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

[nexern]

ot: interesting how quick people are starting to worship the blockchain, viewed as an untouchable entity from above. i tought this tech was made to
give us, the people, the power back to decide. what sense does it make if we don't use this power but replacing the authority enslavement by an
blockchain enslavement?

The bolded part is indeed part of what the whole point is. The part which is also italicized is not precisely true. The tech is made to PREVENT arbitrary "us, the people" from deciding. That's why there is a consensus protocol.

interesting and i thought i can decide by which client i am running on my box and therefore which chain i am supporting. isn't this what you would call a free decision?

You raise a valid point. However, you make the free decision to accept or not the blockchain as absolute. If most people do, then consensus is achieved. You are free to limit your freedom when you decide which client you are running. The network works best when most people agree with the blockchain as a superior truth. In a sense, it is a mutual-relinquishment of freedom: if I accept that the blockchain is absolute (including over me), and you accept the same thing, and the blockchain is immutable, then we can trade with no trust. This is the Byzantine Generals problem. I don't trust anyone to make choices in my name. So I decide it is better if nobody, not even I, can.

It is not too dissimilar to a hypothetical of leaving your weapons in the lobby when you enter the council chamber. You are not free to carry them, but nobody else is. Everyone is free to decide whether they accept this arrangement or not.

boiled down it is simple, if you (we) don't believe that a majority is able to make meaningful decisions, based on common sense we are doomed anyway, no matter what tech we are inventing/using.
stating that a blockchain should be always immutable is an indicator for the need to pass/deny decisions/responsibilty to another kind of centralized leadership, in this case, the swap to the blockchain.

i will stop here, because i don't want to derail this thread but i am very interested how this social experiment will evolve over time and if people understand they can't have both.

[1714934116]

1714934116

[1714934116]

1714934116

[BlockChains]

I don't know who Peter Todd is but if he was HIRED to be a consultant for Monero it is really really unprofessional for him to be publicly defaming the code on twitter before privately giving his input to the devs. In the corporate world if say IBM were having some issues with their books and hired an outside accounting firm to come audit and straighten things out, then said firm went on twitter and publicly went "Hoo Boy! It's amazing IBM functions at all considering they basically use monkeys with crayons to do their accounting!" That would not fly and would immediately tank the price of the stock. When people have money on the line, why would this guy be publicly slandering the code when he has been hired as a consultant???

[rpietila]

Wouldn't it be best to let weak hands dump and long term believers buy at discounted prices than artificially holding the price up?

With price-discovery in the markets, the definition of "artificial" is vague. In one sense, the decline from 510 to 400 and below was "artificial" (if we assume it was, at least partly, a product of preknowledge of the coming attack and speculation that it would further hurt the price). In the other sense, the essence of markets is that all knowledge is taken into account, information is not perfect, and seldom even the best informed players have access to many information that some of the others have, in turn.

If we discount the last week downturn altogether, the price should be much higher by now. The attack failed - it could not damage the confidence towards XMR, it exposed the old scammers more, and proved how capable the devteam is. "Rolling back" the preparation of the attack from price history would lift us to 600 by tomorrow.

But if the market collectively decides that a selloff is in order, we might find ourselves at 300 instead. That some buyers openly like XMR at 400, is no more artificial than others vowing in the trollbox that they will sell every one of theirs, at whatever price they can get once the trading starts. Depending who will prevail, buying at 400 may be the last opportunity to buy at 400, or the last opportunity to sell at 400. Most likely, given the meager actual effect of the attack, it won't be neither, and anyone making decisions based on what others have already done, is just impoverishing himself as a result.

I have a largish number of XMR and BTC in the exchange, ready to react. But my reaction will be to buy if the price goes down, and sell if it goes up. This is my way of making slow and steady profit. Others have their way, and without panickers, my income would be significantly lower.

[kbm]

I don't know who Peter Todd is but if he was HIRED to be a consultant for Monero it is really really unprofessional for him to be publicly defaming the code on twitter before privately giving his input to the devs. In the corporate world if say IBM were having some issues with their books and hired an outside accounting firm to come audit and straighten things out, then said firm went on twitter and publicly went "Hoo Boy! It's amazing IBM functions at all considering they basically use monkeys with crayons to do their accounting!" That would not fly and would immediately tank the price of the stock. When people have money on the line, why would this guy be publicly slandering the code when he has been hired as a consultant???

This is a reasonable question. Perhaps ask Peter Todd?

