CoinMarketCap.com - Market Cap Rankings of All Cryptocurrencies!

[Lebubar]

Thank you for giving me the confidence in knowing I made the right decision in taking coinmarketcap off my favorite websites list. Your recent actions are very unprofessional and prove to myself and the cryptocommunity at large that coinmarketcap.com can not be taken seriously as a provider of information.

I would say exactly the opposite in this instance. The enormous 35% instamine of dash is something that is highly relevant to providing useful and objective supply statistics, and coinmarketcap is to be commended for disclosing it, even though dash is a "popular" coin and they are bound to be aggressively criticized by dash supporters for doing so.

Although I do question the quality of their information given that they don't list Bytecoin as premined and haven't removed the hitbtc exchange data despite being provided with ample evidence of hitbtc volume being fake.

No no and no.
they put : ** Significantly Premined

This is wrong that's all!

And now, you (smooth) are saying it was CAN be premined without prove.! lol
Such a dick.

Just for you free coding lesson :

If (here you put a condition)
then
 (put some command that will be execute if the condition is true)
Else if
( put here command that will be execute if condition if false)
End if

[MasterMined710]

this is gonna get ugly. no coins have had perfectly fair launches or have "fair" initial distribution including bitcoin.

You're using the wrong standard. The standard is not "perfectly fair" it is "significantly premined."

CMC seems to think that an instamine of 35% in one day counts as that. I think they should clarify the tag and make it "significantly premined or instamined", but that's up to them.

I disagree with your statement that instamined doesn't have a clear definition. It has a reasonable common sense definition and plain English definition that means "mined extremely fast" just as "significantly" has such a definition. I don't know what criteria CMC uses for "significantly" though.

saying 35% was instamined is inaccurate because you are talking about the "current coin supply" and not the "total coin supply".
you are using a moving target as your metric which is not very smart and quite deceptive. in that case monero has a 15-20% instamine. some say monero is still being instamined due to the highly inflationary distribution curve...

1% or 35%.

Maybe you should ask coinmarketcap if they think 1% is "significantly" anything. Then ask them about 35%.

I have a feeling they put that word "significantly" there for a reason, but I don't really know.

Between us friends, lets just call that instamined.

No let's not call that instamined because, you know, words have meanings.

OK. Lets revert.

You, as one of the core devs of Monero, around from practically launch day, as far as I can tell, have openly said Monero was purposefully deoptimized from launch.

You may not have known, but the fact is you have said it was scam launched.

Those coins were not burned and you didn't relaunch, for whatever reason - probably the high emission rate benefiting the early adopters, but who really knows.

Monero will have fewer maxcoins than DASH, yet despite launching 3-4 months after Darkcoin, Monero now has 7.4m coins vs DASH at 5.3m

I don't know why I keep trying to be civil with you.

So lets remember what you said about the Monero scam launch with a deoptimized miner that you have, by your deeds as a core dev, condoned:

-snip-
I don't agree that a few percent of the coins mined by someone who optimized the miner is  "significantly" instamined or premined. If we restrict it to the period before the obviously deliberate de-optimization was remove then it is probably 1% or less.-snip-

[smooth]

saying 35% was instamined is inaccurate because you are talking about the "current coin supply" and not the "total coin supply".

I don't know what method coinmarketcap uses when they decide what is "signficantly" but either way it seems significant to me, and it seemed significant to Evan when he talked about the enormous amount of mining in the first 24 hours causing "problems" and it also seemed signifiant to the darkcoin FAQ and origin of dash posts on the dash site.

These are primary, and credible sources.

you are using a moving target as your metric which is not very smart and quite deceptive. in that case monero has a 15-20% instamine.

Monero has 0% instamine

There are no instantmines or premines in Monero.

[MasterMined710]

"Yes i'm well aware of the (Monero deoptimized miner scam). They mined say 2.5% of the coins over several months... Good for them." Smooth

If you're going to quote, you should actually quote. That is not a quote. You're making yourself look like a scammer when you rewrite a quote and don't link it for context. Not good for your argument at all.

i don't know where your original quote is but are you denying you said that about the 2.5%+ monero instamine?  
if you are denying it let me know and i will find the original quote unless you deleted it.

the 2.5 to 5%+ monero instamine is calculated from the "total coin supply" not the "current coin supply". i'm not sure what the total monero instamined % is from the "current coin supply" but i think it's around 15-20% depending on who you ask and when they say the instamine was complete, 19 days or 2 months due to the admitted deoptimized miner issue.

[smooth]

"Yes i'm well aware of the (Monero deoptimized miner scam). They mined say 2.5% of the coins over several months... Good for them." Smooth

If you're going to quote, you should actually quote. That is not a quote. You're making yourself look like a scammer when you rewrite a quote and don't link it for context. Not good for your argument at all.

i don't know where your original quote is but are you denying you said that about the 2.5%+ monero instamine? 

