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

[TrueCryptonaire]

It's called the free market

even though I mostly agree with your conclusion as well as your position, the free market fails in our specific spot to finance the development of monero. the reason is a dilemma which cannot be solved in a decentralized, anonymous free market manner. at this point decentralization fails, this obv. does not neccessary need a state to be a regulator but it needs a central institution, which solves this specific problem

Yup. The problem of free markets is that it is not a perfect like Chicago school suggests.
The free rider problem is something that the free markets cannot fix.
In this specific case, however, Monero's main problem is its low marketcap and thus the hardness to get some serious dollars out of the community for development.
Personally I am ready to donate as soon as my monero wealth grows in a significiant level in value (I want higher purchasing power for my moneros so that smaller donation will count more).

But, the problem of free rider is just one critisism of free markets.
I am not purely Keynesian or purely Chicago school because both have their problems.

[1713971043]

1713971043

[1713971043]

1713971043

[1713971043]

1713971043

[1713971043]

1713971043

[1713971043]

1713971043

[1713971043]

1713971043

[xulescu]

even though I mostly agree with your conclusion as well as your position, the free market fails in our specific spot to finance the development of monero. the reason is a dilemma which cannot be solved in a decentralized, anonymous free market manner. at this point decentralization fails, this obv. does not neccessary need a state to be a regulator but it needs a central institution, which solves this specific problem

Yup. The problem of free markets is that it is not a perfect like Chicago school suggests.
The free rider problem is something that the free markets cannot fix.
In this specific case, however, Monero's main problem is its low marketcap and thus the hardness to get some serious dollars out of the community for development.
Personally I am ready to donate as soon as my monero wealth grows in a significiant level in value (I want higher purchasing power for my moneros so that smaller donation will count more).

But, the problem of free rider is just one critisism of free markets.
I am not purely Keynesian or purely Chicago school because both have their problems.

I don't think anyone here suggested free markets are perfect. At the same time, you are suggesting a central bank style direct intervention on the money supply. That is the main reason why cryptos exist in the first place - to prevent one entity from controlling the money supply.

[TrueCryptonaire]

A Keynesian has been detected in the thread. I repeat a Keynesian has been detected in the thread. Phasers on stun 

Seriously though. Any systems in which humans centrally make decisions on what's globally "good" for the economy is inherently flawed. You have no idea whether it's good or bad that the money supply is inflated and you know it (in fact it's neither). The only fair solution is 0%. Oh and the money in Europe is being inflated far in excess of 2% at the moment so if they are truly aiming for 2% some people need to lose their jobs.

Further, we already have a perfectly sound system to regulate the economy which is distributed in nature and will automatically be fair because no-one controls it. It's called the free market. Too bad governments outlawed it a long time ago.

In Europe the inflation is much less than 2 % (I think even below 1 % currently).
The problem is that despite Central Banks are trying push the money into the economy, it doesn't go all the way through but rather to assets and securities (stock markets keep rising and many companies are breaking their ATHs only because investors have cheap money but no places to invest it).
In Finland the car dealerships are offering 0 % loans and still complaining that there is not (enough) sales.
The Central Bank has lowered the deposit rate below 0 but still banks are not so much lending money as they should.

The difference between free markets and Keynesian approach is that Keynesians do not prefer so much volatility (the governement should increase their spending when business cycle is at low point). Keynesians do not suggest to waste money (this is a misunderstanding) but exploiting the opportunity to get cheap labor for building roads, hospitals, schools etc which are necessary. It is good for the labor force - they get job in down cycle from the governement and when the cycle turns, they get similar jobs from the private sector.
Wasting resources is something that Keynesians have to be avoided.

[nioc]

Personally I am ready to donate as soon as my monero wealth grows in a significiant level in value (I want higher purchasing power for my moneros so that smaller donation will count more).

Yes I have heard you say this before with a price of 0.1btc/XMR before you donate.  May I suggest you donate something now as it will increase the likelihood of it reaching that level.  Also by the time the Monero economy grows to the point of 0.1btc/XMR I imagine funding might not be as much of an issue.

[TrueCryptonaire]

A Keynesian has been detected in the thread. I repeat a Keynesian has been detected in the thread. Phasers on stun 

Seriously though. Any systems in which humans centrally make decisions on what's globally "good" for the economy is inherently flawed. You have no idea whether it's good or bad that the money supply is inflated and you know it (in fact it's neither). The only fair solution is 0%. Oh and the money in Europe is being inflated far in excess of 2% at the moment so if they are truly aiming for 2% some people need to lose their jobs.

Further, we already have a perfectly sound system to regulate the economy which is distributed in nature and will automatically be fair because no-one controls it. It's called the free market. Too bad governments outlawed it a long time ago.

