Secret canaries, exchanged amongst the core on a p2p basis would defend against many cases.
I learn so much from your posts. |
|
|
|
So if I use a blockchain address to command my wallet to execute a transaction, I also need to use that address to test the result. With obscured blockchains, this is not possible (because they were originally conceived of to transport fiat with a trusted party in the loop, not unbacked crypto). Thats why this is an obsolete archetype. Wait. Are you under the impression that it is not possible to determine whether the monero you send has arrived on the address you intended for it to arrive on? |
|
|
|
http://moneroblocks.info/search/2ebd68f2e6e9ed7eb4681a25856848c2248daadd15e1247e7806d3f2f76356c9Rofl 0.0100000000 90 fee. It's like some time a long time ago someone sent an ultra specific amount of funds and this input has just been caring around that 9 for who knows how long because it would cost a million times its own worth just to split it. Atleast thats my theory. *edit* no looking at the transaction more closely it appears that my client just threw the extra 0.00000000009 in there for giggles. I dont understand. Does anyone know why it randomly added an extra 0.00000000009 input as a transaction fee?
|
|
|
|
There are poorly-designed blockchains with fees that are so low (such as one satoshi), the economics of it don't make any logical sense at all. That does not make them better than XMR, it makes them worse.
Well said. These technologies are great but they don't scale very well. Its not even a block size thing. The block size limit debate is a red herring. Its just a question of how many transactions can a sufficiently decentralized group of people audit. The answer is not that many. Thus its a good thing that sometimes people abstain from making marginal transactions. |
|
|
|
I dont like the monero fees they are just to high.....
0.1 fees it should be more like 0.00085 since monero
is not at the price where it was now its 10 dollars per piece meaning that the fees are expensive...
and it needs to change
I just sent a transaction for the cost of 0.1 USD. So it varies quite a bit. You could have just been forced to bundle up a ton of tiny transactions in order to get them to add up to a big one. So like even in real life, with regular money, do you imagine that it would be a cost free experience to try to purchase a new automobile with random pennies nickels quarters and dimes? Of course not. Its the same thing here. Some things that can help: Use the same wallet for prolonged periods of time. Dont sweep an address. That way you will build up lots of useful denominations for inputs. That helps but the most important thing is when you make a payment use ordinary denominations. Demand that the party you are sending to accept a payment that is rounded to a reasonable significant figure. Squabbling over a few cents will not benefit either party when using monero. |
|
|
|
Windows is needed for my poker programs.
I hear ya. I'm typing on a windows machine right now because of heroes of the storm and overwatch. Just don't put anything valuable on it. Its not that it could have spyware on it, though it could, the problem is more that windows is spyware. |
|
|
|
A week is a long time in politics; in crypto nine days is an interminable drag...
This is a symptom of why these communities and this technology is going to do more to change the world than every political act in the history of man combined. This technology is a force of nature. |
|
|
|
The reason i dumped MNR so long ago and never looked back was because development was slow and unimpressive focused on fundamentals that require a deeper than average understanding of crypto systems to appreciate rather than layered on flashy "features".
FTFY Also I was interested in this project a long time ago before I was censored repeatedly in the main thread just for asking questions. The same sorts of questions which would simply garner forthright responses in moneros thread.  |
|
|
|
too long to courteously quote
It it expansive but unfortunately it's nonsense. You are making an apples to oranges comparison. Monero isn't attempting to be anything other than digital e-cash. It has one application and that is to mimic the process of privately handing someone a wad of cash. At that it succeeds marvelously. Almost every other application besides that is going to be better on a different blockchain probably. Maybe bitcoin but maybe something else with a better balance of fungibility, blockchain utility and scalability. I don't know. But what ever it is, it probably wont do pure private e-cash as well as monero. I dont think its fair to dismiss the value of the apps that will be built ontop of other blockchains but could never be built ontop of moneros any more than it is fair to dismiss the obvious utility of such a pure and elegant e-cash. And if you are going to say this completely missed the point of what you were trying to say I did make a few assumptions because your post wouldn't have made any sense if you were actually arguing apples to apples. If we are comparing bitcoins utility as a pure digital ecash to monero's there is no comparison to be made. The only thing monero needs to be trustworthy in this specific narrow application is well reviewed cryptography and the other basic ingredients of money (durability, portability, divisibility, fungability and scarcity). *edit* i should clarify. this is sort of an argument against the premise of this thread. when i said i think monero has a shot (at replacing bitcoin) i meant as the goto standard for digital ecash. not blockchain applications. monero will probably never be the king of this. |
|
|
|
Why, are you trying to embarrass me? Windows 10  Unless you are going to game on it scrap that crap. https://www.linuxmint.com/download.php It's super user friendly. My dad switched to it no problem. I like xfce. Seriously you wont regret the switch. |
|
|
|
Cash isn't a "credit paradigm", not more than "a piece of gold" would be a credit paradigm. Technically I think for every physical note the treasury owe's the federal reserve an equivalent debt. |
|
|
|
Is it possible to generate iota addresses for a paper wallet on an offline PC that never goes on the internet?
