In your mature scenario, Darkcoin would already be broken if that's the case (with every single masternode owner sharing data for $). Yes that is my point. The design is broken. It can't work longer term. That is my opinion. This does not mean that "DRK [the coin] is dead" after all the technology is still evolving and who knows how it might be improved. It might even evolve into something useful and valuable that has nothing to do with privacy. I have no idea. The current design is a fail IMO. And that's where we'll continue to disagree. You assign very high probabilities to your scenario playing out with the majority (if not all) masternode owners sharing data whereas I assign low probabilities of this being as large of an issue as you make it sound like it will be--strictly from an incentive trade off between data revenue streams vs risk of value loss to underlying holdings. Which was my point earlier in the thread. Many people (and continously more it seems) speculate on smooths/ArcticMine's/etc. scenario. And if you apply game theory, not just to the scenario of masternodes, but also to the whole meta-speculation aspect of a coins value in this thread here, then it looks like it's going one way (probability wise) and I suggest one should act accordingly. |
|
|
|
Not sure how "valuable" fragments of data would be when masternode blinding rolls out and spreads inputs across numerous masternodes instead of each round flowing through one node entirely (granted, probabilities still are on the low side of being selected each round to gain meaningful analysis). And yes, the only person you can ever really trust is yourself.
That is why the data will be shared. This if anything creates more incentive for entities such as data brokers (on the commercial side) and intelligence agencies (on the government site) to aggregate data from many masternodes, and shifts power away from individual masternodes even if they are ideologically driven (unlikely in a mature state). After all, if I'm a masternode, my thinking can be that if the data is spread out among many masternodes, there is not much harm in getting some extra money selling mine. In fact the economics suggest that all masternodes will share data with these entities either knowingly or unknowingly. People not understanding this could read up on Schelling Point and Nash Equilibria. |
|
|
|
I find the bitching about DRK's fastmine/instamine to be petty. Yes it happened. Don't like it, don't invest. I think DRK will see success regardless, because most people couldn't care less about a fastmine. And if it does see success, going around and bitching about the fastmine makes you an envious loser. In the end, I will support whoever has the best solution. Monero has an awesome team behind it, so who knows.
It's not bitching (from my side at least). It's just saying because of abc it is speculated that xyz. |
|
|
|
To quote from your link:
Again, what is your point? Where did I say there wasn't one? It hasn't been hidden, it's a well known part of the history of the coin. I guess when you run out of shit to talk about, bring it back up. Why not, right? And why does it always have to turn into a pissing match between DRK and XMR? I only discuss it when others start posting shoddy info, otherwise, I respect the on-topic discussion. Smooth: Yeah, and that's not even scratching the surface when you start factoring in all the dead/dying coins. It's a speculation forum. I believe there's much more speculation to be done on DRK, sure. ArcticMine speculated that DRK had great short-term > mid-term speculation value, but because of the perceived flaws such as insta-mine, apparently flawed cryptography and suggested vulnerability with master-nodes, it will eventually (speculation) lose out significantly compared to other (better? less flawed?) coins. Therefore, when people doing due diligence to such a degree as ArcticMine is doing (as would investors with large portfolios, or developers investing time and resources into a coin) and chooses XMR and rejects DRK, then that's a tell-tale of that at some point your portfolio should be restructured to accommodate opportunity costs. I suggested that you might have a bias towards your investment (of course, we all do), but that with the presented evidence it should be re-evaluated. I know I have bias towards the things I have in a portfolio, and I am trying not to be. |
|
|
|
Instamine, yes, but many coins in their beginnings have them.
Name names please. I'm curious about this peer group. Excluding the couple week POW->POS coins, and no-name coins, off the top of my head from ones that were top coins or have been around for a while: Darkcoin Feathercoin
Megacoin
Novacoin
PeercoinPrimecoinVertcoinBytecoinDogecoin (although with the amount of coins, it hardly matters) LitecoinCountless others that have came and went all depending on what flavor of the week coin was hot at the time making the others launched with low diff. I fixed that for you. Orly? http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coinsTo quote from your link: What's The Problem With Soft Instamines ("fastmines")?
