The Road to $15 Trillion

[legiteum]

Monero is more used as cryptocurrency than Bitcoin or any other project including failure called LN.
Monero being cheaper to transact and faster is a bargain, on top of that you get privacy even if you don't care about it.

If it's that cheap then the FBI could take it over with a 51% attack with the change they find in their couch--if they haven't already and simply haven't told us (which really wouldn't surprise me). Bitcoin's resistance to takeover is a pure architectural tradeoff with performance.

All that said, do you have a source for that data? I've actually never even seen a vendor that takes Monero.

[DiMarxist]

The market is normally unpredictable but the $15 trillions in 10 year prediction is not to bad and since the market is volatile, the price might be less or more and can't be on the 15 trillions exactly.

[Odohu]

$15 trillion in 10 years sounds like a realistic prediction to me. In that case, Bitcoin is likely to cost around $600k, and I don't think that's unfathomable.
But as for the rest, I believe we shouldn't dwell too much on what Bitcoin used to be like or what the early crypto community was like. Honestly, I think that with that antigovernmental sentiment, Bitcoin wouldn't have reached its current heights, and the crypto market would have remained tiny. It's bridging the gap and a lot of interest in Bitcoin as an investment that brought us to $1.5 trillion market capitalization, and it's more of the same approach that can bring us to $15 trillion, in my opinion.
Perhaps you're making the same point, op, but I'm not sure about that.

$600k price of Bitcoin in the next ten years is a huge possibility; as a matter of fact, there are many projections putting it at $1m per coin. However, the price behavior this year is one that leave many doubting the much talked about $1m price per Bitcoin because we had expected that price will reach $100k shortly after the halving considering that price already started surging at the announcement of the ETF approval possibilities late last year. The ETF approval actually injected a lot of momentum into the market which many thought will combine with the halving effect to immediately send price to six figures but since that did not happen yet, people's optimism is waning Unless for for the ardent believers who are rarely perturbed by the price. Sincerely speaking, there is great prospect for Bitcoin despite the reluctance to explode that we are presently seeing in the market.

[anarkiboy]

If it's that cheap then the FBI could take it over with a 51% attack with the change they find in their couch--if they haven't already and simply haven't told us (which really wouldn't surprise me). Bitcoin's resistance to takeover is a pure architectural tradeoff with performance.

51% attack cost is not based on transaction fees   and this type of attack has higher possibility in Bitcoin because it's mining operation is WAY less decentralized.
It wouldn't surprise you because you know nothing from technical perspective as you have proven here now.

All that said, do you have a source for that data? I've actually never even seen a vendor that takes Monero.

I have already linked you... <facepalm>
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5506007.msg64422895#msg64422895

Most respected VPN (Mullvad) and thousands other places also accept Monero:
https://cryptwerk.com/pay-with/xmr/

On a side note, Bitcoin has been dethroned completely on DNM's, a place where Bitcoin gained it's popularity.  

Monero is taking over Bitcoin wherever both are accepted.
Because why would anyone overpay to use Bitcoin when it's worse in every respect.  

It's not love for the project that wins, it's the everyday usability that wins.
Monero got both, love and usability  

With Haveno DeX now running, it's unstoppable. You can trade it even in North Korea  
What Bitcoin has become is a highly volatile stock, nothing more. It has no value proposition outside market speculation.

The topics created by people on this forum speak for themself:

The Road to $15 Trillion
To the people who only see the downsides of HODLing Bitcoin
Don't Be scared Use this Dip as an opportunity to HODL more.
Do you also panic when bitcoin price falls more than 10-20% in a day ?
Bitcoin Price History 2010-2021 in 2 minutes can help you to be less panic

All they want is more FIAT, not Bitcoin. Bitcoin is just a temporary, disposable vehicle for their FIAT dreams.
Their love for Bitcoin is fake, their true love is FIAT.

[knowngunman]

The original crypto community hated the government, and hates any concept of regulations. They started their movement as explicitly "anti-government". Average consumers love regulations and government protections because it makes things safe for them without needing to think about it.

The original crypto community focused on changing the world and ending the idea of central banks and central governments.  Average consumers want their Social Security check to come when they retire, and they like the protection from crime their government gives them.

