(I still maintain the lowest block reward should be at least 1 monero.)
What are the inputs that must be considered when setting the eternal inflation parameters for a PoW coin? From technical perspective, I mean. From economical perspective, 100 years of growth at 2% APR is 624% per century. Granted, century is a long time, but also the current system with its wasteful resource acquisition and general footprint on pristine nature, cannot continue 1-2 more centuries with this growth rate. On the other hand, gold production of about 1.2% (historically higher ~2%) can be regarded as near optimal, because gold has held its value vs. oil in the last decades. If the economic and population growth abate, 0% is of course optimal as you cannot go lower. => The quick thinking would point to 0.5%-2% bracket, and it must be percentage, not a fixed amount. This is a really important matter. A 1%-point fail can easily destroy the coin. (see silver inflation in 1850-1870 for instance how a precious metal was destroyed) I don't think he was talking about an X% increase in coin supply. He was talking about a perpetual 1 coin per block. You will notice that with each new block 1 coin is a smaller percentage of the total money supply. Eventually it will become so small that the value of securing a marginal unit from loss due to carelessness will be less than 1 coin per block. And thus we would reach an equilibrium where about 1 coin per block was lost due to carelessness and 1 coin per block is created in mining. The beauty of a proposal like this is that it leads to a stable money supply. No deflation or inflation. I think rpietila knows I was talking about a fixed supply (per year), rpietila is advocating a fixed percent instead of fixed amount. I believe that rpietila has good reason to oppose a fixed amount, and this topic needs more discussion. I originally wanted a fixed amount, then a fixed percent (0.5% to 1%) but that has it's own issues because we cannot know how many coins are lost, and then I went back to thinking a fixed amount would be better. It's a very hard thing to get right, and we might have only one chance. Anon136 , the trouble with lost coins is as they become worth more and more they will become lost less and less as people take better care of them. |
|
|
|
What's going on about the shares? Will ken return bitcoins to the original shareholders? What's the process?
Thanks.
Ken has stolen all of the bitcoins, has directed the mining farm into his own pocket and is now using what's left to fight his various legal battles. Ken has won, the scammer has won. |
|
|
|
This is very preliminary, but it appears to me that all anonymous coins based on unlinkability will not be able to solve the very serious double-spend threat. If am correct, this is both a major and fundamental solution for longest chain rule of proof-of-work, but it also eliminates unlinkability as a anonymity solution. Sorry to say. Again this is preliminary, and needs more peer review. I'm reading the paper but am not seeing why their time stamp idea would eliminate unlinkability, you really need to explain your point AnonyMint, because you're being so vague here. Also the programmed self destruction does not really apply to Monero. We have both a smooth emission and immortal supply. (I still maintain the lowest block reward should be at least 1 monero.) |
|
|
|
Sorry about this "FUD", the truth cannot hurt too much, correct?
The Bitcoin Foundation is paying Devs to work on the core code, so they have a type of control over projected changes.
When the economy gets even more unstable and the establishment gets desperate, here is what could happen:
1) The core Bitcoin code (combined with the blockchain) tracks "every Satishi" from their creation to the current address.
2) It would be possible (no matter how unlikely) to change the code to 'collect' (for the greater good) 25% of all existing Bitcoins and send them to a single address controlled by the United Nations/IMF, for example.
3) The Bitcoin Foundation would need a leader/director who is (possibly) being threatened with serious charges for "heinous crimes" which have no statue of limitations, so the threat is always active... ...oh wait...didn't they just elect Brock Pierce as their new leader?
Whoever controls the code, has power over your Bitcoins. Correct?
Of course the mining pools will reject those code changes? Have the mining pools ever rejected code coming from the main dev team?
Is #2 possible (no matter how unlikely) Yes or No?
