Just to be clear. If Evan released early so he or others could instamine or just mine early and some people missed out, I don't necessarily think Evan did anything wrong. What I'm concerned about is that it may come up as an issue at some point in the future and negatively impact the project
Are you saying that Evan misleading people to think he would launch later than he actually did is okay? Meaning he basically lied to people from the launch? adhitthana is entitled to his own value system. All's fair in love and crypto is somewhat understandable. Even if he does think it was okay to lie about the launch, withhold the development plans until after instamining it, etc., he's being smart in recognizing that not everyone will see it that way, and that affects the prospects going forward. |
|
|
|
Thankfulfortoday was the original Dev of Bitmonero when it was forked--it was subsequently forked from him because he wasn't taking the community's input into consideration. There are 30+ people who have worked on the project including a lead Bitcoin Dev. Where is Thankfulfortoday? did he work alone, I want to talk to him about Monero if it's possible. He quit when the community disagreed with his ideas and followed the Monero fork instead of Bitmonero. You can try sending him a PM but his account has been inactive for over a year. Also, 30+ people is a lot but why there is no sync between them to make something amazing? it just feels like those 30+ coders "or bug fixers" did not work with each other at all People work together every day. You have no idea what you are talking about. except Fullfypony and Othe winning 21000 Monero coins in Fluffy's gambling site business MoneroDice?
I can't see how this is anything but off topic. |
|
|
|
|
I'd add that even if profitability of mining works out that it is cheaper to buy, for the specific case of just running one solo mining node, the difference is going to be very, very small in absolute terms. No one is suggesting to go out and build a farm at significant expense if the profitability isn't there, but solo mining on one computer is a small price to pay to help support the network and the coin.
|
|
|
|
Masternodes, IX, blockchain voting, DS, etc all didn't exist for months after the initial launch.
it is only a month but eduffield already have plans for his instamine It didn't take a month. The plans were already in place before the instamine. Read the bold carefully. Great, now that everything is stable, I'll be posting later about the vision of this project and milestones! Time to move on to actually implementing what I set out to do.
|
|
|
|
...
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. Peercoin has been running now since 2012. What's your opinion on PoS? Peercoin has limited capacity by design (and I guess social contract) due to the 0.01 minimum TX fee (which is burned, so a high volume of transactions would destroy the entire money supply). It seems intended as a settlement layer. Discussed here: https://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=4175.0Other PoS coins have different approaches though. BTS with DPoS for example is clearly trying to be high capacity (but wait a year or two when scalability isn't the "hot" crypto thing any more, and it will probably try to be something different). EDIT: Looks like you don't even need to wait. Smart contracts and being a "platform" is the hot thing now. http://bytemaster.github.io/blog/2015/12/30/Why-I-like-Ethereum/ |
|
|
|
...
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. This is all true, and may become important in the future. Bitcoin's block limit, while recognized as a long term issue for years, hasn't been a practical barrier until very recently if at all. It is also true that markets are forward looking, so when all the pieces are in place and the sort of technical and social risk factors that still exist in Bitcoin to this day (for example, there is widespread disagreement about the so-called "scalability roadmap" from some of the developers that is only a partial solution anyway) are absent in something like Monero it is indeed possible he results could be explosive. But this is also very speculative. I do not believe that the primary barriers to crypto adoption are purely technical/capacity, but that is just a belief. I can't prove it. |
|
|
|
Privacy coins were a fad in May 2014.
Newton was a fad. Palm was a productivity tool. Usability features are converging, and the demand will come, inevitably. As long as the usability is there when the demand spike emerges (at some sweet, stochastic moment) the outcome should be quite nice. Maybe it needs a GSM radio to reach a subsequent tier of market expansion, but first things first, walk then run. How many of you are expecting a demand spike with the next release? To me the db work is more important than the GUI but I suspect the general population (even those who care about privacy) will disagree with me for usability concerns. 1. db plus command line works well for me already 2. Some (less concerned with security and to some degree privacy) will think mymonero.com is sufficient 3. Will those who want the new db and an official GUI (as opposed to existing "unofficial" 3rd party solutions outnumber both groups 1 and 2 above? 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. |
|
|
|
constantly delivered on his feature promises for almost two years
That's not even true, as I know there was a list of at least three features he promised and did not deliver that was posted on the Dash thread. The response was that he decided to change the priorities/direction of development, which by itself is probably reasonable except that it does not equate to having constantly delivered on his feature promises. Anyway, that is off topic to this thread, which is about the release/launch. Feel free to create another thread about the feature promises of Dash and maybe people will want to discuss it. |
|
|
|
Yeah stop pretending to care about OPs question when you just hijacked the opportunity to rant about Dash: The only purpose of this sock puppet account.
The question was fully answered by me and my quotations.
