The US $ is Going Up,
Bwahaha!! Funniest thing I read all day... LMAO!! Nice work  Buy and hold infinitely counterfeitable toilet paper, here's a line I've drawn to show you'll be rich. Quote for your upcoming facepalm when the dollar becomes very strong in 2017. Poe's law continues here? Strong vs. the Venezuelan Bolivar, yeah. Possible even vs. some other privately issued toilet papers. But if you are telling me that beer in the local pub will cost me fewer dollars than before, I'm really not sure what you could be smoking. "Dollar so strong, I saw it on the news" That'll be 10 dollar for your sandwich today sir. Meanwhile the funbuck buys you less than 1.3 millies today. |
|
|
|
anonymity defies the blockchain principles because it defies general knowledge of transaction
It took the release of recent coins to teach me the lesson that HCLivess gives us here. Very true. |
|
|
|
Drug dealers and users are a scourge upon society. They inflict pain, Crime is fueled by it and in last 10 years, robbery, rape, shooting, riot, mauling, murders all because of drugs everyday.
Drug dealers are just the symptom. Still, you are refusing to look at the real reason why this violence occur. Unless you improve the education levels, literacy and reduce poverty, the violence is not going to cease. And the only viable measure to end the menace of drug peddlers is to legalize and regulate soft-drugs. no i don't think so, they are not just the symptom they are actually the plague who spread a thing to a certain nation/country which deteriorates it's citizen . and I think even some Educated Persons are getting involved to this drug and some of them are users of a certain drug , what I am trying to say is that even the education is improved Violence will not going to cease as Drug Dealers are still on their position . End prohibition, you put those drug dealers out of business overnight. Anybody who supports prohibition is a stooge in the pay of drug cartels, end of story. Drugs are too dangerous to put in the hands of criminals. |
|
|
|
Proof-of-work coins such as Bitcoin, Monero, and Zcash will lose all their security in the coming crisis, because miners won't be able to exchange BTC for fiat to pay their electricity.
I was looking at the last 6 Months of the US Dollar Index, and I Totally Agree with You ,  http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/index/dxyThe US $ is Going Up, The Best Investment at the Current Time is the US$ , not PoW Cryptos or Metals which will all collapse in price against a Strong Dollar. Soon the Smart money players will dump everything for the US$, Charts are already starting to show it.  Bwahaha!! Funniest thing I read all day and that includes this thing about "Vulcan blockchain" from PWC and some scheiss from Poorpescu to boot. LMAO!! Nice work Buy and hold infinitely counterfeitable toilet paper, here's a line I've drawn to show you'll be rich. |
|
|
|
|
So somebody pays me and I have no way to verify that any of the coin is real or came from a certain round of public issuance?
This doesn't sound like publicly issued coin.
Transactional privacy is good but if there's no way to verify the UTXO set we are back to the fiat dark ages.
|
|
|
|
|
As plenty of others pointed out here, anonymity is relative.
One thing you could try is privately issued coins, such as the toilet paper funbuck aka the US dollar. There is no public nature to this coin so it can be quite untraceable. So untraceable that anyone can issue it in arbitrary amounts and nobody else will notice.
Now there's some anonymity for yo ass.
|
|
|
|
iCEBREAKER has it. Thank you. Prohibition is universally detested as barbaric idiocy by people from all sides of political spectrum, all churches, basically anyone who actually cares about life at all and is capable of thought. One good voice on the matter and all to often ignored is LEAP - law enforcement against prohibition http://leap.cc"Drugs are too dangerous to leave in the hands of criminals" Duterte said some good things, but his policy in regards to prohibition leaves little choice but to be certain he is an agent of a drug running cartel eager to whipe out all competition. Pathetic waste of valuable time. |
|
|
|
Nice thought, but there is no right to secede, as the Pledge of Allegiance states “one nation, under God, indivisible.”
LoL! The constitution came first, holmes. I mean, thanks for pointing out you were brainwashed in elmentary school and all but at this point you are reading on your own so take a look at some other views: http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/secession-its-constitutional/ |
|
|
|
I do not hope either, america is a big country and I believe under the new president he will make the economy of the USA more stronger. He cares for his people will give them jobs as promise, too bad for the immigrants they need to leave the country.
Yes I agree. The immigrants need to leave the country. This country belongs to the native americans and no one else. Please, all 100 million of you immigrants leave. Thanks and god bless  *applause* go back to europe, back to china, back to your orc spawning grounds, thank you for your visit US out of north america |
|
|
|
...I've already started coding around that assumption in my project by discarding the convention of using one-time addresses only and allowing me to create a fully functional multisig identity system with balances.
This sounds really interesting. Looking forward to see good luck! |
|
|
|
FYI: Wonder if you will feel the same way , if your electricity rates increases because of Miners.  Public coin adoption absolutely will lead to people using energy more efficiently. Somehow I don' t find that a bad thing.
Reason Proof of Stake will Defeat Proof of Work in the long run.
