Bitcoin Forum
March 26, 2019, 11:24:02 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 [914] 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 ... 2037 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency  (Read 4548637 times)
ArticMine
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268
Merit: 1037


Monero Core Team


View Profile
December 17, 2014, 09:39:03 PM
 #18261

I suspect that one of the reasons for current market behaviour is that the market simply cannot reconcile "Max supply: ~18.4 million" and "Roughly 86% mined in 4 years" with a tail emission. After all 14% of infinity is still infinity and infinity is >> 18.4 million. Making the OP actually reflect the consensus reached by the core team will go a long way toward calming the market jitters. Furthermore the sooner the tail emission amount is set the better.

Remember that the OP reflects the current status of the code. Once the tail emission is set and committed to master the OP will be updated to reflect that:)

Yes the current status of the code is no tail emission. It is also my understanding that the amount of the tail emission (0.3 XMR or 0.1 XMR etc.) has not being decided and this needs to happen before any coding can begin. This issue is not trivial because it deals with a fundamental economic change. There is also the question that if this is not acted on promptly there is a very good change it could not happen at all. Consider is the 1MB block limit in Bitcoin. It was dropped to 1MB in 2010 by Satoshi to protect Bitcoin from denial of service attacks. Now four years later Gavin is trying to undo this change and is facing stiff opposition from the Bitcoin community. In both cases we are dealing with a hard fork. The key lesson here is that a hard fork with clear economic implications becomes way harder as the coin matures and may in fact become impossible. It was easy for Satoshi back in 2010, it may become impossible for Gavin in 2015. Time is simply running out.

The current situation leads and has lead to all sort of speculation and uncertainty. For example a speculator may hoard XMR betting that core team may not be able to implement the tail emission hard fork because they have left it for too long, effectively defeating the economic argument for the tail emission. If the speculator is wrong and dumps all of a sudden then this leads to wild price movements. Then there is the history over the last few months of the debate regarding the emission change for the main curve. The main argument was that the current emission curve would lead to an unfair "community premine". This argument of course fall flat if there is a tail emission. In fact I would argue that if the tail emission had been clear from the outset the whole emission curve discussion would either never had happened or stopped cold early on.

We can go along way here by clearly identifying in the OP:
1) The current state of the code
2) What is being planned. (With a clear disclaimer that there is no guarantee of 2 given the nature of a POW coin)

Concerned that blockchain bloat will lead to centralization? Storing less than 4 GB of data once required the budget of a superpower and a warehouse full of punched cards. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/87/IBM_card_storage.NARA.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_card
1553599442
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1553599442

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1553599442
Reply with quote  #2

1553599442
Report to moderator
1553599442
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1553599442

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1553599442
Reply with quote  #2

1553599442
Report to moderator
Your Bitcoin transactions
The Ultimate Bitcoin mixer
made truly anonymous.
with an advanced technology.
Mix coins
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
ArticMine
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268
Merit: 1037


Monero Core Team


View Profile
December 17, 2014, 09:44:36 PM
 #18262

...
  • PoW algorithm: CryptoNight [1]
  • Max supply: ~18.4 million [2]
  • Block reward: Smoothly varying [3]
  • Block time: 60 seconds
  • Difficulty: Retargets at every block

[1] CPU + GPU mining (about 1:1 performance for now). Memory-bound by design using AES encryption and several SHA-3 candidates.
[2] Actual number of atomic units is M = 264 - 1. A minimum subsidy may be implemented in the future with <1% annual inflation to preserve mining incentives.
[3] Uses a recurrence relation. Block reward = (M - A) * 2-20 * 10-12, where A = current circulation. Roughly 86% mined in 4 years (see graph).
...

I suspect that one of the reasons for current market behaviour is that the market simply cannot reconcile "Max supply: ~18.4 million" and "Roughly 86% mined in 4 years" with a tail emission. After all 14% of infinity is still infinity and infinity is >> 18.4 million. Making the OP actually reflect the consensus reached by the core team will go a long way toward calming the market jitters. Furthermore the sooner the tail emission amount is set the better.

