I'll upgrade it a bit because I was thinking more about price than market cap. Given continued emission the cap will likely be higher. I still don't agree with 80% but if you do believe that you should probably go close to all-in on it (unless you think DRK is even better I suppose)
I see DRK as more of a wild card. If nothing catastrophic happens, the price may be very high indeed. Thanks to the price reinforcing nature of the master node system, as well as the relatively low number of coins in circulation. I'm planning to hold a bit of each. |
|
|
|
By low I don't mean zero. That is important. I don't disagree for the most part with rpteilla's earlier comments about expected value (may still be high even if the probability of success is low)
But just because Auroracoin did something, doesn't mean any particular other coin is likely to do that.
This is not just a defensive statement to avoid fraud charges, it is my actual opinion.
I think you're overly pessimistic. If one year from now Bitcoin is at its current price or higher, I'd say the odds for Monero having a market cap of over $25 million are over 80%. This needs to be further qualified with the conditions that the database and GUI are done (the Monero client is stable and can be used on most computers by someone who isn't tech savy), and the team is continuing to work on Monero. Given the conditions I specified, I would say that $25 million is the low end! |
|
|
|
It's hard to light a candle, easy to curse the dark instead
Haha, very apt. |
|
|
|
Moderate to low.
Wow really? Even I would say the odds are high for Monero to exceed Darkcoin's current market cap. If garbage like Auroracoin went over $100 million, surely something that's actually useful can do better. |
|
|
|
Fluffypony, can you confirm whether a double spend is possible in Monero?
with 51% of hashrate is possible, same as bitcoin. So what was the double spend protection that he referred to on the previous page? |
|
|
|
|
Fluffypony, can you confirm whether a double spend is possible in Monero?
|
|
|
|
Objectively speaking none of these coins has much chance longer term, and the only real reason to pay attention here is interest in the technology. I think you are a little too caught up in the latest pump to see that though.
It is a nice sort of high to see the digits increase  I do acknowledge that crypto as a whole is an uncertain field. Who knows what will happen. It'd be nice to relax on a beach rather than toil at my boring job though. |
|
|
|
Did you tell them about the numbered items in my OP, and that the same person/people are still running the project?
My experience with investors (granted it is probably a slightly different audience than yours) is that they react to even questionable conduct on the part of insiders much the same way superman treats kryptonite.
No, as I didn't know about some of those until you pointed them out to me. But I basically told it from the worst case scenario, that it was 100% premeditated and an intentional way of securing more coins. Look, I get why you don't like it. You guys did it the honest way and you're losing to guys who (possibly) didn't. If I had to choose, I would hope that the honest team succeeds. But the world doesn't always favor honesty. I'm just doing what's best for my future when I invest in Dash. |
|
|
|
|
I'm a law abiding individual, so I don't really care about an illegal goods marketplace. But I am highly interested in a decentralized Ebay alternative for legal stuff. I hate Ebay so much. So fucking much.
|
|
|
|
That is not the only metric relevant to everyone.
BTW, if we come back and continue this discussion during a time period that the DRK price declined, does that mean suddenly people started caring about the instamine?
I think you would have to agree that it is difficult to attribute price movements to one particular factor or another.
Also, consider: If darkcoin were not saddled with this baggage, maybe it would be higher than it is now.
Yeah, I guess it is difficult to determine exactly what contributed to an increase or decline. But it looks like the overall sentiment for DRK is positive, despite your efforts. Perhaps, perhaps not. None of the people I pitched investing in Darkcoin to seemed to care much about the instamine. But then again, most of them had no prior experience in crypto. I actually made a point of explaining the Darkcoin instamine versus how Bitcoin was mined, and most just thought it was unfair in both cases. (Because they didn't get to mine from the start in either case  ) Anecdotal evidence, but it's pretty convincing to me. |
|
|
|
People just don't give a fuck.
Speak for yourself. You don't give a fuck. That's your prerogative. Other people do give a fuck, including some who have posted on this thread, and many, many more who have not. You guys have done your best in informing everyone on all the details of the instamine over the last week or so, and the price is up ~75 cents. You certainly haven't harmed it. At least not by the only metric that is relevant to me. Of course some people give a fuck, you and others with an interest in competing currencies. But in general, having an instamine hasn't really harmed Darkcoin. Once again, by the only metric that matters, price. |
|
|
|
|
We should have more of these discussions. The Darkcoin price is up around 75 cents after a few days of people accelerating their pointing out of the instamine. Maybe people agree with my assertion that an instamine is actually a positive quality.
|
|
|
|
1. Not holding an MSB license (FinCEN), involvement in a security unregistered with the federal government (SEC), facilitating the purchase of child pornography / drugs / firearms (FBI). They would seize the coins through rubber-hose cryptanalysis. 2. It would also make the network significantly slower - those MNs would have exclusively use Tor for everything, any normal IP connections would leak that they're an MN by virtue of them broadcasting Darksend TXs etc. Additionally, this doesn't prevent MN operator collusion etc. They can't seize the coins because they aren't held in a wallet on the machine/instance running the masternode. The best you could do by getting access to a masternode is shut it down. So you guys are paying your AWS machines with stolen credit cards - thats why you arent traceable? Some hosting companies accept Darkcoin |
|
|
|
1. Not holding an MSB license (FinCEN), involvement in a security unregistered with the federal government (SEC), facilitating the purchase of child pornography / drugs / firearms (FBI). They would seize the coins through rubber-hose cryptanalysis. 2. It would also make the network significantly slower - those MNs would have exclusively use Tor for everything, any normal IP connections would leak that they're an MN by virtue of them broadcasting Darksend TXs etc. Additionally, this doesn't prevent MN operator collusion etc. They can't seize the coins because they aren't held in a wallet on the machine/instance running the masternode. The best you could do by getting access to a masternode is shut it down. I think you need to click through to the Wikipedia link...  missed that one |
|
|
|
1. Not holding an MSB license (FinCEN), involvement in a security unregistered with the federal government (SEC), facilitating the purchase of child pornography / drugs / firearms (FBI). They would seize the coins through rubber-hose cryptanalysis. 2. It would also make the network significantly slower - those MNs would have exclusively use Tor for everything, any normal IP connections would leak that they're an MN by virtue of them broadcasting Darksend TXs etc. Additionally, this doesn't prevent MN operator collusion etc. They can't seize the coins because they aren't held in a wallet on the machine/instance running the masternode. The best you could do by getting access to a masternode is shut it down. |
|
|
|
There are plenty of now dead shitcoins that played games with supply. Supply tinkering != returns.
A possible corollary of your line of thinking is that someone could copy-paste XMR right now but with an emission-capping hard fork. The investors and the market should then naturally flock to this new chain. I doubt that will actually happen.
All other factors held the same, Monero would have been better off with an instamine than without one. |
|
|
|
So now you're basically letting it all out, and saying that you just care about making money. Asking for donations is useless idealism to you, so you'd rather instamine instead. Gotcha.
Darkcoin is gonna have a bright future with it's instamine, faulty masternodes, and terrific community spirit. (sarcasm)
I'm a pragmatist. I'm interested in being on the winning side. An instamine is a more effective way to fund development than voluntary donations, so I would actually prefer a coin with an instamine over one without one. Additionally, an instamine creates a large supply of cheap coins, which leads to greater potential profits. If Monero had an instamine, I would have probably invested sooner. |
|
|
|
We don't beg for donations, we ask - the same that bitcoin does.
Unlike Evan we are real men with balls who put their own money into this, without screwing others.
More useless idealism. I wonder how much consolation that will bring if you end up losing to Darkcoin? Nice guys finish last. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
