[XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency

[kbm]

On which exchange was that guy with 100BTC >?

it was poloniex.com, but it is now gone. er nvm, just moved up to 205, 102.5 btc buy lol 

I wake up, there's 56 or so on the order books. now there's 180 something.

This looks like a rehash of a couple of days ago where in the window of a couple of hours there was a lot of large buys up (well into triple digits) from lower double digits

This market is interesting, if for no other reason than to watch it.

[Anon136]

happenings are happening at poloniex

[fluffypony]

Guys - I'm delaying publishing this week's Monero Missive as I'm just waiting on confirmation of two things, and I will only get confirmation tomorrow (especially since Germany won, which throws everything out of the loop;) Tomorrow's Missive will be backdated to today as it will be this past week's Monero Missive. Thank you for your patience with this!

[Nekomata]

XMR is the future.

[kbm]

I would have to agree also. Despite the major loss to those using the exchange, there would have potentially been any number of completed transactions outside of the exchange. If people were using it to purchase goods/pay paychecks etc .. it would be brutal to just 'roll that back'. You can't expect people to unmail something, or just give back whatever now hasn't been paid for .. just not how things work. The rollback can't address that, so it's clearly a tough issue.

Bringing the issue to a larger picture, what if people were buying houses, cars, or other things of large value? The hardfork would put them in a precarious position that they didn't ask for. Do they give the money back, or keep both the money and the goods? It would make people face a very tough reality that they most likely wouldn't be ready to face.

I know there's more than one person here who lost money from gox, so I'm sorry if this topic strikes a nerve.

I thought some more on this. Vericoin is now PoS.

What kind of comparison to a PoW rollback can be made? Would it be easier to cause a hardfork in this type of situation with a PoW coin, or a PoS coin, to succeed? I really don't know about PoS, but at least for PoW I know a representative majority (>51%) of the miners would be required in order to enforce the hardfork. Does this same logic follow suit with those that stake their coins, where 51% of the stake will be required to consent in order to enforce the hark fork? Or can the developers just pick a point and roll it back, making the previous fork impossible to use without consensus?

[Dogeshop_eu]

Omg he is still there @ 0.00210000   50897.93224285XMR   106.88565771BTC

[onemorebtc]

I would have to agree also. Despite the major loss to those using the exchange, there would have potentially been any number of completed transactions outside of the exchange. If people were using it to purchase goods/pay paychecks etc .. it would be brutal to just 'roll that back'. You can't expect people to unmail something, or just give back whatever now hasn't been paid for .. just not how things work. The rollback can't address that, so it's clearly a tough issue.

Bringing the issue to a larger picture, what if people were buying houses, cars, or other things of large value? The hardfork would put them in a precarious position that they didn't ask for. Do they give the money back, or keep both the money and the goods? It would make people face a very tough reality that they most likely wouldn't be ready to face.

I know there's more than one person here who lost money from gox, so I'm sorry if this topic strikes a nerve.

I thought some more on this. Vericoin is now PoS.

What kind of comparison to a PoW rollback can be made? Would it be easier to cause a hardfork in this type of situation with a PoW coin, or a PoS coin, to succeed? I really don't know about PoS, but at least for PoW I know a representative majority (>51%) of the miners would be required in order to enforce the hardfork. Does this same logic follow suit with those that stake their coins, where 51% of the stake will be required to consent in order to enforce the hark fork? Or can the developers just pick a point and roll it back, making the previous fork impossible to use without consensus?

as usual: the only thing the devs can change is code. nothing else. they cant force you to take another bin. what they are planning is: create a new coin with the same name and add a premine which honors current holders.

miners can do more. and in this case miners are stake holder. given that the thief controls 33% he just needs 22% more to reverse himself

sorry, i just walked by and saw this topic... couldnt resist to make this comment also:

POS in generally is flawed.... did you now that its enough to hold 51% of all coins in the past to trick new clients in to another view of the network... you cant just secure something with itself (imagine a locked box, with the key inside).
the invention of satoshi is NOT blockchain technology (merkle trees and chained data structures exist for a while) his invention is Proof of Work - and to implement a key to the lock which is outside of the system itself (the key is time in this case; something a pc has not a real networkwide provable clue about)...

