|
me thinks you like your name .
where are these decentralized exchanges you are interested in?
|
|
|
|
Do you guys realize Monero's pretty much just gone down since mid June?
Why do you keep listening to the same voices that got you into this mess in the first place?
Or is there just a fresh cycle of noobs that keeps filling the place of those exiting?
Thank you for your concern for others. Yes some people are a bit optimistic for the short term but there is no reason to be pessimistic. #1 is because of high emissions. They are however coming down. The reward was over 16XMR/blk in June and as shown below it is now under 14XMR. Everybody likes round numbers and one such number is 13.888 which is the block reward where less than 20,000 are mined a day. Last Reward: 13.8221 XMR Last Reward: 13.9692 XMR Last Reward: 13.8221 XMR Last Reward: 14.1005 XMR Last Reward: 13.9750 XMR #2 is waiting for necessary improvements for XMR to be able to be used by The Drooling Masses®. Although I am one of The Drooling Masses I have been able to mine and use XMR due to motivation. #3 is the FUD of the last 3 weeks which is coming to an end one way or another "soon". May I also point out that btc has been in a decline since June as well. XMR is niether a shitcoin nor a P&D @smooth, your welcome although at this point I'm not in a mess  |
|
|
|
|
Pardon my emotional reaction. I know a great deal of thought has gone into this and I understand the perspective from which it was created. Considering the quality of people involved I imagine that the right things will be done.
|
|
|
|
In order to encourage joining, MEW had decided to dispense early members of any handling fees and to accept subscriptions starting from 10 XMR. The early access period will stop in exactly 1 week, on the 16th of October at 23h59 UTC. Starting from the 17th, the minimum number of votes will be 50 XMR and the one-time handling fees will be 10 XMR, all paid at the same address MEW initial decisionsHandling fees - Processing a new member request
- Buying more votes for an existing member
- Change in identity information
- Change in how a member's votepower is proxied
- Casting a vote
- Refunding of votes to a member in downgrade or resignation
- Time-based charge for fulfilling special requests (applies to non-members as well)
- The fees are donations paid directly to the administrative clerk (ME or his deputy) and do not go to the GF.
For easier handling, the fees are paid at the same address as the registration - the administrative clerk will then proceed with separation of funds. Did I understand that correctly -- 10 XMR fee to cast a vote? That is really excessive especially for smaller members. Probably not, please read further  The MEW is an economic organization, not a political one. That means there is no big kitty to make the big holders support the hobby-participation of the smaller ones. Or even if there were, we would not consider it a right thing to do. May I suggest that the probably be changed to never. I don't consider being able to freely vote as being equal to big holders supporting the "hobby-participation" of the smaller ones. One man's hobby is another man's life. |
|
|
|
In order to encourage joining, MEW had decided to dispense early members of any handling fees and to accept subscriptions starting from 10 XMR. The early access period will stop in exactly 1 week, on the 16th of October at 23h59 UTC. Starting from the 17th, the minimum number of votes will be 50 XMR and the one-time handling fees will be 10 XMR, all paid at the same address MEW initial decisionsHandling fees - Processing a new member request
- Buying more votes for an existing member
- Change in identity information
- Change in how a member's votepower is proxied
- Casting a vote
- Refunding of votes to a member in downgrade or resignation
- Time-based charge for fulfilling special requests (applies to non-members as well)
- The fees are donations paid directly to the administrative clerk (ME or his deputy) and do not go to the GF.
For easier handling, the fees are paid at the same address as the registration - the administrative clerk will then proceed with separation of funds. Did I understand that correctly -- 10 XMR fee to cast a vote?That is really excessive especially for smaller members. If so please refund my membership. Do you really want to discourage voting and participation? How are you going to get a community consensus without the community? |
|
|
|
RingShuffle
Don't give them ideas, didn't we had enough with IPO/ICO scams?  VaporCoin [ANN] coming Soon TM. Now with 50% more Bogons! I would very much like to be a part of this. Please tell be how I can be. Thank you. Fully anonymous, your identity turns into vapor and mixes with other identities.® We are one.® Be one with VaporCoin.® |
|
|
|
|
so you are saying that annon doesn't exist. OK
What about darkcoinlite?
|
|
|
|
Not even a mention of GUI... The missive is weekly, and the GUI is coming hopefully by Christmas. There is no need to mention it in every weekly bulletin unless there is something available for trial use or something Otherwise excellent, very well written summary about the forum! I will have to join soon. My joining is the stress test to any software, because I am naturally dumb, and totally incapable of doing anything lower-level stuff with computers (most higher-level also, but my Excel skills keep me alive year after year). I will come back screaming YIPPEE when the registration has worked fine Incidentally, we just started a MEW vote concerning whether to move "our" discussion to a new forum or try to continue discussing here. Since the announcement that a new dedicated forum actually is available, the support from members has moved to support the new forum. From one idiot to another, registration was very easy  |
|
|
|
|
10 votes for proposal #2.
|
|
|
|
I don't pretend to speak on behalf of anyone, but I've done a certain amount of work for jl777 on both Teleport and SuperNET documentation. I'm not a dev, I'm a writer, and I understand them both pretty well. They are both excellent ideas. They are very simple in theory - elegantly simple, in fact. There is a lot of complexity to get through to reach that simplicity, though If you have specific questions, please ask them. Better still head over to the SuperNET forum and ask there, as I won't have lots of time to answer stuff here. There will be other folks who can help out there. There's also a SuperNET thread here, though mostly it's pretty quiet as everyone left for the SuperNET forum after some rabid trolls made it impossible to get anything done. Perhaps you can also explain what happened with the dumps then?  Stop using this thread for advertisements. People were asking questions. I offered answers if they wanted. They're still welcome to them, if they want. Since you ask, I imagine the dumps are fairly easily explained by panic sellers bailing after the ANN they thought would make them lots of money failed to materialise. Perhaps they thought everyone else would sell and wanted to get in first. Keynesian beauty contest. What's hard to understand about that? It's crypto, it's driven by sentiment. Now if only there were initiatives that understood fundamentals were important, and realised collaboration was so much better than competition... 95% of bids pulled just before CZ announced the no announcement. Maybe that had something to do with it? ETA" the price had not gone up due to the announcement of the announcement. Would you like to try again? |
|
|
|
How come there are no fortunes in fortune cookies?
