do you think it is possible within a year?  No. ~BCX~ 1 XMR = 20 USD may or may not happen within a year. I would not bet against it. In any case this is quoted for posterity. |
|
|
|
I have to disagree with some of the comments in the OP, when it comes to the FinCEN guidance.
Pool Operators.
There is nothing in the guidance that say they are an MSB. At what point in the process are they accepting virtual currency from anyone? What they are doing is purchasing hashing power in exchange for virtual currency and then using the purchased hashing power to generate virtual currency. Cloud hashing is an entirely different situation, that falls more in the area of selling securities SEC not FinCEN in the US.
Wallet Servers / Exchanges
There are two different situations here:
1) If they accept deposits of virtual currency which the operator of the wallet or exchange then has control over, for example Coinbase, Poloniex etc. then they are MSBs.
2)If they are only providing access to the blockchain and the wallet operator does not have access to the private keys for example Blockchain.info, MyMonero.com then the case that they are MSBs becomes very thin since once could argue that the money transmission is actually been done by the customer. A similar case can be made for Dash masternodes as far as the assembling Coinjoin transactions part of what they do is concerned. Nevertheless this could be considered a “grey area”.
Tipping servers / Micro payment services.
These can be technically MSBs. The issue here is whether the amounts are so small as to trigger any AML/KNC requirements.
I wish you were correct, but the initial guidance we received from two of the top experts in the field (lawyer & compliance auditor), is that it all comes down to custody. If you are a business and have custody of another person's digital currency (for any length of time, however short) you are an MSB. And pool operators, wallet servers, micro-transaction servers, like tipping bots all require registration and hence compliance. I agree with the custody argument. There is further guidance for mining pools and certain virtual currency software development. http://www.fincen.gov/news_room/nr/pdf/20140130.pdf, http://www.fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/pdf/FIN-2014-R001.pdf and http://www.fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/pdf/FIN-2014-R002.pdf. When it comes to mining pools the argument, against the pool being an MSB, comes from the mining pool itself manufacturing the POW virtual currency and then using the virtual currency to purchase computing power from the pool participants. Where it gets tricky is when the mining pool sends the virtual currency to a party other than the pool participant at the request of the pool participant. In this case pool would likely be an MSB. |
|
|
|
I really cannot see them letting it be vAT exempt. I think the only reason they want to regulate it so much is so that they can get their taxes from it and they most certainly aren't going to let us use it for free and untaxed. they always want their cut.
The only way a VAT or GST can work is if the medium of exchange; namely money is not taxed. Otherwise every transaction would be VAT or GST neutral with the VAT or GST on the money offsetting the VAT or GST on the goods or services and consumers would simply register for the VAT or GST to legally avoid paying the VAT or GST. Australia has this dead wrong and so does Estonia. The European Court of Justice Official has it right and understands how VAT or GST works. |
|
|
|
For those interested in selling XMR short Poloniex does offer margin trading. https://www.poloniex.com/marginTrading#btc_xmr One can borrow XMR at very attractive rates as TrueCryptonaire has pointed out and sell the XMR for XBT. Disclaimer: This is not investment advice. Short selling and margin trading can lead to losses far in excess of the initial investment and should only be attempted by experienced sophisticated investors after receiving appropriate professional advice. |
|
|
|
No disrespect for the elder, but if you see anyone older than 60 talking about BTC, start doubting. I mean the biggest investor of all time, Warren Buffet, has absolutely no idea of what's going on. They are just ignorant as hell and can't blame them. This is a generational change, one of those things that older people just can't wrap their mind around. It's like the internet, it will take decades until you see older people using it.