Proof of Stake is energy efficient, where as Proof of Work is just energy wasteful.
Personally I'd rather accept coin which provably required energy to generate than one which provably required.. no energy. We'll see what the market says won' t we  |
|
|
|
If my idea is worthless, then it strengthens the point why ECDSA is needed, and people will apreciate ECDSA more.
Your idea is not worthless and is already used in one of the altcoins. It's actually a nice solution for IoT-friendly cryptography for which ECDSA is too "heavy". The only requirements are to wait long enough between beginning and committing a transaction and to not reuse addresses (private keys). Or you could use Winternitz (Lamport signatures) with Merkel trees for a more robust solution that doesn't reveal the private key and has roughly 1/20th the resource overhead (not including hardware acceleration of SHA256) of the most efficient (curve25519) elliptic curve cryptography (not factoring in batch mode). But the major downside is the size of signatures increase exponentially with increasing bit security level, which is also the problem with RSA. The theoretical gain is future quantum computing resistance, but research is proceeding on elliptic curve (isogenies) variants which are quantum computing secure. There are many reasons why this makes sense... the generation time to create new signatures using Lamport + Merkle is negligent as that is amortized by the client which can afford the extra time for improved security. The signing is up to 10x faster but at the cost of higher bandwidth requirements like Anonymint says. However the upside is favorable as it creates a quantum resistant system that doesn't need a bunch of one way hashing to "work-around" the problem of ECDSA. Another benefit you get from this is that Bitcoin requires one-time use addresses because those public keys once seen on the network can be used to steal balances by NSA once ECDSA is compromised so all spends with change are sent to new addresses with pubkeys not published yet. Because of this there is lack of usability on services that build upon the transaction creation process. For example in Syscoin I wanted to have an identity system (aliases) that would keep balances like accounts. To avoid mangled code to detect which addresses belong to an alias as change I simply removed the need to create new pubkeys for change and send change back to the alias pubkey which are public on the network. The multisig feature of bitcoin lacks clarity and usability because of the design of bitcoin because pubkeys cannot be published and thus redeemscripts need to be saved and sent across potentially unsafe communication lines...(read my multisig post here: http://syscoin.org/multisignature-identity-system-syscoin-2-1-technical-update/) with aliases I also save a redeem script for multisig alias identities so that any spending can be done without the need to transmit this information to each other (increases usability exponentially). The reasoning behind these changes were that if ECDSA were to be compromised Bitcoin would have a situation where they would probably fork it in as quickly as possible and choose the best implementation... leaving the need for one-time use addresses null and void which would mean my implementation which is one of simplicity actually is the optimal solution. Since I am not a cryptographer I'm not going to bother trying to change the implmentation although it shouldn't be too hard to figure out, just for lack of time to do other work but it makes total sense for long run that either Bitcoin through their new soft-fork voting mechanism or a potential coin supplanting Bitcoin would use something like this to overcome quantum computing. Since you bring it up, and folks have been considering, lets look at some of the troubles. 1) Keys much larger. As in 10x or more. Blockchain bloat will be an issue if the thing becomes popular. 2) Lamport signatures are really use-once, because after using it once - the key is basically revealed. So, what if you want to publish an address for donations? Is there a way to do this? Perhaps you could set up a way to sign a group of transactions all at once, consolidating them. Making sure to change the address that you have published for donations first, of course. It seems an unsolved problem still. Those are the big problems. A couple of other points: 1) I'm not concerned with quantum computers, Lamport sigs is still an improved security even without that threat. This is because they are provably as hard to crack as it is to generate a collision in the hash function being used. ECDSA is not provably as hard as anything, always something that concerns some folks. 2) Quantum computers allegedly could still provide a route to quicker collision finding in hash functions anyway. Perhaps not as much of a difference as for Shor' s algo or for ECDSA, but still worth pointing out. |
|
|
|
I would have thought moneroaddress.org on an offline box would be the recommendation here...
why not?
Yes i agree because it is from official of monero developer and That is more can be trusted than another source of wallets and if there are something wrong we can do contacting on moneroaddress.org. i think it can be resposibility than another service. Just coming back to say there are no "officials" of a public coin. There might be people you trust, if so good - if not, read the code. It's open source. |
|
|
|
Still no one has answered my question: how would you find out the value of 1 Bitcoin if there were no Bitcoin exchanges?
I'd ask the brewer down the road how many cases of beer he will trade me for ten bitcents.
Bitcoin is more like a commodity right now than actual, useful money. Bitcoin is like crude oil. People waste energy and resources to gain crude oil for example, that crude oil has a price attached to it depending on the market. The market speculators regulate the price. 1 barrel of crude oil costs $44.65 at present.
Now, I can go to Amazon and shop around bringing my shopping cart to $44.65 with the shipping included. Can I send them 1 barrel of crude oil because it is the same value just because the market says so and it's 'money'? I guess no.
