...
I believe you meant September 15, 2015 for the code freeze for version 0.9
Yes that is correct. Little remark, it was either September 15, 2015 or October 15, 2015 if I recall correctly. However, since we passed both already your argument is still valid and furthermore I agree with it. It's quite simple, mr manipulator and the bears will be able to determine the price (+control the market) until we have a new release. The idea is a code freeze 30 days before a soft fork date with a hard fork starting six months after the soft fork date. So for example Code freeze release plus tag: September 15th, 2015 Soft fork date: (not applicable in this case) October 15th 2015 hard fork date: April 15th 2016. Edit 1: It is a good six weeks behind at best. The other option was to start the cycle on August 15, 2015 for a hard fork on March 15th 2015. Edit 2: The market argument is based on the delayed release date even though the hard fork date would remain the same with a shortened upgrade period. We must keep in mind that database and low memory requirements are not a hard fork and would kick in immediately. Something like the blocktime change would kick in on the hard fork date. |
|
|
|
...
I believe you meant September 15, 2015 for the code freeze for version 0.9
Yes that is correct. Fixed the original post. |
|
|
|
It doesn't matter how hard the reality is now
It does. Should I sell my XMR to prove to you that I don't like the concentration that is happening? (I also don't like that nobody even recognizes this is the problem. As with price, today it is 0.3734 EUR/XMR, twelve days ago it was 0.3735. That one is holding steady.) The problem is that there has not been an official tagged release for the XMR software in well over 10 months now and the last official binaries from December of last year are for most people close to unusable with their 8 GB + of RAM requirements. This creates the false impression that there has not been any development of XMR. It also encourages concentration since those of us willing to clone github and compile from source (as I had to do two days ago when I upgraded from Ubuntu 15.04 to Ubuntu 15.10) actually see the benefits of what has been very extensive development over the last 10 months, while the typical Windows / iOS user will not. The reality is that someone who is not both already involved with Monero and also to be blunt "a nerd running GNU/Linux" is unlikely to compile from source and consequently will either sell or not buy. The recent bear market starting in mid September coincides with the failed target date of September 15, 2015 for the code freeze for version 0.9, and further supports my theory. |
|
|
|
I am not ready to vote yet but we need to look carefully at every available move here including 17.Bc3 My main concern right now is 17.Qf4 Rxe2 (mentioned last move when we were talking about Nh4 so the idea is not a secret) 18.Rxe2 Nd3.
19. Ne7+ followed by Qd6. The danger that I see with Bc3 is After ... Qd8 , Qf4 is ... Ne4 Edit: Corrected Qd8 |
|
|
|
16. Nh4
Opens f3 and g3 for the Queen.
16.Nh4 I voted for it last move, so I wanted to vote for it again https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1190988.msg12782124#msg12782124Sadly it looks really bad for us now: 16.Nh4 Re6 17.Qg3 Rxe2 18.Rxe2 Bd3 and we will lose our knight on c3 16.Nh4 Re6 17.Qf3 Rxe2 (Qxe2 loses our knight and Nxe2 loses our rook) 18.Rxe2 Nd4 19.Qe3 Nxe2+ and we lose our bishop on b2 or our knight on c3 I don't think 16.Rc1 guarding the knight and allowing 17. Qf4 solves anything because after 16.Rc1 Raf8 we are in the same situation because f4 is still not safe. Maybe Qg5 is possible after Re6 but that looks like a dangerous square too. Black can attack us with h6 and our queen seems misplaced there. This is a complex position! I am still trying to decide between Nd5 and Rdd1. The dumbest looking option of all (because of our last move) Rdd1 allowing our queen to retreat to d2 may actually be the safest. As of right now I like 16.Nd5 the best but things get complicated after Re6 Rc1 (LucyLovesCrypto) Nh4 (ArticMine) Nd5 (smooth, xmrpromotions)** ** currently winning Yesterday I thought we were doing really well (unlike Peter Svidler we never wasted time with Rb1 and we were able to play b3 and Bb2 which I assume was his plan with Rb1 although he did not accomplish it: https://chess24.com/en/embed-tournament/baku-world-cup-2015/7/1/3). We may still be doing fine but Rf6 has suddenly made this game extremely complicated. We need to be very careful. Nd5 No more hints as to future moves  I understand your logic but the problem is that it is hard to evaluate a plan one move at a time. After 16.Nd5 Re6 we actually have several options including one that does not involve moving our queen. Looking at this position is giving me a headache. Perhaps we could only discuss multiple moves in advance in an effort to convince voters to reject a potentially bad move (like I tried to do to reject 16.Nh4 above) but not show all of our cards for plans we find promising. I withdraw support for Nh4 |
|
|
|
I read this thread and this is my question:
What if evan duffield unexpectedly dies tomorrow morning?