Hopefully one can see after reading this article that coins like Novacoin, Goldcoin, Blackcoin, Darkcoin, etc are obviously bad investments. (Hold your comments until reading the entire article, please). The amount of coins mined in the beginning is just too advantageous of those fortunate few who got the easy money. But what about the questionable mining…that aren't quite an instant mine but are not a slow mine, either?
.............
Darkcoin
derived from Quark
type of algorithm: blake, bmw, groestl, keccak, jh, stein
PoW and PoS
The following data and time stamps were collected from the Darkcoin blockchain 37).
Block 1: 2014-01-19 Time: 3:54:41
Block 1000 : 2014-01-19 Time: 4:33:39
Block 2000: 2014-01-19 Time: 06:25:47
Block 3000: 2014-01-19 Time: 09:10:16
Block 3250: 2014-01-19 Time: 11:22:11
Looking at this data, we see that Darkcoin was mined with 500 DRK generated per block from the get go. From block 1 to at least block 3250, according to their blockchain, they were still producing 500 coins each block. The transition from 500 to 277 coins per block occurs between 3250 and 3500 but this author did not see the necessity of getting the exact moment of halving. Simple math shows that 3250 blocks multiplied by 500 coins a block is 1,625,000 Darkcoins created between the times of 3:54 and 11:22 on January 19th, 2014. As of today there are around 4,300,000 DRK in existence, making this a pretty hefty instamine. The Darkcoin website expects around 22,000,000 DRK to be created. That means in less than 8 hours, almost 5% of the Darkcoins that ever will be created spawned in that 1/3 of a day. It's safe to say Darkcoin has left it's investors in the dark on this one. |
|
|
|
This is in stark contrast to Darkcoin which has gone for short term gains. In the short term DRK has out performed XMR by a very significant margin. This has come at a price. DRK is in many ways build upon a house of cards that can come tumbling down at any moment. This brings me to my second threat to the XMR bears:
2) A possible collapse of Darkcoin. Given that the market capitalization of Darkcoin is close to 7x that of Monero a sudden collapse of Darkcoin would lead to a flood of refugees looking for an alternative and Monero is a clear option. This also could easily set off a buying panic in XMR.
Here we go... again.  I hold both XMR and DRK but the clear bias you have because you only have XMR is ridiculous. They attack privacy from two different angles. I am simply saying that someone who is short XMR should place very close attention to DRK from a risk management perspective, and yes I hold a long position in XMR and no position in DRK. By the way the same is true for someone who is long XMR which is why I am spending and have spent a fair amount to time learning about DRK and how it works. In spite of this I have not seen anything in my research that would justify me buying DRK. This is because I look at crypto-currency as a medium to long term hold. Hedging by holding both is a possible strategy in some situations but even that can have a significant impact on the price of XMR because of the relative capitalizations of both coins. I see DRK as a possible short term play but over the medium to long term I simply do not like the fundamentals. XMR on the other hand is very much a medium to long term play. I bought into drk when it first came out and got cut off at the knees with the P&D's and then found out about the 30mil premine and then looked for a long term coin and this is the one my research led me to as the most viable. I guess I'll find out in a year or so.  lol, 30m premine. Bravo. Those numbers are clearly wrong. But don't ignore that there was a major pre-mine, which is being hushed and swept under the carpet. Your bias of investing in the coin makes you not face the issues presented. |
|
|
|
Assuming someone really wanted to buy like 200BTC worth of XMR when the price was low, he couldnt do that without obviously pumping the price. Even more so when half the sell orders were his own.If you dont say anything people will think that, well, the time they were waiting for may be coming indeed and wont sell. They may even buy more. So what is best to do? Tell the people that you are manipulating the price. People dislike that. They play along but stay alarmed and sell when they feel a bit scared. After all its just manipulation. So i would argue that you actually manage to buy the coins you wanted at better price by stating that you are manipulating the price. And this way also has a plus. Your words gain more trust if you say something and that happens. You can use that in the future. Maybe really near future too. Only thing i really dont think you are going to do is to wait 24h to buy. You actually buy the moment you said that you are going to buy. Oh and remember, it is also buying when people (from a wannabe syndicates or not) dump on you  I wait 24 hours if I say I wait 24 hours. If I don't