... Given the spectacular failure of the Gavinista Reddit Army's rabble-rousing populist assault on 1MB, I'd say BTC's block size limit is firmly "in the realm of software, outside of human hands." Due to the nature of antifragility, the 1MB limit is now more set in stone than before the (adversarial) attempted XT governance coup began.  I'm very happy both approaches are being experimented with, as Monero's dynamic approach and BTC's static variable compete in the Darwinian/meritocratic marketplace. My bet is with Monero's dynamic approach. |
|
|
|
Very interesting article on the Bitcoin blocksize issue by Jeff Garzik and Gavin Andresen. https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitcoin-economics-are-changing-1451315063 No mention of Monero but the following quote near the end of the article is very significant. And finally, to remove long term moral hazard, core block size limit should be made dynamic, put in the realm of software, outside of human hands. |
|
|
|
haha.......evan duffield tried to kill dashcoin for its name by paying dashcoin dev to fuck off. well dashcoin is still alive because of decentralization...evan created confusion. this is outdated and wrong dashcoin is not POS + POW the supply is not 184 billion it is 18.4 million Dashcoin [DSH] is a textbook example on how de-centralized virtual currencies are supposed to work, and why the developers are not administrators as per the FinCEN guidance. https://www.fincen.gov/statutes_regs/guidance/html/FIN-2013-G001.html, They also cannot be issuers of the coin as a security. Other good examples are Monero (The takeover from thankful_for_today) and of course Bitcoin (The two sides on the blocksize debate). Market capitalization is not critical here given the wide range of capitalizations of the examples above. What occurred with Dashcoin is that the Darkcoin Foundation attempted to buy Dashcoin as if it were a centralized virtual currency in order to become its administrator, as per the FinCEN guidance. The original intent was to shut it down. The motive for this was that they needed the common law trademark rights associated with the word dash for a trademark dispute with a third party. There was even an investor in the then Darkcoin who figured on purchasing 51% of all Dashcoins in order to "control" Dashcoin as if it were a company. His motivation was to protect his investment in the then Darkcoin after the failed takeover attempt of the Darkcoin foundation. The key here is that both of these attempts to turn Dashcoin into a centralized virtual currency failed, despite the minuscule capitalization of Dashcoin. |
|
|
|
I'll focus on a side point, since I have no clue why the windows version would silently die: 2015-Dec-31 17:43:17.718750 WARNING: no two valid MoneroPulse DNS checkpoint records were received
That is odd. Can you ping checkpoints.moneropulse.co, checkpoints.moneropulse.se ? If you have dig, what is the output of: dig -t TXT checkpoints.moneropulse.co dig -t TXT checkpoints.moneropulse.se If you have another DNS tool to run on the same machine bitmonerod runs on, you can use it instead to query the TXT record for these two hosts. I go the same error on version v0.9.0.0-release running on Ubuntu 14.04 and Trisquel 7 Here is the dig output: $ dig -t TXT checkpoints.moneropulse.co
; <<>> DiG 9.9.5-3ubuntu0.6-Ubuntu <<>> -t TXT checkpoints.moneropulse.co
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 21580
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 9, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 3
;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;checkpoints.moneropulse.co. IN TXT
;; ANSWER SECTION:
checkpoints.moneropulse.co. 600 IN TXT "450000:4d098b511ca97723e81737c448343cfd4e6dadb3d8a0e757c6e4d595e6e48357"
checkpoints.moneropulse.co. 600 IN TXT "250000:f59d31839bd909ec8830b4f7f66ff213f0bd006334c8523daee452725e5c7a79"
checkpoints.moneropulse.co. 600 IN TXT "300000:0c1cd46df6ccff90ec4ab493281f2583c344cd62216c427628990fe9db1bb8b6"
checkpoints.moneropulse.co. 600 IN TXT "275000:c003a351a091d30c769edce5005d3fc4cfca95a841f7189584e2c3f93cc7281a"
checkpoints.moneropulse.co. 600 IN TXT "350000:74da79f6a136969abd6364bd3d37af273c408d6471e8ab598e80569b42415f86"
checkpoints.moneropulse.co. 600 IN TXT "325000:4260d56368267bc2a70dd58d73c5ecf23b4e4d96e63c29a868e4a679b0741c7f"
checkpoints.moneropulse.co. 600 IN TXT "400000:1b2b0e7a30e59691491529a3d506d1ba3d6052d0f6b52198b7330b28a6f1b6ac"
checkpoints.moneropulse.co. 600 IN TXT "233000:4f69bec2af6c0852412bdd10c19e6af10c8d738fe2618b5511a98efd03ab477e"
checkpoints.moneropulse.co. 600 IN TXT "375000:c80c23e387585e12ffb6649d678e9ba328181797b9583a6d8911b77e25375737"
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
MONEROPULSE.co. 3600 IN NS TIMEWARP-AGAIN.MONEROPULSE.co.