Now we have Bitcoin. What are people doing to get Bitcoin? They sit at home digitally extracting that commodity racking up electricity bills and breaking down expensive electronics in the process trying to extract Bitcoin from the Blockchain. 1 Bitcoin is valued at $708.8. This is what the market thinks 1 Bitcoin is valued at - or the speculators.
Now, I challenge you to delete all bookmarks to any online Bitcoin exchanges, BTC debit cards, Circle, Coinbase all the other fancy-schmancy websites and tell me what 1 BTC is valued at this Christmas based on your calculations.
Because I know that 1 bottle of water or 1 Subway sandwich will be x amount of fiat at the end of the day but there is no way you would know how much that would cost in BTC if BTC weren't pegged to fiat. Or I could pay for my sandwich with x amount of gold, Facebook credits, CS Go skins, World of Tanks points or any other token but this doesn't make it money just because it has a value. Anything can have a value so what? Just because Satoshi said that Bitcoin will be free digital currency for the people worldwide that doesn't mean that everyone will become rich out of the blue. You still have to buy equipment and 'mine' for it in the virtual world like you would mine for ores or extract petrol in the real world. And no, Bitcoin at the moment is not money.
First of all, you have no idea how many rupees you will have to trade me for 1 Subway sandwich in 2018. Technically you don' t know the price until the deal goes through. Second of all, who cares whether you call something money or not? In the end of the day, you will trade your cases of beer to me for a certain amount of my facebook credits, private bank issued dollars, publicly issued bitcoins, or maple syrup. It's an exchange. Commodities which are used exclusively for exchange are called exchange commodities, many refer to them as money. It doesn't matter, does it. Perhaps you need to make a legal argument and say it's not money citing some things people wearing wigs and suits said many years ago. Sure, go for it. |
|
|
|
|
I would have thought moneroaddress.org on an offline box would be the recommendation here...
why not?
|
|
|
|
If my idea is worthless, then it strengthens the point why ECDSA is needed, and people will apreciate ECDSA more.
Your idea is not worthless and is already used in one of the altcoins. It's actually a nice solution for IoT-friendly cryptography for which ECDSA is too "heavy". The only requirements are to wait long enough between beginning and committing a transaction and to not reuse addresses (private keys). Or you could use Winternitz (Lamport signatures) with Merkel trees for a more robust solution that doesn't reveal the private key and has roughly 1/20th the resource overhead (not including hardware acceleration of SHA256) of the most efficient (curve25519) elliptic curve cryptography (not factoring in batch mode). But the major downside is the size of signatures increase exponentially with increasing bit security level, which is also the problem with RSA. The theoretical gain is future quantum computing resistance, but research is proceeding on elliptic curve (isogenies) variants which are quantum computing secure. Yes. It looks like OP is suggesting a Lamport Signature coin. Go and build it please |
|
|
|
|
Yes we still believe in cancer, and in highway robbery. How can you not believe in these things? They are everywhere, universally holding back all creatures they contact. The question is whether or not we can learn to avoid them.
|
|
|
|
Thanks OP for asking this question. People are finally starting to ask it and to think about it. This will be an issue long before the last coinbase satoshi is handed out in 2140 because bitcoin's distribtution curve is a rapidly converging geometric series. Already more than 3/4 done.
As you know if you have looked at woodcoin, there are ways to do coinbase distribution without rapid convergence, and without infinite inflation.
But lets look instead at the possiblities for what happens to the original bitcoin around 2030 or so when the coinbase reward drops below fees:
1) Mining Centralization. This is the NXT model. Fees stay low but miners keep mining at high security because they hold a lot of BTC and want to see BTC still work so that their coin will hold its value. I find this hard to believe but it's a possibility.
2) Large Fees. This is how Satoshi said (briefly in passing) that it would work. Security against double spends will be paid for by large fees on transactions. As long as not too many people flee to other coins and they stick with btc (at this point solely because the market values it highly) this could work. The network becomes a high-value-tx network only, as transactions on the scale of a case of beer simply won't be able to afford to get into the blockchain. This is what most people envision; there is some stability question from a game theory perspective though, as users wishing to use coin for small tx will flee to other coins.
3) Coinbase Adjustment. This hardfork is sacrilege to suggest at this point and I see 0 chance of it happening. However to make the list theoretically complete it should be here.
4) Pro-bono mining. This also seems quite farfetched, but you never know. People might just mine the thing because they love the community or some such.
5) Flight to other coins. There could be a more stable and robust diverse public coin ecosystem at that time and markets will evaluate coins accordingly. My suspicion is that it will be more complex than I can predict at present.
Seems like number 1 is contradicting number 2 about the low fees then large fees? Or is it just on a different timeline? Are those different fees you are talking about? Just asking. Yes, those scenarios are contradictory. I'm just trying to list ALL the different things that could happen. |
|
|
|
Gold and cash are not hackable. And in today's world it's a big plus.
That depends on what you mean by hackable. There are those that print out billions of new dollars worth of cash at almost no cost. You could consider that a hack. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