I understand his mom also has the keys for spork. |
|
|
|
|
16. Nh4
Opens f3 and g3 for the Queen.
|
|
|
|
Litecoin, Monero, Doge, Dash? What will rise first following a BTC bull-run?
Most likely all four will appreciate in terms of Bitcoin if history is any indication. Most likely all four will depreciate in terms of Bitcoin. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Time will tell. |
|
|
|
Litecoin, Monero, Doge, Dash? What will rise first following a BTC bull-run?
Most likely all four will appreciate in terms of Bitcoin if history is any indication. |
|
|
|
15.Rfe1
What about 15. ... Ne4 after Rfe1? |
|
|
|
Bitcoin still has to deal with the related issues of the 1 MB blocksize limit and the development of a fee market for when the emission runs out. Both of these issues will over time prove to be fatal. Monero has both of them fixed. Bitcoin can buy some time by increasing the blocksize limit in a hard fork, but I do not see a solution to the question of securing the network once the emission runs out.
The privacy / fungibility of Monero will in the end turn out to be by comparison just a bonus.
As Trace Mayer eluded to, transaction privacy is much more of an important topic with bitcoin than the block size as of right now. Emission of bitcoin won't run out for what like 4 decades? I dont know the exact number of years. Bitcoin transactions aren't taking up the full 1MB yet but at the same time there has been countless hours of discussions, trolling, conferences, travel, phone calls etc that are all billable hours yet it isn't that big of an issue to the people hiring bitcoin to do what it is they want bitcoin to do. Yes, but this ignores the impact of cross chain mixing. If Monero were to grow to a size that could threaten Bitcoin, normal trading between Bitcoin and Monero would make most Bitcoin blockchain analysis very difficult if not impossible. Even today a simple way to mix Bitcoin is to sell Bitcoin for Monero, run the XMR through the Monero network with say a mixin of 5 and then trade the Monero back for Bitcoin. If the amounts are below typical AML/KNC levels this can be done both legally and anonymously. By the way the ratio of the emission to the number of coins of Bitcoin will be below that of Monero in about 13 years. (1.5625 XBT per 10 min vs 3 XMR per 10 min). This is a lot sooner that many realize. As for the 1 MB blocksize limit if there is any significant growth in Bitcoin the impact will be felt when transactions simply do not confirm. My take is that are "good enough" privacy / fungibility fixes for Bitcoin, including ironically Monero itself. The issues I have raised are fundamentally fatal and cannot be easily fixed. Edit: Take care of the longterm and the short term will take care of itself. The reverse is not the case. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin still has to deal with the related issues of the 1 MB blocksize limit and the development of a fee market for when the emission runs out. Both of these issues will over time prove to be fatal. Monero has both of them fixed. Bitcoin can buy some time by increasing the blocksize limit in a hard fork, but I do not see a solution to the question of securing the network once the emission runs out.
The privacy / fungibility of Monero will in the end turn out to be by comparison just a bonus.
|
|
|
|
...maybe we won't all pay insane taxes on our Monero capital gains after all.
That ruling was VAT, no capital gains. Significant nevertheless. (In Finland where I used to live, individuals are liable for capital gains tax even if their USD has appreciated against EUR before spending it. I would assume this is not widely reported though.) It is a very significant and also common sense ruling. Otherwise the VAT would simply not work. This leaves Australia as the country trying to collect GST on crypto currency. The reason levying VAT or GST on crypro currency does not work is that people can legally avoid the tax by registering as a VAT or GST business. In order for VAT or GST to work one cannot tax the medium of exchange or "money". My reading of Canada's GST legislation is that the definition of money is broad enough to include crypto currency in the definition of "money". |
|
|
|
|
1 ETH = 1 XMR is only one step on the downward trend of ETH. I actually expect ETH to fall below DASH in capitalization or 1 ETH = 0.46 XMR at current valuations.
|
|
|
|
... You can't be sure. It could be translated differently: "We are not buying a single Monero until the price is 0.001. Everything I have said concerning the principles is fully in force, of course, so after that we'll continue accumulating as much as we could " Trying to predict the price of Monero is coming down to predicting the timing of the release of the 0.9 tagged binaries. The recent market behaviour is very indicative of this. After the first deadline for a code freeze of September 15, 2015 https://forum.getmonero.org/4/academic-and-technical/303/a-formal-approach-towards-better-hard-fork-management passed with no news the market started to go down. On September 17, 2015 we were at 0.00227, by September 29, 2015 the low of 0.00131 was reached. We are now at 0.00147 after the second deadline for a code release of October 15, 2015 has passed. Edit: The recent selling pressure can easily be attributed to market participants reaching the conclusion that this project is simply not able to make a tagged release. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