The original crypto community fought against things like centralized stores of your assets--not your keys, not your coins, they said. Average consumers want their wealth to be stored in a financial institution, because they want to pay somebody else to guard it, not hide it on their own person.

I enjoyed reading everything up there including your unjustified prediction about market cap in the next ten years but you begin to missed it when you involved government. Bitcoin and it developers did not publicly declare fight against government. We can not refute the fact that some bitcoin enthusiasts hold anti government view but bitcoin itself is neutral. It is just like an alternative to government financial system for those that value their financial privacy. It's high time we stop this unnecessary competition and comparison.

[BlackHatCoiner]

VPNs are centralized, they require money and they offer zero privacy.

Tor is free, decentralized and it offers true privacy.

I disagree.

A network is decentralized if the users hold equivalent rights. For example, Bitcoin, by running a full node. Tor is not decentralized, it is federated. End users are not expected to neither run relay nor exit nodes. Being able to achieve privacy in a trustless manner (as in the case with downloading the blockchain and checking your balance) is not the case with Tor. You have to trust that there is no adversary controlling the Tor nodes.

There are VPN companies in countries where keeping no logs is legal, like Sweden. I'd argue that, given some trust, using that could offer more privacy than Tor. (A good one is this, operating since 2009, working with Tor developers, accepts XMR.)

Their love for Bitcoin is fake, their true love is FIAT.

I don't love fiat. But I do want to store the value of the money I make, and Bitcoin does this job better than Monero. You have to realize that.

[anarkiboy]

I don't love fiat. But I do want to store the value of the money I make, and Bitcoin does this job better than Monero. You have to realize that.

Monero is losing to Bitcoin in terms of XMR:BTC pair but Monero is much more stable when we look at XMR:FIAT pair in the long run.
Due to this I'd argue that for storing value Monero is much better option.

[BlackHatCoiner]

Monero is losing to Bitcoin in terms of XMR:BTC pair but Monero is much more stable when we look at XMR:FIAT pair in the long run.

That's not enough for me. I want to store the value of the money I make. If I only wanted to store the amount, I'd just save in fiat instead.

[anarkiboy]

Monero is losing to Bitcoin in terms of XMR:BTC pair but Monero is much more stable when we look at XMR:FIAT pair in the long run.

That's not enough for me. I want to store the value of the money I make. If I only wanted to store the amount, I'd just save in fiat instead.

I'm talking about the value, it is less volatile in Monero.
The amount does not change in neither Bitcoin nor Monero.

You can see the value of Monero closely relates to usage:
https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/transactions-price-xmr.html#alltime

Cryptocurrency that's being actually used outside speculation trading will always be more stable.
That's why Bitcoin is becoming more volatile each year, it's being less used (for buying stuff), it's being HODL and traded by bots.

Seeing as usage for Monero is only increasing with time, we can speculate the price will go up as well - without that much volatility as we can see in Bitcoin.

[BlackHatCoiner]

I'm talking about the value, it is less volatile in Monero.

If it's more stable against the fiat price, then it doesn't hedge against inflation. If I make $150, put it into XMR, and XMR is still worth $150 in 4 years, then I've lost to inflation. I don't want my savings to be stable to a fiat currency that is stably losing value.

[anarkiboy]

I'm talking about the value, it is less volatile in Monero.

If it's more stable against the fiat price, then it doesn't hedge against inflation. If I make $150, put it into XMR, and XMR is still worth $150 in 4 years, then I've lost to inflation. I don't want my savings to be stable to a currency that is stably losing value.

I told my friends to buy Monero when it was $7 USD per coin, they didn't listen.
One of my friend purchased it couple years ago at ~60-70 USD, he is very happy today.
I think it is doing GREAT, but maybe not that great as Bitcoin but at least much more stable 

[Lucius]

I told my friends to buy Monero when it was $7 USD per coin, they didn't listen.
One of my friend purchased it couple years ago at ~60-70 USD, he is very happy today.
I think it is doing GREAT, but maybe not that great as Bitcoin but at least much more stable 

I agree, currency that's not being used for anything else than "number goes up" is just another worthless pyramid scheme, the biggest of them all is Bitcoin.