In Europe the inflation is much less than 2 % (I think even below 1 % currently).
The problem is that despite Central Banks are trying push the money into the economy, it doesn't go all the way through but rather to assets and securities (stock markets keep rising and many companies are breaking their ATHs only because investors have cheap money but no places to invest it).
In Finland the car dealerships are offering 0 % loans and still complaining that there is not (enough) sales.
The Central Bank has lowered the deposit rate below 0 but still banks are not so much lending money as they should.

The difference between free markets and Keynesian approach is that Keynesians do not prefer so much volatility (the governement should increase their spending when business cycle is at low point). Keynesians do not suggest to waste money (this is a misunderstanding) but exploiting the opportunity to get cheap labor for building roads, hospitals, schools etc which are necessary. It is good for the labor force - they get job in down cycle from the governement and when the cycle turns, they get similar jobs from the private sector.
Wasting resources is something that Keynesians have to be avoided.

Below 2%? Try 30%. The ECB is printing like a motherfucker. I don't care much for your retarded definition of inflation as a proxy for prices.

Indeed Keynesians  cannot stand volatility and that's why they fuck everything up. Just as people that have no appetite for volatility should stay out of the market they should stay out of the economy. Go was an old person or something.

Is the whole argument here merely on the definition of words?

Are you satisfied if I replace the word inflation by "increase of CPI"? It is longer way to write it so I prefer using term inflation (=inflating prices).
Sounds like the problem here is semantical.

ECB is printing money indeed but as I told you, it doesn't help real economy since the money is not channeled to real economy but to securities. I feel myself very retarded when I have to repeat myself.

Indeed I prefer lower volatility to higher volatility. Generally high volatility asset cannot efficiently serve as money - currency perhaps but not money.
No rich person will invest significiant amount of money in currency that can tomorrow become worthless or 10 times more valuable. Those who invest in such instruments are called gamblers. They could as well to Las Vegas playing their money in roulette.
I am not one of those.

Personally I am ready to donate as soon as my monero wealth grows in a significiant level in value (I want higher purchasing power for my moneros so that smaller donation will count more).

Yes I have heard you say this before with a price of 0.1btc/XMR before you donate.  May I suggest you donate something now as it will increase the likelihood of it reaching that level.  Also by the time the Monero economy grows to the point of 0.1btc/XMR I imagine funding might not be as much of an issue.

The devs can do things that will increase the marketcap of Monero. If they are unwilling to increase it by lowering the blockreward enough for more scarce coin, I am neither not that willing to donate. I donate based on results, not promises.

[smooth]

ECB is printing money

This is pretty far off topic guys. We do have a Monero Economy thread for discussion of macroeconomic topics such money supply, etc. (especially since the question of tail end money supply in Monero is still unresolved). It hasn't been active recently, but it seems we have some new participants and interest in that subject has picked up, so please take it there. Link is in the OP.

[TrueCryptonaire]

ECB is printing money indeed but as I told you, it doesn't help real economy since the money is not channeled to real economy but to securities. I feel myself very retarded when I have to repeat myself.

It doesn't matter that it's not channeled to the real economy (whatever that means). You're just repeating what these clowns are telling you without questioning.

As you are so bored with repeating yourself I'll shout the point I have been making to you so finally get it: YOU ARE A FUCKING IDIOT AND COMPLETELY WRONG.

You are not making any point but only yelling like the worst internet troll. 

[smooth]

ECB is printing money indeed but as I told you, it doesn't help real economy since the money is not channeled to real economy but to securities. I feel myself very retarded when I have to repeat myself.

It doesn't matter that it's not channeled to the real economy (whatever that means). You're just repeating what these clowns are telling you without questioning.

As you are so bored with repeating yourself I'll shout the point I have been making to you so finally get it: YOU ARE A FUCKING IDIOT AND COMPLETELY WRONG.

You are not making any point but only yelling like the worst internet troll. 

Read my previous reactions to here. I'm done. Please also re-read your own posts. If you truly think it matters for inflation whether printed money is deployed and where it is deployed than you are truly stupid.

The rudeness doesn't bother me but the off-topic does. Please take it to Monero Economy or elsewhere if you are simply arguing about economics without some actual connection to Monero.

[TrueCryptonaire]

ECB is printing money indeed but as I told you, it doesn't help real economy since the money is not channeled to real economy but to securities. I feel myself very retarded when I have to repeat myself.

It doesn't matter that it's not channeled to the real economy (whatever that means). You're just repeating what these clowns are telling you without questioning.

As you are so bored with repeating yourself I'll shout the point I have been making to you so finally get it: YOU ARE A FUCKING IDIOT AND COMPLETELY WRONG.

You are not making any point but only yelling like the worst internet troll.  

Read my previous reactions to here. I'm done. Please also re-read your own posts. If you truly think it matters for inflation whether printed money is deployed and where it is deployed than you are truly stupid.