Remember that all these coins are types of social contracts. This is very important to understand. Bitcoin is several things, the client(s), the history (blockchain), the security (miners and nodes via the client(s)) and also a social contract. Bitcoin's social contract is quite simple, the bitcoin supply is growing according to the mint rate specified when Satoshi first created Bitcoin, all bitcoins can be sent with no need for approval apart from controlling the private key, there cannot be double spends and no way to modify the mint rate. Notice that the entire value of the bitcoin network is derived from these basic rules, and people have given Bitcoin value based on their belief that those rules are forever and unchanging. Now if the Bitcoin foundation released a tainted client that stole bitcoins, the social contract would be undone and two things happen: either the community reacts and fights to keep the original social contract in place (by releasing an untainted client and hardforking the network back to where it was) or the community agrees with the change (or can't be bothered to fight via releasing another client) and the value of a bitcoin drops to zero. Now the price will crash and those stolen bitcoin aren't worth anything now anyway. The reason why Bitcoin has it's value is because of Satoshi's original social contract that we have all bought into, changing a fundamental rule would undo all the faith the market has in Bitcoin and is suicide. Satoshi never said that a Government isn't allowed to buy up all the bitcoin's, so that is ok and in line with the social contract, but Satoshi said that the private key is always required to send bitcoins, any movement of bitcoins that does not involve the private key breaks the social contract and thus removes all faith in the system. That is my assessment of the situation. |
|
|
|
6. PoS
7. IPO
Haha, that leaves nothing to discuss then. You should only invest in Bitcoin and XMR, thread can be closed  Actually this is most likely the case, you say this in jest but it's very close to the truth. You might be confused why many people in this thread are not willing to entertain second movers (BBR and LTC) and IPO's and POS. It's because many people in this thread come from Risto's school of thought and under normal circumstances would never invest into alternative coins in the first place. Almost every alternative coin, second mover clone coin with heavy reliance on silly changes to set themselves apart, and the scam IPO and POS rich get richer models are real turn offs, they are not being built with the next 50 years in mind. However, many of these forward thinking and smart people have now seen a coin that could actually exist alongside Bitcoin and has real reason for its existence, Monero. Like I have said many times, BBR is pointless, if BBR overtakes Monero I am back to Bitcoin for good as it sets an easy precedent for the next clone coin with small change to overtake BBR, and thus investing in any CryptoNote coin becomes impossible. It's the same with Litecoin, if Litecoin overtakes Bitcoin in its current state then it's over, most of the money will leave CryptoCoins for good because the precedent is that a real investment can be destroyed by any clone that can market its small irrelevant changes well enough. Monero is a first mover because the true first mover (Bytecoin) is a scam coin due to the 80% premine. Ethereum, Monero, Bitcoin, are all first movers. This is why the Ethereum team are spending a long time getting their IPO right. They have made it so that most of the coins in the first 5 years will be mined coins, not IPO coins. Notice that they are not considering IPO and then POS, if they did a clone of Ethereum would then become the true first mover as Ethereum original would be tagged as a scam coin. The Ethereum team are being very careful not to mess the release up, if the market thinks the release is unfair, a clone will take over as primary candidate, like what happened with Bytecoin. The coin release is as important as the technicals. Bitcoin had the technicals and fair release. Monero had the technicals and fair release. Ethereum has the technicals and looking for the fairest release, if they screw up then they loss. Also don't even mention Darkcoin, that is a scam through and through. |
|
|
|
|
I suggest focusing on the block reward once the primary supply has been minted in several months, at the moment Monero needs focus on the core code, the GUI, the marketing in general, fighting the FUDsters.
Too much is going on right now to have a real serious discussion about the final immortal supply. Remember this doesn't come into effect for many years anyway.
My vote has been for 1 Monero fixed per 2 min blocks. But we'll see when the developers are ready for this to be decided. At the moment keeping this coin alive is the most important thing. Many people on this forum are actively trying to destroy Monero through FUD.
|
|
|
|
|
Nutilduh.
Monero has a very active development and community. Things are tense right now because of the following:
1. Many uninformed people expected the developers of Monero to be superstar programmers like the worshipped developers of the scamcoins. However instead of fake developers that hype themselves up we have real hard working developers that are honest and humble. The average bitcoin user is very dumb. They see the Monero developers as weak and lazy when in fact they are capable and doing the right thing.
2. The high inflation doesn't last a long time and drops off every day. However at the moment it's causing a lot of selling pressure bringing the price down. This isn't an issue because our target Litecoin releases more coin per day and at a higher rate than Monero. So when the GUI is apart of the main development branch and the software is fully usable by the average brain, then the price may rise and it could easily absorbed the "high inflation".
3. The developers are focusing on the important behind the scenes stuff in the code. Not the GUI for now.
4. In the last two weeks. There has been a massive flood of low activity bought and paid for bitcointalk accounts spreading fraud, FUD, lies and confusion. A lot of the Monero followers are growing tired constantly having to defend against hundreds of FUD accounts.
5. Monero is far far from dead. The only negative thing is that the price has fallen. Remember this coin is only a few months old.
|
|
|
|
Speculation you say?
Ok, where do you see XMR price in 24 months?
$100? |
|
|
|
I read that the devs of XMR use botnet to make fake demand for this coin. Is it true?
PS If it's true, I'll be very disappointed in XMR team
Use your brain! There is no evidence at all suggesting any members of the team are using botnets at all. All of this FUD comes from one team member stating that he knows a botnet owner that is mining Monero. Seriously you could have found out that yourself. Secondly, even if a team member was using a botnet, how would any of us find out about it? Come on dude start thinking for yourself! Why would some core member admit to using a botnet even if that was the case!!!!! Just to clear things up: no team member has admitted to using any sort of botnet. I know a few team members are cloud mining but that is normal. (Or they were cloud mining, the currently difficulty might not make cloud mining worth it.) Everything is ok. The core team are working hard on this coin day and night and things are making good progress. |
|
|
|
patience buyers...miners will mine for you..lets buy XMR at cheap prices.
lots of smart people and respected members here see the potential and in a way created a buying hype..but XMR is still not as user friendly as BTC and not as known to many people yet.
