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

[aminorex]

Long ago I blew up your argument.

I don't feel particularly demolished in this regard.  I think your argument is riddled.  Moreover, arguing for an unstable regime without so much as a damping feedback loop ti mitigate divergence doesn't inspire me with visions of success.

A possibly insignificant probability of failure under attack is much less problematic than inevitable blow-up.

The issue could be decided with clarity by two rather tricky computations:  (1) compute the actual probability of a successful attack, as a function of resources.  (2) compute the time to value divergence as a function of econometric parameters.

I'm not going to be able to do either in the time available to me here.  You may consider it a default if you wish.  Personally, I don't keep scores.



  

[AnonyMint]

Moreover, arguing for an unstable regime without so much as a damping feedback loop ti mitigate divergence doesn't inspire me with visions of success...

(2) compute the time to value divergence as a function of econometric parameters.

That is a more high IQ explanation of what you were thinking in terms of "exponential blowup".

We need to enumerate divergence scenarios due to an exponentially scaling nominal size of expenditures on mining.

One is that mining becomes centralized, so we collectively are being siphoned by the few. That is probably the main concern for divergence?

But in that case, we've lost control of the coin any way and the government can take control of the coin and change the protocol as they wish to a fiat where they siphon us (where Bitcoin is headed with one or two pools controlling > 50% of the hashrate, once the G20 coordination on the Global Police State tracking of tax offenders reaches full implementation 2016 - 2020ish).

Currency will always be heavily debased because the people demand to use a currency that is debased (if your coin doesn't they will shift to a coin that does). Thus we had better focus on keeping the mining decentralized.

[monero-extended]

A new thread has been created for any discussion relating to development and engineering for Monero. This is not a general support thread, there is already one for that.

Please check it out here!


-updated by kbm

[AnonyMint]

A new thread has been created for any discussion relating to development and engineering for Monero. This is not a general support thread, there is already one for that.

Please check it out here!


-updated by kbm

I will not post there.

I will not participate in a self-moderated thread because I've already seen a desire for censorship which impact engineering considerations. My posts will continue in the unmoderated thread.

I edited the post to explain that technical considerations were impacted by the topic you wanted to censor.

[onemorebtc]

A new thread has been created for any discussion relating to development and engineering for Monero. This is not a general support thread, there is already one for that.

Please check it out here!


-updated by kbm

I will not post there.

I will not participate in a self-moderated thread because I've already seen a desire for censorship which impact engineering considerations. My posts will continue in the unmoderated thread.

I edited the post to explain that technical considerations were impacted by the topic you wanted to censor.

+1
censorship is only for people who are afraid.

edit: if you just want good discussions you can use "local thread rules" which are enforced by mods

[cAPSLOCK]

He was arguing against a constant % rate of perpetual mining rewards (a.k.a. debasement). He conflated this with the exponential growth of the value and adoption of the coin.

This is not at all what I read.  I understood him to mean he favored a fixed constant block reward (ie 1 coin) as opposed to the exponential growth from a percent inflation (ie 1% total coins per x time).

The "1 coin per" scenario keeps rewards flowing while effectively reducing the value of the reward via the greater total coins while the percent ends up ramping up the coin supply on an exponential curve.

Was it not clear?

[David Latapie]

I have also decided to donate a bottle of wine from my cellars to all core developers who show up in my castle.

Once I'll get rich with Monero, I'll definitely visit Malla (plus, it would a great place for a  Murder mystery game or a tabletop RPG.

..I'll remember Malla in 2019.
The Supernode, Baltic Sea
And an old Pietila wine...
Estonian Walkways

I've been using it to mean == "goes up to a value 10 times higher the original value" == +900%.

Maybe I accidentally invented it and it's not in general use  

Decuples is the term

And is it me or does the quality of discussion in this thread seem to improve between about 10:00 and 17:00 UTC each day? I've only bothered to check this "statistic" for the last few days' worth of posts but so far it holds up, at least on weekdays.

Interesting, especially if it holds true with time.

im interested in alts - can't put my finger on why exactly.

Because you find Darwinian evolution at work fascinating? Innovations in altcoins

This really was a great interview with David.  

Glad you liked it

[DumDumz]

where is dev right now?
say something!
Do some acture  work.

[jwinterm]

where is dev right now?
say something!
Do some acture  work.

lol DumDumz, you so CrayCrayz

[Anon136]

Ok so im reading the mini blockchain whitepaper. It appears to be a marginal improvement in some ways but it doesnt address the fundemental difficulty in scaling blockchains. The scalability problem doesn’t have anything to do with the size of the blockchain. It comes from the fact that each actor's transactions must be verified by all other network participants. Its the same math as network effects, except its a negative network effect.

Suppose actors make 1 transaction per minute.

1 actors = 0 verifications because he doesnt need to verify his own transactions.
2 actors = 2 transactions per minute. 2 * 2 actors = 4 transactions verifications. They dont need to verify their own so 4 - 2 = 2.  
3 actors = 3 transactions per minute. 3 * 3 = 9 verifications. they dont need to verify their own so 9 - 3 = 6.
4 actors = (4*4)-4=12
5 actors = (5*5)-5=20
ect...

0,2,6,12,20,30,42,56,72

This very quickly gets out of hand when you consider that there is a cost associated with verifying a transaction. even if that cost is infinitesimal.

Actors (users) are not verifying nodes, so you math is slightly incorrect in that respect.

However, your point remains valid that transactions scale O(NxN) by Metcalf or Reed's law. And verifying nodes probably don't scale by N actors.