say, I can do what I want. Those 24 hours have already expired. What I currently have said is that: - Monero price will rise (from the starting point of 115k); - I will aim to focus the marketing to investor-minded people who have significantly more money than currently invested in Monero; - I have money under management that is about to flow to Monero; - I hope that the small guys who already know about Monero, get back on board first. If you project other wishes of yours to me, hoping that I make them true, you will be disappointed. I have explained what I believe is the best investment approach towards Monero here in this thread, and will probably do it in a dedicated website soon as well. Both the core team and the MEW are cooperatives, because those aims can only be reached by networks of people. The coming Monero Investment Group (MiG) is largely a one-man effort (to eliminate the possibility of collusion). The aim is to dispense facts for people to act upon, for everyone to make his own decision. Let the MEW take care of the social aspect. It's becoming tiring to explain the same thing the 4th time in 4 days, and getting accused of untransparency. These are my plans, and as long as Monero stays cheap, no one can stop me from achieving them. When it goes up, they are achieved. We are changing to the "money talks, bullshit walks" phase. The power that the current holders have against the influx of new money is to sell. That power can be exercised only once. Use it, but with caution, since the target value of Monero is not 10x or even 1,000x, it is 100,000x the current value. Some of us understood perfectly the first time around. Plenty of people read and don't necessarily tell you how appreciative they are. Some read and don't even have user accounts on here. You catch disproportionately more flack than thanks. Guys, how many other would give a heads up like this to early adopters and passionates? |
|
|
|
Eventually, as usage increases (and I think it will thanks to XMR.to), people that want to buy something privately will maybe buy 50$ worth of XMR even though their purchase only requires 40$ worth. Sure, this is one person now with 10 XMR off the markets, decreasing supply by a tiny tiny fraction, but this will add up, over time.
And further to make speculation of XMR even more difficult, is that the price of XMR doesn't matter for this use case. If I need to buy 50$ worth of XMR to make a private transaction, it doesn't matter if 50$ buys my 150 XMR or if it buys me 0.001 XMR.
When it comes to the idea of price of Monero goes up if it gets more transactional use, this is false statement. Here is very simple reasoning: You convert 50 usd to xmr and spend them and the merchant dumps the coins back to market => the effect is more or less neutral. If the merchant keeps the coins and do not dump them, then it is obviously very bullish especially if there are lot more merchants deciding to hodl. Hodling is the only thing which gives a value for a coin. Without hodling the coin serves a mere token and cannot reach any significiant prices. The latter part of your message is true - indeed it doesn't matter if you get 0.001 XMR or 150 with 50 usd. Monero will rise in price only and only if more new people enter to the markets long time enough. This is not exactly true because no matter how efficient the buyer and seller are in hedging their exposure to XMR there is going to be minimum holding period between the buyer and the seller. The process is is never instantaneous. It is this minimum holding period that makes the use of XMR in commerce very bullish at a fundamental level. The time would at least be the time the of the average bitcoin transaction - if you were using xmr.to. If you do simple "on the back of a napkin" calculations, of how much of the (xmr & btc) monetary mass would be removed from the market at all times, it's not insignificant. It isn't insignificant but really the bigger factor for use-in-commerce is just that people won't instantly and constantly convert, for convenience reasons if nothing else. If you know you are going to make another purchase tomorrow or the next day or even next week you will just keep the coins. Even in an environment (not now) when short term interest rates are significant, people don't put all their spending money into interest-bearing accounts; they still hold on to some cash. We're a long way from use-in-commerce being significant enough to matter though. BTC isn't there and BTC is about 700 times bigger than XMR. I concur, of course. Holding and spending quickly adds magnitudes to the numbers. |
|
|
|
Eventually, as usage increases (and I think it will thanks to XMR.to), people that want to buy something privately will maybe buy 50$ worth of XMR even though their purchase only requires 40$ worth. Sure, this is one person now with 10 XMR off the markets, decreasing supply by a tiny tiny fraction, but this will add up, over time.