Well the trouble is a low value may cause new potential developers to lose interest. Or worst case even the current developers. People. Please don't give up hope. |
|
|
|
I just want to know when the price will stop falling, getting a bit ridiculous.
All I know is that diversifying works. Monero is now falling towards my buy in average and I don't know what to do. I believe in the project but damn it's getting low isn't it. |
|
|
|
IMO, XMR has no future, because the market can't withstand such amount of coins. It will only get worse in near future.
Inflation drops every block. The problem will get better as time goes on. Not worse. |
|
|
|
regarding xmr - did someone expect that low prices? - I assumed that we find after ATH a new equilibria around 0.005 or at least 0.004
I never expected them to go this low. |
|
|
|
Electrum password alone isn't sufficient (assuming the attacker got it through your dropbox plain text file), he'd also need a copy of the electrum wallet file. Any idea how that was accessed?
If I understand the OP correctly, both the wallet file and a plaintext txt with the password were on a dropbox volume. I don't use electrum but the way I understand it is the wallet is constructed from the 12 word seed. That's why I asked Klee for kleerification... (*snort* sorry) There's a password that secures your wallet file, and there's the master seed. With the seed, you're able to access the funds all by itself, but with the electrum password alone, you still need the wallet. They had both.. EDIT: Apologies for not replying but I am trying to manage a mess here (format the computers, contacts with authorities, phone/skype calls etc).. Doesn't dropbox use 2-factor? |
|
|
|
From now on, only the following coins may be mentioned in the thread:
BTC
XMR
NXT
FLT
BBR
NEM
XCurrency
Maidsafe
Skycoin
Siacoin
Discussion of the other coins belongs to other threads.
How can we request a new coin if it offers something great to get onto this thread? PM? |
|
|
|
ok, no trust in this coin anymore my message deleted: A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted. this coin is full shit and dead now
i lost every fucking coin in my wallet!!
somebody else spent those, cant use them anymore.
move on, dont lose your time and money
i moved to freshcoin
We don't control what the mods do. Promoting another coin in someone else's thread a big no-no, though. I grabbed your wallet, you have a metric ton of small inputs. I understand it's hard not being able to withdraw your 1.656924551683 XMR, so if you can pm me your address I will send you 1.656924551683 XMR from my wallet and I'll keep your wallet to withdraw the dust at a later stage when the tx fee has reduced. All this fuss over 1.6 Monero of dust payments? As I understand it Bitcoin suffers from the same issue and before the min tx amount was introduced into Bitcoin dust payments clogged up Bitcoin too. Anyways, I happy with all the progress being made. Thanks. |
|
|
|
If you're still running 32-bit, you probably are a senior or something and shouldn't be messing with magic internet money.
+1 lol The majority of internet-connected computers are 32-bit, no PAE. It is a serious freaking problem. And they're likely botnet zombies while their owners have no idea because all they use it for is email and Facebook. We should avoid techno elitist attitudes. The fact the current CN code demands a 64bit system because it handles data inefficiently and clumsily. This is embarrassing for Monero, and certainly it's biggest current flaw. Insulting the end users does not help the problem, and might damage the reputation of the currency. The 32 bit thing is embarrassing. Also never insult the end user. This needs to be fixed. Are any of the Monero developers able to fix it? |
|
|
|
|
AlexGR, what are you talking about? Monero is currently 2:1 size wise, growing less than twice the rate of Bitcoin.
You're trying too hard here, your bias is obvious.
|
|
|
|
|
My advice: if you're not ok with an anonymous coin being two to three times larger than bitcoin then please dump all your coins, because it's unlikely Monero will ever be 1:1 size wise compared to Bitcoin.
Even darkcoin routing through multiple nodes in RC4 will have the same bloat issues.
Anonymous will always cost more. Always.
It seems a lot of you don't know what you've got yourselves into. I think you're looking for a coin that is anonymous and is as small as Bitcoin. If so, the exit is simple; Please dump every last Monero you own, right now.
|
|
|
|
I have been involved in this coin for a while. there r two things bothering me.
The first is that blockchain keep growing at a fast pace than I expected. I understand this is uniquely caused by cn protocol. I am just wondering any hero devs has ever tried to think about a solution for this issues.
Now that the pool dust problem has been fixed the chain is growing at about twice the rate that bitcoin does. So the chain is roughly going to end up being 2 to 3 times larger than bitcoin due to the anonymity. This is really a non issue right now. The main issue is bandwidth usage. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