[kbm]

as usual: the only thing the devs can change is code. nothing else. they cant force you to take another bin. what they are planning is: create a new coin with the same name and add a premine which honors current holders.

miners can do more. and in this case miners are stake holder. given that the thief controls 33% he just needs 22% more to reverse himself

Got it, i'd like to add that there's a serious flaw here with that in mind. With a large theft, the consensus mechanism will now be flawed in that there will be a majorly disproportionate number of people staking the old fork (Due to the theft itself) compared to those trying to stake the new fork (as anyone in favor of the new fork will now have zero coins). This seems to be a massive security flaw in using centralized exchanges, and is something that only effects PoS coins (on the topic of their consensus mechanism). It's a mechanism that encourages massive amounts of theft.

sorry, i just walked by and saw this topic... couldnt resist to make this comment also:

POS in generally is flawed.... did you now that its enough to hold 51% of all coins in the past to trick new clients in to another view of the network... you cant just secure something with itself (imagine a locked box, with the key inside).
the invention of satoshi is NOT blockchain technology (merkle trees and chained data structures exist for a while) his invention is Proof of Work - and to implement a key to the lock which is outside of the system itself (the key is time in this case; something a pc has not a real networkwide provable clue about)...

That's a good description of it, been trying to make an analogy for a while now and this goes toward that a little bit.

[onemorebtc]

as usual: the only thing the devs can change is code. nothing else. they cant force you to take another bin. what they are planning is: create a new coin with the same name and add a premine which honors current holders.

miners can do more. and in this case miners are stake holder. given that the thief controls 33% he just needs 22% more to reverse himself

sorry, i just walked by and saw this topic... couldnt resist to make this comment also:

POS in generally is flawed.... did you now that its enough to hold 51% of all coins in the past to trick new clients in to another view of the network... you cant just secure something with itself (imagine a locked box, with the key inside).
the invention of satoshi is NOT blockchain technology (merkle trees and chained data structures exist for a while) his invention is Proof of Work - and to implement a key to the lock which is outside of the system itself (the key is time in this case; something a pc has not a real networkwide provable clue about)...

Got it, i'd like to add that there's a serious flaw here with that in mind. With a large theft, the consensus mechanism will now be flawed in that there will be a majorly disproportionate number of people staking the new fork (Due to the theft itself) compared to those trying to stake the old fork (as anyone in favor of the new fork will now have zero coins). This seems to be a massive security flaw in using centralized exchanges. It's a consensus mechanism that encourages massive amounts of theft.

the best is this:
 - buy 51%
 - sell 51%
 - change your client to not accept new blocks and only build your own chain beginning at the time where you had 51%
 - wait...

obviously its simplyfied (also depends on the implementation)...but as always with basic logic flaws: you cant solve it buy building on top of it...

but i guess you get the point... need a beer now... germany WON!!!!

[blaaaaacksuit]

Gee, I wonder whos buy wall that is. 

[blaaaaacksuit]

Gee, I wonder whos buy wall that is.  

me too, /me casino mode on I bet 1 XMR he has a castle lol

I bet his name rhymes with Risto.

So much for me buying ultra cheap coins 

[xa4]

Who is Risto ?

[blaaaaacksuit]

Who is Risto ?

A guy who really really likes BTC.

[smooth]

Who is Risto ?

This guy: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=624223.0

[pandacoin]

Who is Risto ?

Rpietila, the owner of castle in Estonia, Bitcoin enthusiast and Monero whale.

[Anon136]

Who is Risto ?

Rpietila, the owner of castle in Estonia, Bitcoin enthusiast and Monero whale.

A for real castle owner? Any idea which castle?

[xa4]

Who is Risto ?

This guy: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=624223.0

aaaahhh, now I see ...

[cAPSLOCK]

Who is Risto ?

Rpietila, the owner of castle in Estonia, Bitcoin enthusiast and Monero whale.

A for real castle owner? Any idea which castle?

I always think of Castlevania.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malla,_Estonia

[rpietila]

Who is Risto ?

Rpietila, the owner of castle in Estonia, Bitcoin enthusiast and Monero whale.

A for real castle owner? Any idea which castle?

I always think of Castlevania.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malla,_Estonia

Once again, to prove my royal birth to the trollbox. 

[AnonyMint]

Why would anyone mine XMR for profit now when you can mine QuazarCoin, cash it in, and buy 30% more XMR than you can get from mining?  For that matter, Vertcoin should get you about 100% better return (GPU basis). The only rational reason to mine XMR now is because you want to help build the network - or you are just too lazy to switch coins.  

Can anyone make a rational argument against this claim:  The current hash power is almost 100% enthusiasts, who mine because of confidence, support for XMR.  (They are not  likely to be sellers.)  It makes no sense at all for any botnet to mine XMR for sale.

(Yet the current hash rate is roughly 85% of the historical high.  The depth of support this demonstrates is breathtaking.)

In Economics 101, the marginal price, not average price, is where supply and demand meet.

So the simple interpretation is that the marginal price is much higher than being reported on the exchanges, because most aren't willing to sell at any where near that price, thus the volume on the exchanges is insufficient to satiate actual demand. Thus the only way to meet demand is to mine at a much higher cost.