He is utterly clueless about Bitcoin but this has little to do with age. His comment about credit cards as the digital alternative to cash illustrates his ignorance very well. What he fails to see is that most people in the world do not qualify for a credit card but they can use cash, Bitcoin and other bearer instruments. In fact I would expect someone over the age of 60 to understand the value of cash and bearer instruments far better than the average 20 year old. So age in this case does not excuse his ignorance, it actually magnifies it. Edit 1: I am old enough to remember a time when children and teenagers were not discriminated against in payments, as is the case today, because everyone used cash. I see Bitcoin and other crypto currencies is a way to return to that saner time. Edit 2: A few days ago I was walking down the street on a very hot summer day and very thirsty, when I came across a couple of kids operating a lemonade stand. I of course purchased some of the lemonade and paid for it in cash. They did no accept debit or credit cards. I know of many 20 year olds who do not carry cash and would not have been able to quench their thirst. |
|
|
|
Take a look at https://blockchain.info/ and the size of blocks. Miners are forced to ignore transactions with fees due to the 1 MB blocksize limit. |
|
|
|
The biggest problem with Bitcoin is the 1 MB maximum blocksize limit and the lack of adaptive blocksize limits. Take an look in this thread and see how many people are complaining about transactions taking too long to confirm. This is directly related to the fixed blocksize limit that has made the recent "stress tests" / "attacks" economically feasible. Now take a look at https://blockchain.info/ and find that most blocks are very close to the limit. Then take a look at https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions. It is very easy to attack a network, that is already running very close to capacity with legitimate transactions, with "stress tests". |
|
|
|
They are only that cheap because botnets or claymore or whatever (SPV mining? Is it true?) constantly dump redistribute healthy amounts into the market.
You forgot the whales that are keeping the price down so they can buy more. This is possible, and I suspect there is an element of truth to it; however this can be a dangerous game for the whales in question. I must say the current very low volume after a significant correction is very indicative of this kind of behavior. |
|
|
|
To say warren and Charlie are not competent developers is irresponsible. What fucking "innovations" are you guys talking about? Is a solid ledger backed by a TH of PoW not 'good' enough? Think about what some of you are saying, we're just in the infancy of adoption and your bashing an established mechanism for decentralized, P2P monetary exchanges?
Get over yourselves, and come up with something better. And you want to talk dollars and cents? Add up ltc/btc volume against any other coin. Even if the Chinese volume is some what faked, it's not even close. Give props where props are do. If you're in the crypto game, LTC is your daddy if your names not BTC.
Failure to deal with the fixed blocksize limit issue in Litecoin is irresponsible. Assuming that XMR would ever need to support >28 TPS is clearly irresponsible. Don't bash excellent contributors to the crypto sphere who do it pretty much because they love it. Some of us should be so blessed. What is very irresponsible is hard coding into the protocol of 28tps after observing the debate in Bitcoin going back to 2010. The hard blocksize limit is precisely what has got Bitcoin into its current problems. This issue remains in Litecoin and if, as it is likely, Bitcoin deals with this issue the limitation will still remain in Litecoin. The Litecoin community has missed the golden opportunity by ignoring this issue. |
|
|
|
BTW Asking "stupid" questions is not evidence of stupidity. Not asking questions is.
you bolded this, so it was extra important presumably. It seems, from the language you chose, you accept the presupposition that you are/were asking stupid questions. Customer asks clerk, "I have a coupon for 25% off a hundred dollar purchase. How many dollars does that come to?" I would say asking stupid questions is sometimes evidence of stupidity and not asking questions can mean you already have an answer or are willing to work it out on your own or are timid, none of which are stupidity. I'm almost tempted to take you off ignore to see what other words of high-school teacher wisdom you have for us. This is actually not a stupid question because one has to take the newspeak of marketing into account. The correct answer would be along the lines of 24.99 less applicable handling fees and taxes. |
|
|
|
PLEASE answer my specific question:
To be clear this is an attack only the premine holders can perform/help perform?
Thanks
The premine turns a decentralized virtual currency into a centralized virtual currency and the preminers become MSBs. The premine creates a massive regulatory risk. This is what happened in the case of Ripple. In the Ripple case the word premine was used in the settlement agreement between Ripple labs and the US government. So to answer your question the regulators will force the preminers to perform the attack. |
|
|
|
...
Welcome back to the XMR thread, where your BCN blather remains off-topic. Please be respectful and take your troll posts back to the BCN thread where they belong.
+1 Could we please keep the debate on whether Bytecoin was a ninjamine or a premine in the following thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=740112.0 |
|
|
|
8MB cap
Doubling every two years (so 16MB in 2018)
For twenty years
It is one thing to temporarily increase the size to give a bit more breathing room for sidechains , payment channels and the lightning network to be tested and another thing to simply double the limit every two years to remove the pressure of discovering more efficient means of scaling. This is a horrible plan and one that I cannot support. (coming from someone that has defended Gavin and Hearn in the past) Why do you think hardware can not keep up with it? What in the last 25 years shows anything towards that idea? I think we will most likely be fine.