I never said anything about a "Monero instamine", because there isn't one. I'll quote again from an objective independent source that has done a careful a well respected investigation of many coins.

There are no instantmines or premines in Monero.

Whatever aspects of Monero you don't like are not relevant to question of instamining, and especially not relevant to the (extremely well documented) dash instamine.

[MasterMined710]

saying 35% was instamined is inaccurate because you are talking about the "current coin supply" and not the "total coin supply".

I don't know what method coinmarketcap uses when they decide what is "signficantly" but either way it seems significant to me, and it seemed significant to Evan when he talked about the enormous amount of mining in the first 24 hours causing "problems" and it also seemed signifiant to the darkcoin FAQ and origin of dash posts on the dash site.

These are primary, and credible sources.

you are using a moving target as your metric which is not very smart and quite deceptive. in that case monero has a 15-20% instamine.

Monero has 0% instamine

There are no instantmines or premines in Monero.

don't blame your deception on cmc.
you already admitted monero had at least a 2.5% (total coin supply) instamined or "unfair" mining issues.
so i guess you agree cmc should add  3 *** for the "unfair mining" of monero?

quoting a anti darkcoin/DASH site as proof of something is no proof at all...
"Hopefully one can see after reading this article that coins like Novacoin, Goldcoin, Blackcoin, Darkcoin, etc are obviously bad investments."
http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins#darkcoin

[smooth]

you already admitted monero had at least a 2.5% (total coin supply) instamined or "unfair" mining issues.

I did not admit that Monero has any instamine, because it does not.

so i guess you agree cmc should add  3 *** for the "unfair mining" of monero?

It is up to them if they want to start rating the "fairness" of mining, as opposed to the more objective question of whether there is a large discontinuity of supply at launch (significant premine or instamine). That's not something they've done so far.

quoting a anti darkcoin/DASH site as proof of something is no proof at all...
"Hopefully one can see after reading this article that coins like Novacoin, Goldcoin, Blackcoin, Darkcoin, etc are obviously bad investments."
http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins#darkcoin

It is only an "anti-dash site" as you call it in that the author did a huge amount of work to carefully evaluate a large number of coins (shown on the right hand column) and one of several that was evaluated negatively on the basis of a clear instamine was dash (then called darkcoin).

[BagHolder010]

@ Smooth

I am cry baby Monero developer who can not compete with EVAN in CODING or bring something new to Monero so I cry about it here


Ehhh, just go back to ur shitcoin please

[3x2]

@ Smooth

I am cry baby Monero developer who can not compete with EVAN in CODING or bring something new to Monero so I cry about it here


Ehhh, just go back to ur shitcoin please

so you think coinjoin is developed by EVAN? 

[MasterMined710]

you already admitted monero had at least a 2.5% (total coin supply) instamined or "unfair" mining issues.

I did not admit that Monero has any instamine, because it does not.


-snip-

i said instamined "or" unfair mined. whatever you want to call it is fine as long as you admit it.

also, thanks for admitting monero had a 12.5% unfair mine. is that 12.5% from the "current coin supply" or the "total coin supply"? your blatant metric deception is confusing everyone.

smooth is deceptively playing word games again.
when he says 35% he is talking about the current coin supply not the total coin supply. i guess that means that 15-20% of moneros "current coin supply" was instamined.

0% of anything was instamined on Monero, and you know it.

If you want to express the effect of the deliberately de-optimized miner in terms of the current supply of monero it would be around 2.5x (roughly 1/2.5 of the nominal total coin supply currently exists), so probably <2.5%.

If you want to express the effect of some people optimizing miners better than others, that might be as much as 12.5% or more if you consider that it goes on forever (for every coin, nothing special about Monero).

[reflexmk]

This site lost the credibility it had, to be so unprofessional and mark DASH as premined coin, you cant be serious.

[smooth]

you already admitted monero had at least a 2.5% (total coin supply) instamined or "unfair" mining issues.

I did not admit that Monero has any instamine, because it does not.


-snip-

i said instamined "or" unfair mined. whatever you want to call it is fine as long as you admit it.

also, thanks for admitting monero had a 12.5% unfair mine. is that 12.5% from the "current coin supply" or the "total coin supply"? your blatant metric deception is confusing everyone.

I said it could be 12.5% or more depending on how you want to define the concept. I don't know what an "unfair mine" even means. If it means there being some people with better optimized miners than others (which was what I said about 12.5% if you take my comment in context) then dash has certainly had close to a 100% "unfair mine" since I know of private optimized X11 miners that have been around forever and are still being used. I wouldn't be surprised if Monero does too, but I don't know about them specifically since dga's stuff ended. As far as I know at this point the best Monero miner is yam, which is public.

[fluffypony]

also, thanks for admitting monero had a 12.5% unfair mine. is that 12.5% from the "current coin supply" or the "total coin supply"? your blatant metric deception is confusing everyone.