These statements basically make sense, even interpreted in light of infinite supply. The actual number has a footnote after it. Follow the footnote and you see the minimum inflationary subsidy (at least the possibility of it). The supply will only grow very slowly once the minimum reward is reached so "roughly 86%" might be interpreted as ~86% of the amount that will exist in the near future (a decade or two).

The base supply target is the dominant short term effect, and the inflation only becomes dominant beyond 10-20 years (and even then slowly).



On a 1% tail emission the tail emission becomes dominant after approximately 7 years.

Concerned that blockchain bloat will lead to centralization? Storing less than 4 GB of data once required the budget of a superpower and a warehouse full of punched cards. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/87/IBM_card_storage.NARA.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_card
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2072
Merit: 1077



View Profile
December 17, 2014, 09:46:17 PM
 #18263

...
  • PoW algorithm: CryptoNight [1]
  • Max supply: ~18.4 million [2]
  • Block reward: Smoothly varying [3]
  • Block time: 60 seconds
  • Difficulty: Retargets at every block

[1] CPU + GPU mining (about 1:1 performance for now). Memory-bound by design using AES encryption and several SHA-3 candidates.
[2] Actual number of atomic units is M = 264 - 1. A minimum subsidy may be implemented in the future with <1% annual inflation to preserve mining incentives.
[3] Uses a recurrence relation. Block reward = (M - A) * 2-20 * 10-12, where A = current circulation. Roughly 86% mined in 4 years (see graph).
...

I suspect that one of the reasons for current market behaviour is that the market simply cannot reconcile "Max supply: ~18.4 million" and "Roughly 86% mined in 4 years" with a tail emission. After all 14% of infinity is still infinity and infinity is >> 18.4 million. Making the OP actually reflect the consensus reached by the core team will go a long way toward calming the market jitters. Furthermore the sooner the tail emission amount is set the better.

These statements basically make sense, even interpreted in light of infinite supply. The actual number has a footnote after it. Follow the footnote and you see the minimum inflationary subsidy (at least the possibility of it). The supply will only grow very slowly once the minimum reward is reached so "roughly 86%" might be interpreted as ~86% of the amount that will exist in the near future (a decade or two).

The base supply target is the dominant short term effect, and the inflation only becomes dominant beyond 10-20 years (and even then slowly).



On a 1% tail emission the tail emission becomes dominant after approximately 7 years.

Not dominant to the total supply is what I meant. The "roughly 86%" figure will still be correct after 7 years and even after 10 or arguably 20.

Come-In-Behind
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182
Merit: 100


View Profile
December 17, 2014, 09:47:43 PM
 #18264

I'm happy about the Core team's decision after reading the last few pages. Seems they actually want Monero to be used a currency rather than being mainly a speculative investment. I like their attitude(s).
mik_druid
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 159
Merit: 100


View Profile
December 17, 2014, 09:54:10 PM
 #18265

pump!
ArticMine
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268
Merit: 1037


Monero Core Team


View Profile
December 17, 2014, 10:23:55 PM
 #18266


Not dominant to the total supply is what I meant. The "roughly 86%" figure will still be correct after 7 years and even after 10 or arguably 20.


This kind of argument is best dealt with by actually running the simulations. Which is why defining the parameters clearly and early is so important to the markets. Now with a 1% tail emission the 4 year money supply will be approximately 64% of the 20 year money supply. This is a far cry from "roughly 86%" of a now irrelevant number.

Now please do not get me wrong here. The core team has made the correct call on whole main and tail emission question. The OP simply does not reflect the reality of that decision.