Sure of course. And I'll save you some time in the future. The phrase you are looking for here is "air gapped". |
|
|
|
Skilled workers my ass, the immigrants you're getting are riff-raff their home countries are happy to get rid of. The whole thing is transparently engineered to break down national borders and social bonds to pave the way for global Managerialism under the most corrupt and venal bunch of assholes who ever hoisted a cocktail weiner. The extreme right wing people are responding rationally, if predictably, and if you're so mercenary that you can't see any value beyond the economic I feel sorry for you. That said, I not really with the nationalist right because I think technology makes globalism in some form inevitable in any case. I'm here because I hope that crypto can change the dynamic from a top down Mandarin model to a bottom up model that empowers regular people to organize their affairs as they see fit. In other words: Gas the Davos cunts; Anarcho-Localism now!
Wow. Just wow. Someones got a damn decent head on their shoulders. Also take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panarchism |
|
|
|
I was talking more about the idea than the specific thing. But yea actual literal swiss bank accounts don't work any more as I understand it. The rich are now using dummy corporations and shell companies as seen in the panama papers. A right pain in the butt it sounds like. Just buying monero would be so much easier and more practical if it had sufficient liquidity. |
|
|
|
words
Yea. Swiss bank accounts. Nobody ever wants those. |
|
|
|
I have been following the recent block size debates through the mailing list. I had hoped the debate would resolve and that a fork proposal would achieve widespread consensus. However with the formal release of Bitcoin XT 0.11A, this looks unlikely to happen, and so I am forced to share my concerns about this very dangerous fork.
The developers of this pretender-Bitcoin claim to be following my original vision, but nothing could be further from the truth. When I designed Bitcoin, I designed it in such a way as to make future modifications to the consensus rules difficult without near unanimous agreement. Bitcoin was designed to be protected from the influence of charismatic leaders, even if their name is Gavin Andresen, Barack Obama, or Satoshi Nakamoto. Nearly everyone has to agree on a change, and they have to do it without being forced or pressured into it. By doing a fork in this way, these developers are violating the "original vision" they claim to honour.
They use my old writings to make claims about what Bitcoin was supposed to be. However I acknowledge that a lot has changed since that time, and new knowledge has been gained that contradicts some of my early opinions. For example I didn't anticipate pooled mining and its effects on the security of the network. Making Bitcoin a competitive monetary system while also preserving its security properties is not a trivial problem, and we should take more time to come up with a robust solution. I suspect we need a better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relying solely on altruism.
If two developers can fork Bitcoin and succeed in redefining what "Bitcoin" is, in the face of widespread technical criticism and through the use of populist tactics, then I will have no choice but to declare Bitcoin a failed project. Bitcoin was meant to be both technically and socially robust. This present situation has been very disappointing to watch unfold.
Satoshi Nakamoto
PS well done Team Monero, pretty smooth hard fork from what I can tell Is this for real? Is this signed with a reliable public key that we know for sure belongs to satoshi? |
|
|
|
Even if you think that BTC/ETH/XMR will fail it may be mathematically appealing to invest.
The excellent risk/reward ratio allows to invest to some degree, even for fairly conservative approaches.
ETH abandoned its principles and so is bankrupt of legitimacy. That doesn't mean it cant succeed if peoples memory is sufficiently short but its like a specter hanging over the project. Not for me. |
|
|
|
I really think it could. Its superior in so many ways.
Jap, same here, not saying it WILL happen, but there's a chance... XMR is better technologically and 'monetarilly'... BTC has the network-effect though... let's see what's more important in the long run... Network effect is the only advantage BTC has pretty much. And if the price of Monero keeps growing faster than the price of btc people certainly has not even one reasson to dump their bitcoins into Monero and that transfers the network effect to XMR. You might consider brand to fall under network effects but I think it is different enough of a thing and bitcoin has monero beaten there too. I used to be more skeptical about whether or not monero would ever gain traction despite being superior, for previously mentioned reasons. I saw it as having a good risk reward profile but expected it to languish in total absurdity for all time because the world isnt always fair. Since its started to gain some momentum and take a foot hold in the minds of many more people, I don't consider it to be a long shot any more. In fact at this point I put it at better than a 50/50 for long term success. (which is probably like a decade in this business) The likely hood of beating bitcoin though? Still definitely less than half. We have a lot of room between long term success and beating bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
I really think it could. Its superior in so many ways.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
