CPU miners and end the constant FUD about botnets. Even if botnets are not a problem, FPGA's ending the perceived botnet threat would do Monero good.

Not really. People can save the old data, and even create a collaboration portal where blockchain chunks are uploaded to create an unbroken chain from day one for the purpose of reducing this coins anonymity abilities.

Let's make it simpler then.

If Monero ends up as a 50,000 bitcoin coin in two years, then buy around 0.0033ish, expect 0.01 if you can imagine a price of 150,000 bitcoin in two years.

I'm buying not because of Jesus (I invested well before rpietila talked about Monero) but because the development of this coin is strong and I am investing based on Monero replacing 3rd place minimum, and taking out Litecoin as a bonus.

Expect a price of 0.02 if Monero does take Litecoins place.

If you're buying because of magic numbers and technical analysis, I would suggest withdrawing your Monero and Bitcoin and try the local casino.

This coin will not do well if half the investors lose their money to large whale pumps.

Ok.


Some people hold, some buy, some dump.

The price moves up, or down, or stays the same.


I'm personally not a fan of technical analysis. I know rpietila has made millions from technical analysis, but most of us wont. I think day trading is for most of us, very close to hitting red or black on a roulette wheel.

Have you made any changes to the code that handles transaction broadcasts? If you have developer questions ask on IRC Freenode at "#monero-dev".

The chatroom is quite active and normally you'll get help pretty quickly.

Have a look at Monero. Currently there is no coin more anonymous.

I believe that BitcoinDark will achieve anonymity via routing transactions through Boolberry, Monero's competitor.

Becareful though, Boolberries creator is currently making very questionable modifications to the CryptoNote code. (CryptoNote powers both Monero and Boolberry) These modifications are debatable and mostly a marketing effort against Monero. Step with care.

1 - You  cannot change the final amount of coins after the social contract for a coin has been set in place. Once a coin is released that will mint X amount of coins then the wheels are set in motion, this is a basic principle that even Satoshi talked about. If the creator of this coin then changed the final amount of coins or changed the inflation amount after the coin has been released, they are effectively creating a premine. A premine is bad, it'll kill all legitimacy for this coin.

2 - If you don't like the inflation rate, please fork this coin and release it under a new name.

3 - The creator specifically wanted high inflation for a fairer long term useage. You're currently asking for something that is against one of the primary purposes of this coin. You need to research about what a coin's creator intended in their coin before complaining about one of its primary objectives.

I would have found this very useful for mining the other CryptoNote coins.

If you could make a pool that allowed me to save my balance on site until a new coin was listed on an exchange, and then transfer to the exchange, I would certainly use it, even if you charged a 5% fee for the convenience.

For example, if a new coin came out tomorrow called 'whateverCoin' and I could mine on your pool from day one, and then when 'whateverCoin' was listed on Poloniex for example, I then transfer all my mined 'whateverCoin' to Poloniex to exchange for Monero. Then I would use your service.

You would find that your pool would be the post popular pool for mined coins, and you could easily make a ton of money with a 5% fee.

So the miner of a new coin never even has to download the wallet to send the coins back, they can either mine with no account with an address to be like a normal miner, or they sign up and make an account to collect the new coin on your site until it gets listed.

Two options:

1-Like normal but with payment ID, they supply an address and payment ID, and until an exchange supports it they just send the coins to their own address.

2-Sign up for an account, so their mined coins stay on the pool until an exchange accepts that new coin.

How many coins are being mined per day? And this amount will be half in ten years correct?

Well good luck, on the topic of IPO's, I really hope that they come to an end. I am 99% certain you'll be able to buy Ethereum for way less than IPO once the free market kicks in for even large amounts of Bitcoin.

The IPO scene is really bringing down the entire community. I think their IPO will be a stain on Ethereum's name for years to come.

I think that CryptoCurrency will have such a profound effect on society that they may never decrease in popularity. I guess it'll be like the adoption curve of the internet, which is closer to the adoption curve of a religion than most technologies.

Most technologies rise and fall, with a few left over to pick up the pieces. Very few technologies, less than 1% actually carry on being used. I would argue that the Internet is an exception to the rule, and that CryptoCurrency will be the same.

I expect the set of {CryptoCurrencies} to be the dominant form of currency and commodity of which all things are priced and bartered against within the next 40 years.

Within this set I see only the currencies that keep on moving to actually compose a significant chunk of that total set.

If I were a large holder of Bitcoin, I would fund research into side chains and side trees, and then start a media campaign against the official form of Bitcoin and attempt a hardfork to a new Bitcoin that had the ability from that point onwards to assimilate all other coin technologies. I believe that these competing CryptoCoins are in a war with each other, a very competitive war. That is why I argued earlier that if Monero were to adapt to new threats, that we attempted to make this the coin that would fight back, then we might have a chance of being a large component of the set of CryptoCurrency in 40 years time.

I think Ethereum is on the right track, but I am not entirely sure their solution is the right one. If I am right, and the future is a pure CryptoCurrency that enables a computing platform beside it, then Monero could be that currency, and we could do it without needing any ability for advanced scripts.

I am not convinced combining the platform and currency is the correct solution.

The potential for Ethereum is so huge, the potential for Maidsafe is so huge, the potential for Bitcoin is so huge (side trees and side chains), the potential of zerocash is so huge, the potential of mintchip was so huge.

Beware, XC isn't the only thing with potential.

Also Monero has far better anonymity than XC, so you have to get people to build on your platform even though the anonymous abilities are not the best in the world.

Remember, getting anothers perspective is always advised.

Why are people replying to ice? He's always been an immature forum troll up to no good, I'm sure all he wants is attention, and you guys sure are giving it to him.

He lost a large amount of his own money on icedrill,  this is his way of venting.

Well I'm fine with Satoshi remaining anonymous. Exposing Satoshi does not sound like a good idea.