There is if you have the vision to see it. ~BCX~ An 11 year old pointed out to me that what is in fortune cookies are actually statements. I was slightly surprised to see the BCX won that philosophical exchange handily IMO. Impressed. On the face of it, yes they are only statements and quite cheap to produce. But this ignores how knowledge is formed. BCX's reply eloquently captured Taleb's and my theories about the formulation of value (via knowledge). It is the (long-tail) chance meeting of information that causes symbiosis and genesis. Nobody won or lost, merely a chance meeting of information. No matter what answer BCX gave my response would have been the same. He could have replied having used the definition of fortune being wealth. He did give a good answer. Another way to knowledge is not to take things for granted and to look at the world and everything you do with fresh eyes. Children do this and most adults lose this. Why did I even ask what seems like a meaningless question out of the blue? |
|
|
|
How come there are no fortunes in fortune cookies?
There is if you have the vision to see it. ~BCX~ An 11 year old pointed out to me that what is in fortune cookies are actually statements. |
|
|
|
Oh, then you're just wrong. Or deliberately vague. Which one this time?
Neither just posting above your comprehension level. ~BCX~ How come there are no fortunes in fortune cookies? |
|
|
|
What is your guess about this vaporware below? Don't worry you won't offend me, just be frank.
Does such a credible and correct unpublished white paper exist? Yes or no?
How the hell do I know? Correct would be especially hard to say if it is unpublished, since that would limit who might be scrutinizing it for errors or unstated (here at least) assumptions. Here is a quadruple dose of FUD...
Wouldn't it be ideal if a coin's whitepaper has a mathematical proof that it isn't vulnerable to anything less than a 50% attack (other than the normal 6 confirmations type risk of double-spend)?
And wouldn't it be porn, if that proof showed that every other proof-of-work coin (including Bitcoin) is so vulnerable?
And wouldn't it triple sexy if that proof showed that all (untraceable block chain) anonymous coins can't be fixed to remove that vulnerability?
Excuse my drooling, I can't contain myself.
Edit: I have not withheld any quantification of TW attack on CN afaik. I shared all of my (limited) knowledge on that. I am referring to something different above.
right back to it eh ? LOL Did you happen to read the title of this thread? Do you realize that it was created by a non supporter of Monero? Do you understand the premise of this threads creation? Do you realize that these posts that you consider "scientific gibberish" are actually some of the most on topic posts there are? Do you realize that your posts are not only off topic but repetitive? Also your posts seem to me oft times to be the pot calling the kettle black. |
|
|
|
It seems the question is whether the trend from the current block reward to the minimum (subsidy) reward is too fast? What criteria would deem the trend too fast? Are miners running for the hills as we speak? I'm only trying to clarify what exactly the problem is.
Is the issue simply that XMR's emission schedule isn't similar enough to bitcoin's?
Preface: I operate at about 1/10 the speed of smooth with <1/10 of his knowledge and what follows was written before his post. It is another side I have seen discussed and I wasn't even thinking of the mining aspect. Since smooth believes the value must increase in order to keep miners then what follows should be taken with that in mind. Also realize that I am not in anyway qualified to speak on the subject especially considering the talent in Monero. OK so why is this idiot doing so? Selfishly to help me understand it. Also I don't presume I'm the only idiot here so maybe they can learn something from the perspective of one of their own. I'll give my observations although I believe you know more than your question suggests. It seems the non selfish argument is along the lines of a) people don't want to buy a coin that is mostly mined. If that is the case almost every coin will have this problem at some point. What does slowing emissions so it takes another year or two really accomplish? I guess a better distribution but that comes from adoption because it is useful. therefore b) they believe the time it will take for adoption to occur will happen at a time when most coins are already mined. This is due in part to the time needed to develop Monero to the point where it can be used by the infrastructure that also needs to be built. I have no idea if the central premise is correct. For the people that will find Monero useful, will they really care if it is mostly mined? I understand Risto's concerns about this but I wonder if this is because he is looking at it from an investment perspective more so than the perspective of a Monero economy. |
|
|
|
Fast cashouts? That's a joke to me, mine took 12 hours.
They clearly state that most cashouts will be completed within 12 hrs. What's your problem again? |
|
|
|
On the other hand, it does make sense to speak of 40% of the coins that will be mined during the initial period of faster mining. It isn't quite as clear what that means though, but it does make this whole emissions curve sound a bit more like an instamine doesn't it?
Maybe I'm a little slow but if the concept of 40% of the coins doesn't exist, how can you use it to compare it to an instamine? What I meant was when you start talking about some percentage of some "initial period of faster mining" (and that is the only correct way to discuss percentages here) that sounds to me more like the system being set up from the start like an instamine, fast mine, etc. The faster period in this case is several years before emissions slow to some tail level. I just can't see how the emissions can be changed after a very significant % has been mined.
It is a simple change to one or a few lines of code. I'm pretty sure that's not what you meant though, but that is literally the case. So "can be changed" is not really the issue, it is more like whether people want it changed. Ultimately it comes down to consensus of the community. Thank you for responding to The Drooling Masses® Luckily we have many very knowledgeable and capable people in the community. I'm looking forward to their input in the appropriate venue. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