[BlockChains]

I don't know who Peter Todd is but if he was HIRED to be a consultant for Monero it is really really unprofessional for him to be publicly defaming the code on twitter before privately giving his input to the devs. In the corporate world if say IBM were having some issues with their books and hired an outside accounting firm to come audit and straighten things out, then said firm went on twitter and publicly went "Hoo Boy! It's amazing IBM functions at all considering they basically use monkeys with crayons to do their accounting!" That would not fly and would immediately tank the price of the stock. When people have money on the line, why would this guy be publicly slandering the code when he has been hired as a consultant???

This is a reasonable question. Perhaps ask Peter Todd?

I'm more bringing it to the attention of the devs who brought PT on board....

[kbm]

I don't know who Peter Todd is but if he was HIRED to be a consultant for Monero it is really really unprofessional for him to be publicly defaming the code on twitter before privately giving his input to the devs. In the corporate world if say IBM were having some issues with their books and hired an outside accounting firm to come audit and straighten things out, then said firm went on twitter and publicly went "Hoo Boy! It's amazing IBM functions at all considering they basically use monkeys with crayons to do their accounting!" That would not fly and would immediately tank the price of the stock. When people have money on the line, why would this guy be publicly slandering the code when he has been hired as a consultant???

This is a reasonable question. Perhaps ask Peter Todd?

I'm more bringing it to the attention of the devs who brought PT on board....

Oh! I will PM him then, he would probably have a direct answer.

[presstab]

Wouldn't it be best to let weak hands dump and long term believers buy at discounted prices than artificially holding the price up?

With price-discovery in the markets, the definition of "artificial" is vague. In one sense, the decline from 510 to 400 and below was "artificial" (if we assume it was, at least partly, a product of preknowledge of the coming attack and speculation that it would further hurt the price). In the other sense, the essence of markets is that all knowledge is taken into account, information is not perfect, and seldom even the best informed players have access to many information that some of the others have, in turn.

If we discount the last week downturn altogether, the price should be much higher by now. The attack failed - it could not damage the confidence towards XMR, it exposed the old scammers more, and proved how capable the devteam is. "Rolling back" the preparation of the attack from price history would lift us to 600 by tomorrow.

But if the market collectively decides that a selloff is in order, we might found ourselves at 300 instead. That some buyers openly like XMR at 400, is no more artificial than others vowing in the trollbox that they will sell every one of theirs, at whatever price they can get once the trading starts. Depending who will prevail, buying at 400 may be the last opportunity to buy at 400, or the last opportunity to sell at 400. Most likely, given the meager actual effect of the attack, it won't be neither, and anyone making decisions based on what others have already done, is just impoverishing himself as a result.

I have a largish number of XMR and BTC in the exchange, ready to react. But my reaction will be to buy if the price goes down, and sell if it goes up. This is my way of making slow and steady profit. Others have their way, and without panickers, my income would be significantly lower.

I would expect a panic sell to bring the exchange rate down, but in the long term this whole ordeal will strengthen the XMR code, which is why I think this could turn into a good opportunity to buy the dip.

[DogTheHunter]

1) Can you already rule out that the same (or similar) attack can be mounted again?

2) Can you already rule out conclusively that no lasting damage was done (as in: according to the pre-attack ownership situation)? Any chance that some subtle damage was done that'll be discovered only later?

I'll answer both at the same time. This particular attack can't be mounted again. We haven't pushed out the official fix yet, but exploit it requires growing the blocks sizes, which takes time. We'd never let that happen. The full fix will be out soon. This hole is plugged.

Any software can have vulnerabilities and exploits. This is exacerbated by the fact that we got the code from a bunch of lying scammers who despite that character flaw, happen to have some talent when it comes to cryptography and to a lesser extent coding. We are reviewing the code and paying qualified people to review the code in order to identify and correct problems to the greatest extent possible. Further we will be restructuring, refactoring, and/or replacing some of the code in order to further increase its robustness and trustworthiness (removing obfuscation for example).

I think you need to take a break. You are unintentionally saying stupid things.

This particular attack can't be mounted again.

Implies - so other attacks are still possible?

Any software can have vulnerabilities and exploits.

Implies - don't trust Monero with your anonymity just yet.

we got the code from a bunch of lying scammers who despite that character flaw, happen to have some talent when it comes to cryptography and to a lesser extent coding.

Where do you start with this statement.