MONEROPULSE.co. 3600 IN NS IS-IT-TRUE.MONEROPULSE.co.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
IS-IT-TRUE.MONEROPULSE.co. 5866 IN A 216.69.185.52
TIMEWARP-AGAIN.MONEROPULSE.co. 5866 IN A 208.109.255.52
;; Query time: 390 msec
;; SERVER: 127.0.1.1#53(127.0.1.1)
;; WHEN: Sat Jan 02 22:05:17 PST 2016
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 909
$ dig -t TXT checkpoints.moneropulse.se
; <<>> DiG 9.9.5-3ubuntu0.6-Ubuntu <<>> -t TXT checkpoints.moneropulse.se
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 4548
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 9, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 3
;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;checkpoints.moneropulse.se. IN TXT
;; ANSWER SECTION:
checkpoints.moneropulse.se. 600 IN TXT "275000:c003a351a091d30c769edce5005d3fc4cfca95a841f7189584e2c3f93cc7281a"
checkpoints.moneropulse.se. 600 IN TXT "375000:c80c23e387585e12ffb6649d678e9ba328181797b9583a6d8911b77e25375737"
checkpoints.moneropulse.se. 600 IN TXT "250000:f59d31839bd909ec8830b4f7f66ff213f0bd006334c8523daee452725e5c7a79"
checkpoints.moneropulse.se. 600 IN TXT "350000:74da79f6a136969abd6364bd3d37af273c408d6471e8ab598e80569b42415f86"
checkpoints.moneropulse.se. 600 IN TXT "233000:4f69bec2af6c0852412bdd10c19e6af10c8d738fe2618b5511a98efd03ab477e"
checkpoints.moneropulse.se. 600 IN TXT "325000:4260d56368267bc2a70dd58d73c5ecf23b4e4d96e63c29a868e4a679b0741c7f"
checkpoints.moneropulse.se. 600 IN TXT "300000:0c1cd46df6ccff90ec4ab493281f2583c344cd62216c427628990fe9db1bb8b6"
checkpoints.moneropulse.se. 600 IN TXT "450000:4d098b511ca97723e81737c448343cfd4e6dadb3d8a0e757c6e4d595e6e48357"
checkpoints.moneropulse.se. 600 IN TXT "400000:1b2b0e7a30e59691491529a3d506d1ba3d6052d0f6b52198b7330b28a6f1b6ac"
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
moneropulse.se. 3599 IN NS is-it-true.moneropulse.se.
moneropulse.se. 3599 IN NS timewarp-again.moneropulse.se.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
is-it-true.moneropulse.se. 74110 IN A 216.69.185.52
timewarp-again.moneropulse.se. 74110 IN A 208.109.255.52
;; Query time: 1107 msec
;; SERVER: 127.0.1.1#53(127.0.1.1)
;; WHEN: Sat Jan 02 22:06:32 PST 2016
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 897
|
|
|
|
Wow, nice! This is nice starting out my new year reading about the release! When I get home Ill be sure to start setting up the new rig set up. This is definitely going to be an exciting year for monero I believe, but not anything astronomical. I mean technically were still in the 2010/2011 phase in terms of Bitcoin, and believe we will see a similar pattern on adoption now that we have made everything official with helix.
Yes I agree. Monero at this point is very much like Bitcoin in late 2010 / early 2011. Helix is laying the foundation for a lot more exciting things with Monero. |
|
|
|
Downloaded the new 0.9 release for GNU/LInux. What a difference. Under 60 MB RAM vs over 9.2 GB RAM for the 0.8.8.6 release. A major list of improvements https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/releases and some that were not even mentioned such as including the code for the tail emission. I upgraded from one of the 0.8.8.7 betas so there was no need to re-sync the db. The wallet did require a re-sync, after copying wallet.bin.address.txt and wallet.bin.keys. Do not copy wallet.bin over it will generate an error. |
|
|
|
...
This is crap to learn this, why is the transaction fee so high just because i got small payouts?
I dont really understand how this all works. Are my XMR broken into tiny fragments instead of their own unit?
Seems i wasted alot of time mining this if they are unspendable.
Quite honestly if this is a concern, I would just wait it out. If the price of XMR increases then the fees in XMR terms will likely drop and the relative fee to clean up the dust will also drop. |
|
|
|
The blocksize scaling solution in Monero requires a tail emission otherwise when the emission becomes minimal or zero there is no penalty and no cost to increase the blocksize. This makes the Monero solution to this issue a non starter in Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
...
Peercoin has been running now since 2012. What's your opinion on PoS?