From "another worthless pyramid scheme" to something that is "great as Bitcoin". You're doing great on the forum, keep it up

[anarkiboy]

From "another worthless pyramid scheme" to something that is "great as Bitcoin". You're doing great on the forum, keep it up

I know your IQ level restricts you from understanding sarcasm and the fact that a pyramid scheme can do better than a legit project so it doesn't negate logic in what I have wrote before and now.  

If you need any more help, just ask. If not me, someone else will help you.  

[Lucius]

I know your IQ level restricts you from understanding sarcasm and the fact that a pyramid scheme can do better than a legit project so it doesn't negate logic in what I have wrote before and now.  

If you need any more help, just ask. If not me, someone else will help you.  

You just continue with your "insults" at the expense of my IQ, and at the same time continue to write nonsense and abuse trust feedback. Maybe you should first learn what polite behavior is, when your parents didn't teach you - or you just fell on your head too many times?

[anarkiboy]

You just continue with your "insults" at the expense of my IQ, and at the same time continue to write nonsense and abuse trust feedback. Maybe you should first learn what polite behavior is, when your parents didn't teach you - or you just fell on your head too many times?

I'm not the one stalking forum profile because I got butt-hurt from someone who does not agree Bitcoin is that great  
You dug up my comment from July 28, how much time and anger you have to follow me ?  

Your aggressive comments towards me speak for themself  

Cheers, my friend  

[legiteum]

If it's that cheap then the FBI could take it over with a 51% attack with the change they find in their couch--if they haven't already and simply haven't told us (which really wouldn't surprise me). Bitcoin's resistance to takeover is a pure architectural tradeoff with performance.

51% attack cost is not based on transaction fees   and this type of attack has higher possibility in Bitcoin because it's mining operation is WAY less decentralized.

It's indirectly connected in that higher transaction rates indicate more centralization and/or a PoS model instead of a PoW model, which is easier to attack.

Anyhow, I'm certainly not going to argue with a Monero Maximalist .

The original crypto community hated the government, and hates any concept of regulations. They started their movement as explicitly "anti-government". Average consumers love regulations and government protections because it makes things safe for them without needing to think about it.

The original crypto community focused on changing the world and ending the idea of central banks and central governments.  Average consumers want their Social Security check to come when they retire, and they like the protection from crime their government gives them.

The original crypto community fought against things like centralized stores of your assets--not your keys, not your coins, they said. Average consumers want their wealth to be stored in a financial institution, because they want to pay somebody else to guard it, not hide it on their own person.

I enjoyed reading everything up there including your unjustified prediction about market cap in the next ten years but you begin to missed it when you involved government. Bitcoin and it developers did not publicly declare fight against government. We can not refute the fact that some bitcoin enthusiasts hold anti government view but bitcoin itself is neutral.

I would love that to be true, and I think it's necessary for the overall market to get to $15T. But you don't have to go any further than even this very thread to see that anti-government is a core belief among many in the community.

It is just like an alternative to government financial system for those that value their financial privacy. It's high time we stop this unnecessary competition and comparison.

See, this is the kind of thinking I'm talking about that will not get us to $15T. Consumers do not want a "alternative financial system"--they want a make a profit from their speculation, which is almost all Bitcoin and every other digital currency means to them right now.

And as I've said many times here, there is a huge difference between the sort of privacy offered by a reputable VPN like NordVPN, and the government-proof privacy promised by cryptos (a promise broken by Bitcoin and only really available from Monero and a few others like it).

Most people don't want to fight their government. Most people don't need Monero or something like it that protects them even if they have committed a crime. Most people want to pay their taxes and for their to be no trouble with the police.

And most people don't want to deal with companies and/or individuals that are under investigation by one or more governments for money laundering.

It is a false alternative to assert that if something can be tracked by a government with a valid legal inquiry, it means it is "not private" for the purposes of 99% of consumers. Consumers don't need this anti-government stuff, they just want to be safe from criminals, marketers, and their fellow citizens.