And further to make speculation of XMR even more difficult, is that the price of XMR doesn't matter for this use case. If I need to buy 50$ worth of XMR to make a private transaction, it doesn't matter if 50$ buys my 150 XMR or if it buys me 0.001 XMR.
When it comes to the idea of price of Monero goes up if it gets more transactional use, this is false statement. Here is very simple reasoning: You convert 50 usd to xmr and spend them and the merchant dumps the coins back to market => the effect is more or less neutral. If the merchant keeps the coins and do not dump them, then it is obviously very bullish especially if there are lot more merchants deciding to hodl. Hodling is the only thing which gives a value for a coin. Without hodling the coin serves a mere token and cannot reach any significiant prices. The latter part of your message is true - indeed it doesn't matter if you get 0.001 XMR or 150 with 50 usd. Monero will rise in price only and only if more new people enter to the markets long time enough. This is not exactly true because no matter how efficient the buyer and seller are in hedging their exposure to XMR there is going to be minimum holding period between the buyer and the seller. The process is is never instantaneous. It is this minimum holding period that makes the use of XMR in commerce very bullish at a fundamental level. The time would at least be the time the of the average bitcoin transaction - if you were using xmr.to. If you do simple "on the back of a napkin" calculations, of how much of the (xmr & btc) monetary mass would be removed from the market at all times, it's not insignificant. |
|
|
|
I will coordinate Monero advertisement if we can crowdfund some PR
I would like to do this after the database merge hits production and after there is a mixin hardfork that rejects mixins under 3
Count me in. PM me if/when you start anything? |
|
|
|
The browser-based Crypto Kingdom MMORPG is launching very soon. It will be, to my knowledge, the first game in the world that uses a cryptocurrency-based ingame currency (i.e. moneritos). This will likely make the front page of /r/bitcoin (despite /r/bitcoin's anti-altcoin bias) and draw a good amount of attention to XMR. This will happen whether Risto buys XMR or not. XMR is unable to absorb any serious amount of sustained buying pressure. Only a small number of English-speaking readers of 3-4 incredibly long, inaccessible threads on bitcointalk.org have any idea that this is about to happen, even though I'm writing it plainly here.
Depends on what do you mean by serious amounts of buying pressure. I don't remember seeing ever that many coins for sale on Poloniex. In last summer the high points of coins for sale were 280 k coins, now it is constantly over 400 k coins (increase of 1/3). There are plenty of coins for sale, only people who are willing to buy at any price is lacking. Those 280k coins in asks were worth over a million dollars back then. Liquidity was much better. I have no idea how the order books would change during an XMR bull-run. Undoubtedly, many coins would come out of cold storage to increase the supply and dampen the rise. Also the total mined supply is not constant. 280k / total mined then is not comparable to now. And, it basicly is all relative. Summer '14 is not comparable to late winter '15. Look at BTC-price, look at all the alt pricing/volume. Be careful when drawing conclusions to quickly about specific coins/situations. It all moves within an ecosphere, within an ecosphere, within a ecosphere. Ecosphereception That the emission is higher now is a piece of the puzzle, certainly. Let's say in the middle of summer '14 and rounding up a bit, the total emission was 2.4m with 280k on the books. That's roughly 11.6%. Today the emission is 6.4m with what? 450k on the books. That's roughly 7%. Oh and a few days ago there were far less asks (and bids mind you). Also, the books change quite dramatically. And who might be interested in having lot's of asks on the books? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