It isn't blockchain bloat and hard disk space I'm concerned with but network latency and bandwidth which won't scale that quickly. Many valid security and centralization concerns, some of which satoshi szabo is concerned with - https://twitter.com/NickSzabo4/status/611259452402987008History indicates otherwise. Nielsen's Law of Internet Bandwidth http://www.nngroup.com/articles/law-of-bandwidth/ 50% per year compounded so a doubling every two years is actually below that. Edit: 1.5^20 > 3325 vs 2^10 = 1024 |
|
|
|
I'm not sure 8 GB blocks would ever be needed. If Bitcoin became the global currency standard, there is still a finite number of transactions/second that humans would perform. Even with the Internet of Things doing transactions autonomously, I doubt the transaction volume will double every two years.
A quick back-of-the-napkin calculation tells me that the 8 GB blocks would be able to handle several million transactions/second. That is far in excess of even VISA/Mastercard peak volumes right now. (Oddly enough, I have a project I'm brainstorming that if fully successful would actually need that million TX/second today, not in the far future... just wish there was a proven technology that could handle it today.)
This reminds me of the quote attributed to Thomas John Watson Sr. of IBM in 1943. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_J._Watson I think there is a world market for maybe five computers There is also the quote attributed to Bill Gates in the 1980's regarding 640KB of RAM. 640K Ought to be Enough for Anyone http://www.computerworld.com/article/2534312/operating-systems/the--640k--quote-won-t-go-away----but-did-gates-really-say-it-.html While the Watson and Gates quotes are the subject of much dispute the following one from Digital Equipment Corp. founder Ken Olsen in 1977 is not There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in his home Now while IBM and Microsoft are still around where exactly is Digital Equipment Corp.? My one criticism of this proposal its that the doubling stops after 20 years, thereby keeping a max blocksize limit in Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Bill Gates' wealth is growing like a snowball. Now it is 79.3 billion USD
Satoshi, with roughly 1 million bitcoin, is worth 250 million USD. Thus, Satoshi's fortune is hundreds of times smaller than Bill Gates.
Who do you think will reach 1 trillion first and why?
Bill Gates, why? Well, he has a company which is leading the technology and computer, which is essential for Bitcoins  Satoshi. If s/he has 1 million XBT then s/he is well ahead, unless of course s/he stored her/his XBT on a Microsoft Windows computer and lost it to one of the 10s of millions of Windows malware. By the the way there is nothing in Microsoft's products that is essential for Bitcoin and furthermore any Bitcoin user would be very well advised to stay well away from Microsoft products if they wish to hang on to their Bitcoins. |
|
|
|
Curious how much monero the core team donations wallet received ? Now you can look! With latest git: ./build/release/bin/simplewallet --generate-from-view-key 46BeWrHpwXmHDpDEUmZBWZfoQpdc6HaERCNmx1pEYL2rAcuwufPN9rXHHtyUA4QVy66qeFQkn6sfK8a HYjA3jk3o1Bv16em:e422831985c9205238ef84daf6805526c14d96fd7b059fe68c7ab98e495e5703:/home/user/monero-core-team-donations-watch refresh Enjoy wait wut? I was told a long while back that viewkey would never be working before official wallet.  is it true? There is a steadily growing discrepancy between the constant stream of git commits and the "official" binaries that are over six months old. As a result of this many a Monero naysayer will be in for a rude surprise. Edit: https://forum.getmonero.org/4/academic-and-technical/303/a-formal-approach-towards-better-hard-fork-management Once this process starts likely in the fall then the reality will sink in. |
|
|
|
To say warren and Charlie are not competent developers is irresponsible. What fucking "innovations" are you guys talking about? Is a solid ledger backed by a TH of PoW not 'good' enough? Think about what some of you are saying, we're just in the infancy of adoption and your bashing an established mechanism for decentralized, P2P monetary exchanges?
Get over yourselves, and come up with something better. And you want to talk dollars and cents? Add up ltc/btc volume against any other coin. Even if the Chinese volume is some what faked, it's not even close. Give props where props are do. If you're in the crypto game, LTC is your daddy if your names not BTC.
Failure to deal with the fixed blocksize limit issue in Litecoin is irresponsible. |
|
|
|
...
No.
I am looking forward to a permabull that is going to start dumping as a result of exchaustness.
Bitcoin had the "long term holders" that sold their coins way too early. Monero needs those, too.
Not everyone has a merit to be rich and hold 2000 usd/xmr coins.
Ever thought of the possibility that some of those Bitcoin "long term holders" may choose to not make the same mistake with Monero? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