/thread
Sigh. Again you can start a Monero versus dash thread if you want or raise the old one from the dead, but Evan's answer in your post doesn't answer why he launched in an impromptu manner robbing those who went to bed of the early mining opportunity. Reread what he said, "We launched later.." he then tries to explain the instamine. He never explains why people went to bed thinking the coin was relaunched without any formal announcement. Maybe an explanation exists, but it's not in your quoted material. Holy shit. Is that true? A badly coordinated launch and some people were caught off guard? Oh fuck! How much coin did he steal from all those poor miners in those couple of hours? Dear God! This is the final nail in the coffin of Dash! Screw all the technology the team created since then! The launch is holy and must be perfect!!! FUCK I'MA SELL RIGHT NOW!!! Yep. That's what I would say if I was as obsessed and lunatic as the average XMR-troll. TL;DR: Idgaf about that. Neither does any other sane person. Again the questions were if the launch happened early (it did) and did Evan explain why it happened early (acknowledged, yes/explained, no). I'm hardly insane for knowing the subtle difference between explained and acknowledged. But good luck on your investment. I don't even see where he "acknowledged" launching early. All he said is "when we relaunched" but nothing about timing at all. |
|
|
|
I am a bit skeptical of Dash, but I've been wrong before and I could be wrong about Dash. So, I have a question.
IIUC when Darkcoin/Dash was first released Evan Duffield told people that mining would start at a certain time. However (and again this is my understanding and I could be wrong), Evan then went and issued it early with the result that miners who had believed it would be released as he had said missed the early mining stage when many (?) coins were released/mined.
Is this correct, or have I been misled?
If it is correct , did Evan Duffield ever explain why, the release time was moved?
You have been misled I don't think so. Please provide a specific quote from that post where Evan explained why the launch happened within hours after Evan promised not to launch it within minutes/hours, and clearly caused at least one person (but more likely many) to miss the launch by several hours during which time a million or more coins were already mined. Ok now it insta crashes when I type "setgenerate true".
Time to go to bed and try again next week? Yeah, let's do that. I obviously need to do some more testing. Thanks everyone! Best thing to do I guess. Please, confirm you won't be launching after some minutes/hours even if you fix it, and the sooner would be tomorrow, thanks. Definitely not. I'll also follow up with this post when I do set a time. Launch is being moved to 11PM EST!
... seriously? Just woke up to this  How many hours have I lost? Oh, well. Time to git pull and launch it again. |
|
|
|
^ What's with the supply reduction? And how can they do that in the middle of the game? That's not good if you're trying to set up a 'currency'. I mean... wtf dude?
They just moved the decimal in how the amounts are displayed. It didn't really change anything in the underlying system. EDIT: I'm pretty sure the original "supply reduction" question was about dashcoin supply reduction, but it does apply to Darkcoin/Dash as well. The two reductions were quite different though. |
|
|
|
monero developers (ponny, smooth) are on someone's payroll to stagnate development
Shit, primer- you weren't supposed to tell anyone about paying us. |
|
|
|
|
The open source AMD GPU miner bounty of 9000 AEON has been paid out to Wolf0.
Here is our current donation fund balance (various small donations and mined blocks also received since the last report):
balance: 450158.232169665722, unlocked balance: 450125.527120220919
|
|
|
|
Or could be the same one fooling around.
Anyway, how's the daily trading volume and liquidity of Aeon?
The volume seems to run around 0.5-1 BTC/day or so, with occasional higher spikes. The liquidity is okay for trades up to about that size but if you want to trade bigger, you are going to move the market (temporarily at least), as pegasus and others have experienced. |
|
|
|
I think 2016 will be the year of bitcoin and maybe just a few of the other legit projects will survive.
Very possibly. Late 2015 saw a clear trend (with a few exceptions) of alts losing value against Bitcoin. It will be interesting to see if 2016 continues that trend (which would be dire for the concept of alts) or if there will be some reversal. |
|
|
|
Smooth QC (Brewery) report, dividend
We have repeated last week's dividend with 15762 per share paid out. Conditions in the BEER market appear to somewhat weaker, so forward guidance is negative. |
|
|
|
|
I'm not an expert on GPU miners but it looks like you don't have the OpenCL SDK installed or properly configured.
|
|
|
|
The actual lastest binary on the repo (0.2 Release; 7 Nov) is used successfully by windows users. No need to test it further.
the latest amelioration from xmr miner (Substantial speedup; reaches the next milestone!; 23 dec) is not present in aeon miner on wolf's repo. so no test can be done.
i can try to update my repo for testing if aeon miner is speeding up like xmr miner but it's better if wolf update its own. (this part seems not correlated to the bounty)
Thank you for the report Arux. Agreed the terms of the bounty did not require updating to later optimized versions. Another community member can do it or Wolf0 can do it if he wants to continue to remain involved. |
|
|
|
Dev i have one question about the roadmap exactly what are the advantages of the Blockchain pruning?
it is not like a electrum server?
The main advantage is reducing the storage required to run nodes over time. As the blockchain grows (every day 360 more blocks) that all needs to be stored by every node. With the pruning branch most of the old information does not need to be stored, making nodes more lightweight. There may be other advantages for thin wallets similar to Electrum later but that is not really helped by the current implementation. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