Concerned that blockchain bloat will lead to centralization? Storing less than 4 GB of data once required the budget of a superpower and a warehouse full of punched cards. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/87/IBM_card_storage.NARA.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_card
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2072
Merit: 1077



View Profile
December 17, 2014, 10:31:41 PM
 #18267

Now with a 1% tail emission the 4 year money supply will be approximately 64% of the 20 year money supply. This is a far cry from "roughly 86%" of a now irrelevant number.

Only for some definition of "roughly" and also "<1%." Also note that I said arguably for 20 years, as it is clear as you point out there is some meaningful divergence by that point. But I think given the assumption that the total money supply will grow much more slowly in the out years, using the original target as a "rough" number for descriptive purposes of the overall shape of the curve was fine (for example by comparison with other coins with very different curves).

In any case I agree this should be fully specified soon. There is no reason to wait any longer.

ArticMine
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268
Merit: 1037


Monero Core Team


View Profile
December 17, 2014, 10:37:31 PM
 #18268

In any case I agree this should be fully specified soon. There is no reason to wait any longer.
+(264-1)

Concerned that blockchain bloat will lead to centralization? Storing less than 4 GB of data once required the budget of a superpower and a warehouse full of punched cards. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/87/IBM_card_storage.NARA.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_card
Oscilson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 250



View Profile
December 17, 2014, 10:56:10 PM
 #18269

The total is 2^64-1. For the base supply, it is 86% after 4 years. If you have 0.5% tail emission after that, it will take roughly 28 years to reach 2^64-1. Then do you need to increase the digit again to 128 bit?
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2072
Merit: 1077



View Profile
December 17, 2014, 10:59:48 PM
 #18270

The total is 2^64-1. For the base supply, it is 86% after 4 years. If you have 0.5% tail emission after that, it will take roughly 28 years to reach 2^64-1. Then do you need to increase the digit again to 128 bit?

Maybe but not necessarily.

It will be sufficient for a very long time that simply no single transaction can include more than 2^64-1 (this was already implemented in the original code, although I'm not really sure why -- extra defensiveness I guess). The total money supply figure is never used in the code except to calculate the declining block rewards, but that won't apply any more after the minimum is reached.

In theory a wallet would require some modification for presentation purposes if the balance (consisting of outputs from multiple transactions) of the wallet is >2^64-1 but this wouldn't affect the core code.


owlcatz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1193


BTC, XMR & VIA FTW


View Profile WWW
December 18, 2014, 01:22:17 AM
 #18271

The total is 2^64-1. For the base supply, it is 86% after 4 years. If you have 0.5% tail emission after that, it will take roughly 28 years to reach 2^64-1. Then do you need to increase the digit again to 128 bit?

Maybe but not necessarily.

It will be sufficient for a very long time that simply no single transaction can include more than 2^64-1 (this was already implemented in the original code, although I'm not really sure why -- extra defensiveness I guess). The total money supply figure is never used in the code except to calculate the declining block rewards, but that won't apply any more after the minimum is reached.

In theory a wallet would require some modification for presentation purposes if the balance (consisting of outputs from multiple transactions) of the wallet is >2^64-1 but this wouldn't affect the core code.




hi, any TL;DR for us who don't have time due to life issues? did something change? Help, i can't dig through these pages! Sad

Thanks in advance! Smiley
PestoQuinty
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 106
Merit: 10


View Profile
December 18, 2014, 01:25:15 AM
 #18272

I think trend is the only thing that changed, going north slowly.



The total is 2^64-1. For the base supply, it is 86% after 4 years. If you have 0.5% tail emission after that, it will take roughly 28 years to reach 2^64-1. Then do you need to increase the digit again to 128 bit?

Maybe but not necessarily.

It will be sufficient for a very long time that simply no single transaction can include more than 2^64-1 (this was already implemented in the original code, although I'm not really sure why -- extra defensiveness I guess). The total money supply figure is never used in the code except to calculate the declining block rewards, but that won't apply any more after the minimum is reached.