It is fundamentally flawed. The basic problem with PoS is that the coin network has no way of detecting if the stakeholder has shorted the coin on a derivatives market, and / or is using borrowed stake. If the stakeholder is in a net short position then the stakeholder would logically vote her stake against the best interests of the coin undermining the very premise of PoS. The reason PoS has not been called to task on this issue is that crypto currency derivatives markets are very small and for the most part limited to Bitcoin. There is no liquid way to short Peercoin yet. A failing exchange such MTGox is also a huge risk for any PoS coin. Edit: I did formulate "The Second Pirate Savings and Trust" attack on PoS. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=897488.msg10182752#msg10182752 |
|
|
|
This is the kind of technical discussion about Dash that is needed. What TPTB_need_war is discussing there is the incorrect application of the Binomial Theorem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_theorem. How this can be construed as "hate" is beyond me. As for developers from other coins raising these issues it is hardly surprising, since highly technically competent people would naturally raise what they see as basic errors. |
|
|
|
...
I actually own some doge but I've never taken it serious, after reading what you've said it doesn't seem like a bad idea though, but even still I think it's more important that we get the right fix for Bitcoin.might stock up on some more doge.
The question I have is: Does such a fix for BItcoin even exist without touching the 21 million maximum number of Bitcoins limit? I do not have the answer to this question. What I do know is that a lot of very smart people have been searching for this fix to no avail up to now. |
|
|
|
A mew thread about Dash's launch ? How quaint.  Yes. Another pointless thread on the Dash instamine issue. Dash has way more serious design issues on many levels that make the whole instamine insignificant by comparison. A proper discussion on the technical, regulatory and economic issues that Dash has is far more relevant and useful than this endless instamine debate. |
|
|
|
...
GUI and MyMonero and DB (and payment processing services) are not enough for widespread adoption. This is clear from coins that already have (the equivalent of) these things and even in the case of Bitcoin still only have limited adoption, with other coins lagging even more.
It will take more work and time, or some sort of positive black swan, or both.
Bitcoin's adoption has been stymied by the blocksize issue that Monero does not have. Why is it that virtually every major Bitcoin business is concerned about the blocksize issue? Edit: To be blunt the limited adoption of Bitcoin is hard coded into the Bitcoin protocol. Furthermore this is also the case for every POW coin with a higher capitalization than Monero. Doge and Bytecoin only have partial solutions, and Bytecoin's partial solution is untenable when its block subsidy runs out or becomes minimal. |
|
|
|
Litecoin is the safe haven coin. Volume good, liquidity good. No problems getting in or out.
so is doge. and you can use it to do/buy "real" things. Between Litecoin and Dodge as a replacement for BItcoin if BItcoin runs into trouble, I would pick Doge. The reason Doge has a tail emission. The biggest challenge facing Bitcoin today is the 1 MB blocksize limit. What many do not realize is that the reason why there is so much division among the Bitcoin developers is that there is no simple solution to this problem. Simply increasing the blocksize only kicks the can down the road. The issue is how do you secure Bitcoin once the block subsidy runs out? This is why many are so reluctant to increase the blocksize in order to make the blocksize a scarce commodity to ensure that there are enough transaction fees to secure the network. The one existing solution for an adaptive blocksize in POW coins is in the Cryptonote coins. This solution works by applying a penalty function to the block subsidy; however this requires a block subsidy to penalize. With the Cryptonote adaptive blocksize and without a tail emission (say Bytecoin) the blocksize becomes effectively infinite when the emission runs out and there is no way to secure the coin. It is for this reason that Monero has a tail emission, making it the highest capitalization POW coin to have solved the Bitcoin blocksize issue. Doge has a partial solution since it has a tail emission in place. Adding an adaptive blocksize is not a disrupting hard fork but changing the overall maximum number of coins from finite to potentially infinite is. For this reason my choices for likely replacement are: 1) Monero 2) Doge. |
|
|
|
|
The spreads are significant. Dash is at 0.00739 on Cryptsy and 0.00868 on Poloniex
Edit: It is unclear which coins are good "exit" coins. With MtGox it was XBT and at the end JPY
|
|
|
|
|
0.0097 XBT has been an area of resistance then support then resistance for Dash going back to September 2014 if not earlier. If it is not broken on the upside it will simply mean more resistance in this area. What is significant is that there has been no impact at all on the price of XMR unlike what happened in March of this year when a sudden drop in the price of Dash led to an immediate rise in the price of XMR. My take is that the price of XMR will be driven by its own fundamentals rather than what happens with Dash.
|
|
|
|
...
Why not 48. Rc1 Nf3+ 49. Bxf3 instead?
I am looking at 48. Rc1 Nxf3+ 49. Bxf3 Rxc1 50. Kxc1 Rxf3 51.Ra2 getting behind our passed pawn.
51. ... Rf1+ 52. Kc2 Rf2+ 53. Kb3 Rf3+ etc. The king cannot escape the checks I am looking at. 48. Bb7 Rcc3 49. a6 Nf3+ 50 Ke2 Re3+ 51 Kf2 threatening a7 |
|
|
|
Edit 2 48. Rc1Edit: I spent time looking at Rcc3 for black instead of Kf5:(
...
So did I On further analysis. I am playing 48. Bb7. Since after 48. Rc1 Nf3. 49 Kd1 fails to 49. ... Rd3+ 50. Ke2 Rc1 51 Kd3 Rd1+ loosing the bishop. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