We're not afraid of discussing Monero's launch because:

1. We didn't launch it, so we had no control over any of those factors.
2. We have not, at all, broken our social contract.

To be specific:

The "glitch" in the obfuscated miner was fixed extremely fast (by NoodleDoodle, one of the core team members), a lot faster than most people remember. At the time it was a pretty big deal.

Specifically, the change was commited May 7th, so ~19 days from launch = 2.58% of initial emission mined up to that point (we have infinite tail emission, but still use the 18.4 million initial emission as a reference point). This was roughly a 2.5x speed improvement over the original (sorry smooth, I was misremembering yesterday). There was an additional speed bump, once AES-NI support was added on May 18th, and that was an additional ~5x speed improvement, so by the time the first month had passed we'd improved the miner efficiency by more than 12x and made those changes publicly available.

A good exercise is to look at a logarithmic hashrate chart for the period:



You can see the initial spike as speculative miners start CPU mining, and then a continual ramp-up, with spikes on May 4th-8th and again on May 19th-20th, but neither of those spikes are orders of magnitude greater than the initial spike.

Remember, too, that at the time the core team that you know and love today didn't know each other. I knew othe a bit (online), but I'd never even had a passing pm with any of the others. Plus the community as a whole, largely spearheaded by those who would become the core team, were in the process of taking it over after things with thankful_for_today were...not working out;) So collusion on any level would have been unlikely, and if we did collude with the intent to scam you can bet we would have run with an improved miner for a lot longer than a couple of days. We would have mined for many months with only small improvements to the hashing function, and added lots of whiz-bang features to build the price up whilst we built up our stash.

Also to add, here's a log chart for all time:



You can see the onboarding of speculative miners and the improvements in hashing efficiency up till 2014-05-20, after which all changes were largely inconsequential. At that point 826k XMR had been mined, so we're talking about dga and others competing with our public improvements to the hash function that everyone used for a piece of 4.49% of the initial emission. It was a bit of an arms race, although the miners that were just pulling the changes that were committed to the repo were not at much of a disadvantage (in fact they were probably at an advantage, as they were able to expend more energy spinning up AWS instances since they weren't trying to optimise code:-P )

Indeed, from the moment Monero launched it had binaries for Windows 64-bit *and* Windows 32-bit, plus the other bits and pieces. The logarithmic chart clearly shows that there was nobody pressing any dominant advantage.

But, frankly, this has absolutely nothing to do with Dash being correctly marked as a significantly premined cryptocurrency. Your desperate attempts to deflect that betray your own struggle with acknowledging this, and I completely understand that. But this is not something raised by myself or smooth or any members of the Monero core team (or even a contributor. It's raised by someone who has nothing to do with Monero, and who was provoked by BlockaFett. That's not something we have had any control over.

Stop trying to deflect.

[TanteStefana2]

So because you weren't there it doesn't matter?  Really?

[TanteStefana2]

This site just lost it's credibility because of a cry baby Monero dev who is a copy cat with no coding skills what so ever. Instead of working to make Monero better he attacks EVAN because he is to much for him to compete with in CODING or getting something new to CRYPTO.

I'm in total agreement

[reflexmk]

-snip-

You call youurself a dev and you dont know what premine is. What a moron. DASH was not premined, and displaying it like that is incorrect and unprofessional from a site claiming to know what its doing.

[TanteStefana2]

This site just lost it's credibility.

Agreed. Anybody who looks at the Dash block explorer can clearly see that no coins were premined. If you want to mark the coin as instamined, that's great, but it's clearly and provably not premined.

I didn't realize they put it down as premined!  Seriously, what language do they speak?

[BlockaFett]

absolutely nothing to do with Dash being correctly marked as a significantly premined cryptocurrency.

Stop trying to deflect.

So this is the Monero lead dev and owner of MyMonero.com, where aparently 50% of Monero wallets reside.

He is now saying it is correct to say Dash is a "premine", which is new because until recently he was saying it was an "instamine".

"Pre" - means - "before" - as in "before the launch".

You are saying that CMC listing is correct because Dark were mined before the launch.

Proof now please...

[fluffypony]

-snip-

You call youurself a dev and you dont know what premine is. What a moron. DASH was not premined, and displaying it like that is incorrect and unprofessional from a site claiming to know what its doing.

You call yourself literate and yet you can't read? What a moron.

The term "significantly premined" is the term that CoinMarketCap uses to refer to both instamined and premined currencies. It's a generalisation, and not a wildly incorrect one, and I was using their terminology.

[fluffypony]

So this is the Monero lead dev and owner of MyMonero.com, where aparently 50% of Monero wallets reside.

We've published absolutely no stats, and it's impossible to determine how many Monero "wallets" there are, so where do you get that figure from? Stop lying, BlockaFett, it's unbecoming and unprofessional.