Implies

- We didn't have the technical skill in the first place, so we are just using anything we could find
- Quality assurance in the code was never a priority

We are reviewing the code and paying qualified people to review the code in order to identify and correct problems

Implies - We haven't got a clue. So we are paying for temporary help.

Get some sleep. For investors, this sort of loose talk, from someone that is an established part of the team, gives zero confidence in the project.

[DogTheHunter]

Implies - We haven't got a clue. So we are paying for temporary help.

Get some sleep. For investors, this sort of loose talk, from someone that is an established part of the team, gives zero confidence in the project.

Real investors have already stated their confidence are at all times high with the Monero project, who do you think people are going to hear.

now go back to your darkcoin thread

Am I not entitled to hold a number of coins at the same time? First rule of investing is: don't put all your eggs in one basket.

As an Monero investor for some time, am I not allowed to say what I think?

[Nekomata]

XMR is the future.

[hologram]

Your comment was basically an insult and provocation towards Monero devs and everyone trying to fix the attacks. It deserved a much worst response.

You lose your time.

[smooth]

If you want to be taken seriously (I have no idea) then you need to educate yourself at least a little about the history and status of this project.

1. We have always described it as alpha-quality software. Perhaps some day we will promote that to beta-quality.

2. We took over the project, which was a fork of a promising coin with a fraudulent hidden premine. It turns out that they guy who did the fork was probably in collusion with the original group of scammers. The project only became anything other than a scam when a bunch of interested people from the community decided that despite the mess there was enough promise here to take it and run with it. If any of this makes you uncomfortable, this is most certainly not the coin for you.

3. I don't give a fuck about pandering to investors. They are free to speculate or short terms swings or to invest in the long term possibility that we are able to develop this project to something much greater than it is today. You are also perfectly free to do neither.

Have a nice day.

1) Can you already rule out that the same (or similar) attack can be mounted again?

2) Can you already rule out conclusively that no lasting damage was done (as in: according to the pre-attack ownership situation)? Any chance that some subtle damage was done that'll be discovered only later?

I'll answer both at the same time. This particular attack can't be mounted again. We haven't pushed out the official fix yet, but exploit it requires growing the blocks sizes, which takes time. We'd never let that happen. The full fix will be out soon. This hole is plugged.

Any software can have vulnerabilities and exploits. This is exacerbated by the fact that we got the code from a bunch of lying scammers who despite that character flaw, happen to have some talent when it comes to cryptography and to a lesser extent coding. We are reviewing the code and paying qualified people to review the code in order to identify and correct problems to the greatest extent possible. Further we will be restructuring, refactoring, and/or replacing some of the code in order to further increase its robustness and trustworthiness (removing obfuscation for example).

I think you need to take a break. You are unintentionally saying stupid things.

This particular attack can't be mounted again.

Implies - so other attacks are still possible?

Any software can have vulnerabilities and exploits.

Implies - don't trust Monero with your anonymity just yet.

we got the code from a bunch of lying scammers who despite that character flaw, happen to have some talent when it comes to cryptography and to a lesser extent coding.

Where do you start with this statement.

Implies

- We didn't have the technical skill in the first place, so we are just using anything we could find
- Quality assurance in the code was never a priority

We are reviewing the code and paying qualified people to review the code in order to identify and correct problems

Implies - We haven't got a clue. So we are paying for temporary help.

Get some sleep. For investors, this sort of loose talk, from someone that is an established part of the team, gives zero confidence in the project.

[Majormax]

I don't know who Peter Todd is but if he was HIRED to be a consultant for Monero it is really really unprofessional for him to be publicly defaming the code on twitter before privately giving his input to the devs. In the corporate world if say IBM were having some issues with their books and hired an outside accounting firm to come audit and straighten things out, then said firm went on twitter and publicly went "Hoo Boy! It's amazing IBM functions at all considering they basically use monkeys with crayons to do their accounting!" That would not fly and would immediately tank the price of the stock. When people have money on the line, why would this guy be publicly slandering the code when he has been hired as a consultant???

This is a reasonable question. Perhaps ask Peter Todd?

I'm more bringing it to the attention of the devs who brought PT on board....

I would have thought that Peter Todd (previously a core bitcoin dev) would have enough on his plate as he recently (few weeks ago) joined the Viacoin dev team.

I can only conclude that either it was an ill considered invite (and the Monero team surely understand enough about Crypto loyalties not to make an error), or there is some potential collaborative connection.

Anyone else have an opinion ?