In theory a wallet would require some modification for presentation purposes if the balance (consisting of outputs from multiple transactions) of the wallet is >2^64-1 but this wouldn't affect the core code.




hi, any TL;DR for us who don't have time due to life issues? did something change? Help, i can't dig through these pages! Sad

Thanks in advance! Smiley
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2072
Merit: 1077



View Profile
December 18, 2014, 01:27:00 AM
 #18273

The total is 2^64-1. For the base supply, it is 86% after 4 years. If you have 0.5% tail emission after that, it will take roughly 28 years to reach 2^64-1. Then do you need to increase the digit again to 128 bit?

Maybe but not necessarily.

It will be sufficient for a very long time that simply no single transaction can include more than 2^64-1 (this was already implemented in the original code, although I'm not really sure why -- extra defensiveness I guess). The total money supply figure is never used in the code except to calculate the declining block rewards, but that won't apply any more after the minimum is reached.

In theory a wallet would require some modification for presentation purposes if the balance (consisting of outputs from multiple transactions) of the wallet is >2^64-1 but this wouldn't affect the core code.




hi, any TL;DR for us who don't have time due to life issues? did something change? Help, i can't dig through these pages! Sad

Nothing changed. There was some discussion about changing the emission curve but there was no decision to change anything, nor any changes made.

owlcatz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1193


BTC, XMR & VIA FTW


View Profile WWW
December 18, 2014, 01:28:22 AM
 #18274

Nothing changed. There was some discussion about changing the emission curve but there was no decision to change anything, nor any changes made.

Thank you sir, as always! it's all about the future to me. Smiley
5w00p
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 502



View Profile
December 18, 2014, 02:28:45 AM
Last edit: December 18, 2014, 02:38:49 AM by 5w00p
 #18275

I like the discussion, especially fluffypony's thoughts on the utility of XMR being more important than mere speculation.

I have this thought:

Monero will be a seriously formidable currency when there are Monero forks (clones).
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2072
Merit: 1077



View Profile
December 18, 2014, 03:00:18 AM
 #18276

I like the discussion, especially fluffypony's thoughts on the utility of XMR being more important than mere speculation.

I have this thought:

Monero will be a seriously formidable currency when there are Monero forks (clones).

There are already two. They went nowhere
 
5w00p
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 502



View Profile
December 18, 2014, 04:08:59 AM
 #18277

superresistant
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1960
Merit: 1087



View Profile
December 18, 2014, 09:28:46 AM
 #18278

I like the discussion, especially fluffypony's thoughts on the utility of XMR being more important than mere speculation.
I have this thought:
Monero will be a seriously formidable currency when there are Monero forks (clones).
There are already two. They went nowhere

You thought they were just two ?

No, there are at least 8 clones :

QCN/FCN/Aeon/Duck/Dash/OEC/MCN/ORION

All DEAD in a matter of few weeks.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2072
Merit: 1077



View Profile
December 18, 2014, 09:33:12 AM
 #18279

I like the discussion, especially fluffypony's thoughts on the utility of XMR being more important than mere speculation.
I have this thought:
Monero will be a seriously formidable currency when there are Monero forks (clones).
There are already two. They went nowhere

You thought they were just two ?

No, there are at least 8 clones :

QCN/FCN/Aeon/Duck/Dash/OEC/MCN/ORION

All DEAD in a matter of few weeks.

Two were cloned (well forked with minimal changes -- just parameters) off from XMR: QCN and AEON. The rest were cloned from other cryptonote coins, as far as I know. Dash certainly was (BCN). MCN was forked from FCN. It is possible some of the others were forks of XMR, but I'm not sure.
slb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 598
Merit: 501


View Profile WWW
December 18, 2014, 12:39:21 PM
 #18280

The easiest way to find out about the forks:
https://github.com/amjuarez/bytecoin/network/members

Forknote (create cryptocurrenies easy) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1079306.0
Dashcoin (anonymous cryptocurrency) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1020627.0
Pages: « 1 ... 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 [914] 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 ... 2037 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!