The rudeness doesn't bother me but the off-topic does. Please take it to Monero Economy or elsewhere if you are simply arguing about economics without some actual connection to Monero.

Yup. I am out of the stupid argument about pure economics and semantics.
My conclusion for this large OT-branch here is that why not put Monero into the bullish trend by adjusting the supply to the demand. If there is no demand for all the supplied coins (ie price goes down), there is no reason to supply too many coins. Those coins can be "saved" to later days when there is more demand.
Also, if it is made sure the supply is slightly below the demand, it makes the marketcap rising (some may want to dump but this need to be considered when re-evaluating the coin mintage).

For the adoption, it is better to make it constantly rising (it can be made only by adjusting the supply vs demand framework).

[xulescu]

Yup. I am out of the stupid argument about pure economics and semantics.
My conclusion for this large OT-branch here is that why not put Monero into the bullish trend by adjusting the supply to the demand. If there is no demand for all the supplied coins (ie price goes down), there is no reason to supply too many coins. Those coins can be "saved" to later days when there is more demand.
Also, if it is made sure the supply is slightly below the demand, it makes the marketcap rising (some may want to dump but this need to be considered when re-evaluating the coin mintage).

For the adoption, it is better to make it constantly rising (it can be made only by adjusting the supply vs demand framework).

For a college student in an elite economic theory program, you DO lack reading comprehension. Re-read my posts and re-evaluate your responses.
You either (1) didn't read the replies (2) didn't understand the replies but decided to ignore them as irrelevant (3) understood the replies and decided to ignore them as inconvenient.

I will not continue this off-topic.

[xulescu]

Restarting the discussion on Monero's tail emission on the Economics thread

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=597878.msg8985803#msg8985803

[Karl Hungus]

newbie question, can I check the balance of an address using a monero blockexplorer? Do ring signatures make that impossible?
thanks

[dEBRUYNE]

newbie question, can I check the balance of an address using a monero blockexplorer? Do ring signatures make that impossible?
thanks

Not possible, the details are explained in the whitepaper.

https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf

At 4.3.

[David Latapie]

Moderated Monero General Discussion Thread

The same as here, but without the trolls.
This is a new thread, moderated with the monero-extended account so that there will always be one or more moderators here.

If you wish to apply for moderatorship, PM me. Also for the moment Anon136 is the modo, round-the-clock moderation is always welcome.

Personally, I'd love to see more and more traffic moving there, but the market will decide.

[NewLiberty]

Spoken like a true student of Bernanke. Macroprudential, right?

You're not describing adoption, you're describing a Ponzi.

I am majoring in economics at university of Helsinki in the faculty of Social Sciences (valtiotieteellinen tiedekunta). It is quite hard to get in there.   I think fiat money system's advantages surpasses its disadvantages as long as the inflation is in control. Debt based system is not good one but fiat system is since it forces people buying right now instead of waiting eternally. Those who want to save money can do it in gold or silver, fiat money is not the right tool for it at least for more than a few years generally. Economy needs small inflation in order to function. On the other hand, if the inflation is too high it is also problematic. ECB targets 2 % inflation which is optimal in my opinion (not too high but not too low neither).
It is well-known fact that crypto is a pyramid but to say it is ponzi is not legit IMO.

All I said, the price of xmr should go up which encourages people buying the coin and thus increases the marketcap.
If the price is in bearish trend, it is rational to postpone the buys and if the price is going up it is rational to buy immediately.
The challenge is to find the exact rate of emission which goes along with the pace of adoption. Ideally the emission should be a little lower than the adotion rate since some long term bagholders might want to sell and it shouldn't cause volatility too much ideally so there should be constant shortage of the coins in the market in order to keep the marketcap rising.

Also, there is no incentive to dump coins if the coin price is rising steadily because of the opportunity cost of loosing some of the gains.

Interesting theory.
I typically do the opposite so it is reassuring that I will have lots of students at your school on the opposite side of my trades. 
I tend to buy more when the price is low and less when it is going up.
Sometimes I might even sell a few if the price goes up higher than I think it should be.

[Cryptobro]

Can someone in the know comment on a possible TW attack underway?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789978.msg8988462#msg8988462

[Hueristic]

Can someone in the know comment on a possible TW attack underway?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789978.msg8988462#msg8988462

I always pick the wrong time to buy in. Shit

[OrientA]

Can someone in the know comment on a possible TW attack underway?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789978.msg8988462#msg8988462

I always pick the wrong time to buy in. Shit

I hope it can be mitigated.

[monero-extended]

So with time warp attack the attacker basically turns his hashing power on and off in a pattern of resonant frequency? Am i understanding this right? I haven’t actually heard the name before but when studying bitcoin years ago i decided against buying in because I imagined this sort of attack. (boy what i mistake, i still bought in relatively early but i wish i had bought in *THAT* early).

[Nekomata]

XMR is the future.