[AnonX#1]

We are reviewing the code and paying qualified people to review the code in order to identify and correct problems

Implies - We haven't got a clue. So we are paying for temporary help.

implies he's honest about what's going on?

Get some sleep. For investors, this sort of loose talk, from someone that is an established part of the team, gives zero confidence in the project.

implies investor needs more lies right ?

[DogTheHunter]

Am I not entitled to hold a number of coins at the same time? First rule of investing is: don't put all your eggs in one basket.

As an Monero investor for some time, am I not allowed to say what I think?

Your comment was basically an insult and provocation towards Monero devs and everyone trying to fix the attacks. It deserved a much worst response.

If you read it more carefully, you will see that I was pointing out that loose lips, sink ships. There are a number of people under a lot of stress and uncertainty. That is when people make silly and unintended mistakes.

Which part of my interpretations do you consider provocation?

[jl777]

Oh well price will obviously fall. Price will obviously come back. The time frame that this will happen is unclear. One things is sure. Panic sellers and panic buyers will lose...

I believe that MP and the XMR markets on Poloniex have operated continuously with no substantive price movement.  The moonshot may resume uninterrupted.

Mintpal price is about 0.00415 now, HitBTC was frozen at 0.00380 after some had dumped on low volume (2,500 XMR) at the last moment.

All I ask is that the most reputable and highest-volume exchange, Poloniex, would:
- announce the resumption of trading at least 1 hour in advance;
- allow traders to enter orders during this time;
- arrange a market-clearing procedure at the moment when the trading starts, so that the existing bids and asks that coincide, would be matched with each other at the midprice that clears all of them, to not favor sellers or buyers.

Nice plan! Kind of like the opening of stock market. Not sure polo could implement this in short time, unless their new trading engine has this option.

I am impressed with the quick fix under pressure. Should I let bter know XMR can be unfrozen? I think their volumes are pretty low and so probably dont need to worry about clearing price. I dont know how long it will take for them to resume trading, but I have frequent contact with freeworm.

Anyway, I never realized there was something about the cryptonote (CN?) outfit itself that is fishy. they seemed pretty corporate to me, but never did quite understand their biz model. Is there some URL with specific info on what sorts of things they have done?

I did my best to rally support during this crisis, not sure if I helped much, but at least I tried.
I am very happy to see the XMR devs are urging harmony between the two communities. Kudos to tacotime for just knowing where the bug is! Clearly shows he knows the codebase very well to have such intuitions.

James

[Nekomata]

XMR is the future.

[canonsburg]

Implies - We haven't got a clue. So we are paying for temporary help.

Get some sleep. For investors, this sort of loose talk, from someone that is an established part of the team, gives zero confidence in the project.

Real investors have already stated their confidence are at all times high with the Monero project, who do you think people are going to hear.

now go back to your darkcoin thread

Am I not entitled to hold a number of coins at the same time? First rule of investing is: don't put all your eggs in one basket.

As an Monero investor for some time, am I not allowed to say what I think?

Because rule #1 of crypto investing is don't treat the devs like they are corporate management and you are shareholder.

The devs owe you nothing. This is open sourced software provided free for you to use (or not use). They are not selling you a product, you are not investing in a company. They simply provide the software "as is" for people to use.

[aminorex]

Am I not entitled to hold a number of coins at the same time? First rule of investing is: don't put all your eggs in one basket.

As an Monero investor for some time, am I not allowed to say what I think?

First rule of investing is not to invest in something you are incapable of understanding.  Warren Buffett tells us that diversification is needful for those incompetent to discriminate good investments from bad.

No one is allowing or disallowing.  Honest constructive people observe that you are acting like an idiot or a scoundrel.  If you continue, then you are also incorrigible.

[EFS]

I don't know who Peter Todd is but if he was HIRED to be a consultant for Monero it is really really unprofessional for him to be publicly defaming the code on twitter before privately giving his input to the devs. In the corporate world if say IBM were having some issues with their books and hired an outside accounting firm to come audit and straighten things out, then said firm went on twitter and publicly went "Hoo Boy! It's amazing IBM functions at all considering they basically use monkeys with crayons to do their accounting!" That would not fly and would immediately tank the price of the stock. When people have money on the line, why would this guy be publicly slandering the code when he has been hired as a consultant???

This is a reasonable question. Perhaps ask Peter Todd?

I'd like to hear that, too. I hope Peter Todd will answer in this thread.