However, Metcalf's law doesn't tell you the frequencies at which actors do transactions. Visa is currently at about 6000 transactions per second, so this can be verified with a single Intel CPU, so no problem for verifying nodes.

Scaling up to 6 billion people and micro transactions (more frequent transactions) might present a scaling problem. I've looked at Lamport signatures schemes that can verify 100,000+ transactions per second on a single i7 cpu. Since verifying nodes tend to be pools with considerably more resources (amortized over a large amount of hashrate), then a 10 - 100 cpu farm (or a Tilera 64 core cpu) is not unfathomable without destroying decentralization of pools.

Long-term the solution is simple. An ASIC for verification will scale sufficiently to 6 billion and micro transactions.

In short, no problem! Mini-block chain addresses the problem of block chain size and its impact on decentralization of mining. Cryptonite does not include anonymity however.

Thanks. You are annoying and pretentious but you aren't dumb. I'll have to take some time to digest this.

[AnonyMint]

He was arguing against a constant % rate of perpetual mining rewards (a.k.a. debasement). He conflated this with the exponential growth of the value and adoption of the coin.

This is not at all what I read.  I understood him to mean he favored a fixed constant block reward (ie 1 coin) as opposed to the exponential growth from a percent inflation (ie 1% total coins per x time).

The "1 coin per" scenario keeps rewards flowing while effectively reducing the value of the reward via the greater total coins while the percent ends up ramping up the coin supply on an exponential curve.

Was it not clear?

I see now that he was referring to an exponential growth of the money supply, and not an exponential growth of the rewards relative to the money supply.

I see no divergence problem with an exponential growth of the money supply if you are distributing it to yourselves (i.e. the broad usership). The money supply has been growing exponentially since the beginning of human history.

For one thing exponentially growing money supply is necessary to be consistent with the issuance of debt, because otherwise there is no means of paying the aggregately accumulated exponential growth in money needed due to interest compounding.

If we want to consider divergent outcomes and resilient strategies, note that any strategy might have a divergent outcome, e.g. even a feedback loop might carry with it some game theory for manipulation.

[AnonyMint]

Thanks. You are annoying and pretentious but you aren't dumb. I'll have to take some time to digest this.

When I am trying to win over the affection a lot of people, it won't be with words. I have a couple of 1 million user software accomplishments in my resume already.

[Anon136]

Thanks. You are annoying and pretentious but you aren't dumb. I'll have to take some time to digest this.

When I am trying to win over the affection a lot of people, it won't be with words. I have a couple of 1 million user software accomplishments in my resume already.

Comments like these are exactly the reason why you annoy me so much. Why can't you just rely on your arguments instead of appealing to authority. Who the he'll cares how many people used your software. Good arguments aren't made bad if no people used your software and bad arguments art made good if a billion people used your software. No one cares how wonderful you think you are.

[mafostedu]

Any chance of getting this coin listed on cryptsy ? I can't find XMR under their voting list, QCN is listed there though !

[superresistant]

-_-
blah blah blah, monero should not be overly inflationary, it must go like bitcoin, after mining 'stops', only transactions fees are rewarded to the miners, anything more will kill a currency, bitcoin model is well approved.

Nothing is approved. We have no idea what will happen to Bitcoin in a near future.

Any chance of getting this coin listed on cryptsy ? I can't find XMR under their voting list, QCN is listed there though !

lol cryptsy added QCN instead of XMR ? No wonder why this exchange is dead.

[Anon136]

-_-
blah blah blah, monero should not be overly inflationary, it must go like bitcoin, after mining 'stops', only transactions fees are rewarded to the miners, anything more will kill a currency, bitcoin model is well approved.

I am starting to realize that it is probably wise not to rock the boat in this respect. It's probably not that big of a deal anyway and we could scare off untold numbers of people with talk of perpetual inflation of any sort.

[devphp]

doge got in the same trap, they were big, kind of like monero is now but more mainstream, then hubris got them and look where doge is now.

Where, exactly? I still believe Dogecoin will overtake Litecoin on coinmarketcap.com and will be a currency of choice for micro and small transactions.

[Primitive]

Where, exactly? I still believe Dogecoin will overtake Litecoin on coinmarketcap.com and will be a currency of choice for micro and small transactions.

hope you're right   i'm a doge-millionaire.

PS - i need more Monero .  i like this coin more every day.

[AnonyMint]

Thanks. You are annoying and pretentious but you aren't dumb. I'll have to take some time to digest this.

When I am trying to win over the affection a lot of people, it won't be with words. I have a couple of 1 million user software accomplishments in my resume already.

Comments like these are exactly the reason why you annoy me so much. Why can't you just rely on your arguments instead of appealing to authority. Who the he'll cares how many people used your software. Good arguments aren't made bad if no people used your software and bad arguments art made good if a billion people used your software. No one cares how wonderful you think you are.

My gosh you an expert at inciting noise! You are the one who personalized the issue and caused me to defend my person. If you will stay on the facts, I will too.

[AnonyMint]

-_-
blah blah blah, monero should not be overly inflationary, it must go like bitcoin, after mining 'stops', only transactions fees are rewarded to the miners, anything more will kill a currency, bitcoin model is well approved.

Nothing is approved. We have no idea what will happen to Bitcoin in a near future.

Nekomata, Tx fees are the kiss of death. Please do them.   (so much for your blah, blah)

I am starting to realize that it is probably wise not to rock the boat in this respect. It's probably not that big of a deal anyway and we could scare off untold numbers of people with talk of perpetual inflation of any sort.

Yes please don't differentiate yourself from Bitcoin. And who are you targeting anyway with your mining client, the nimcompoops here or the masses?