Most consumers actually trust their government and need them to protect them from criminals. This is a foreign idea in much of the Bitcoin/crypto universe, who see the government as the enemy (except, I guess, when the government protects from being attacks by robbers).

The road to $15T goes through average consumers who think differently than much of the crypto community thinks today.

[anarkiboy]

If it's that cheap then the FBI could take it over with a 51% attack with the change they find in their couch--if they haven't already and simply haven't told us (which really wouldn't surprise me). Bitcoin's resistance to takeover is a pure architectural tradeoff with performance.

51% attack cost is not based on transaction fees   and this type of attack has higher possibility in Bitcoin because it's mining operation is WAY less decentralized.

It's indirectly connected in that higher transaction rates indicate more centralization and/or a PoS model instead of a PoW model, which is easier to attack.

Anyhow, I'm certainly not going to argue with a Monero Maximalist .

You shouldn't argue about subject you don't understand, I have highlighted your lack of knowledge about this subject.
I don't need to comment it, anyone who has at least basic knowledge knows you are wrong.  

For your information, Bitcoin has 16-20x more on-chain transactions happening right now, does it mean it's more centralized ? according to what you wrote - YES, and also easier to attack.
Which is of course false.

I am not only Monero maximalist, I am anything-that-makes-sense maximalist  

Anyhow I did not read rest of your scribble - But I'm sure someone else will correct you (I don't believe you wrote anything that makes sense).

[legiteum]

For your information, Bitcoin has 16-20x more on-chain transactions happening right now, does it mean it's more centralized ? according to what you wrote - YES, and also easier to attack.

Bitcoin also has thousands more nodes and each transaction takes far more computing power.

The simple architectural trade-off for blockchain is this: the safer the network, the more costly it is. The original blockchain architectural scheme was designed to be slow and expensive on purpose to make it harder to attack.

Every non-Bitcoin blockchain digital currency that out-paces Bitcoin in terms of speed and and costs does so by trading off decentralization (both in governance and/or actual computing).

[anarkiboy]

For your information, Bitcoin has 16-20x more on-chain transactions happening right now, does it mean it's more centralized ? according to what you wrote - YES, and also easier to attack.

Bitcoin also has thousands more nodes and each transaction takes far more computing power.

Bitcoin: 19540 nodes
Monero: 13199 nodes

Source:
https://bitnodes.io/
https://monero.fail/map

As you can see, they are not that far away from each other.   again... transaction number does not matter here.
Bitcoin transaction takes less computing power when it comes to nodes, it takes more power when we take into consideration mining.


Sorry but I'm not going to waste more time reading your posts, they are killing my brain cells and I like my brain cells - or at least what left of them after discussion with you.  

Adiós

...15 Trillion USD...

[legiteum]

As you can see, they are not that far away from each other.   again... transaction number does not matter here.
Bitcoin transaction takes less computing power when it comes to nodes, it takes more power when we take into consideration mining.

Interesting. You got me reading more about Monero.

Monero's ASIC-resistant algo is designed so that the network has a higher number of less specialized nodes, which makes it less concentrated. (Hence the comparison between numbers of nodes is misleading since Bitcoin nodes are going to be, individually, much more powerful and expensive).

The reason Monero is currently faster than Bitcoin is because that less-efficient network is processing 5% of the transactions the Bitcoin network is processing. In other words, Monero has perhaps 20% of the hardware that Bitcoin has (in terms of the total cost of those nodes), and it's doing 5% of the work.

And this was an intentional trade-off by Monero: to make processing a transaction less efficient and more government-resistant.

Monero transactions can take up to 20 minutes to be fully confirmed, even though the network is processing 5% of what Bitcoin does. That tells me that if Monero's transaction load ever grew even a tiny bit e.g. doubling, then transaction fees would skyrocket.

Blockchain is a great architecture for what it accomplishes, and I admire Monero for essentially delivering on Bitcoin's promise of government-resistant value transfer.

But back to the OP here (thank god ), most consumers don't want to go up against their government. Most consumers don't need Monero and won't pay for it.

(And, for course, talking about 20k or 500k transactions per day is rather silly when any mainstream adoption of digital currency [the $15T] will require this number of transactions per second).