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

[dEBRUYNE]

Crypto Kingdom sounds ridiculous. What is needed is integration with darknet and privacy-related services, as others are saying.  It's strange how little focus there has been on privacy issues for an anonymous coin.

I'm going to take a stab at this.  This post might convince you I'm not a completely biased shill.

I probably share some views - the fact that the game is being seriously considered as a bolster to the Monero economy makes me cringe.  And many of rpetlia's posts just come at me wrong.  For this reason I've opted out of the MEW even though I have donated to the development team.  Depending on the nature of Cryptokingdom - if it's more than just 2d half life it might be a lot of fun.  But we'll see.  


Here are my reasons.

. Monero is more open to criticism than most other altcoin communities.  (Not a moderated announcement thread, etc).  I still butt heads with the shills but ... as altcoins go.  It's better than the average circlejerk.

. The first non scam cryptonote.  Explaining all of the history might too long winded for me to do here.  But basically cryptonote was a completely new codebase centered around mathematicaly provable anonymity with interesting origins.  The Monero people have had professional mathematicians and developers review the codebase to ensure that it actually is anonymous.  

. The level of having standard anonymity on all transactions in a coin (in my mind) increases the anonymity by as much adoption as the coin has.  Instead of the powers that be being able to narrow down trying to track or trace the 5% of transactions that are anonymous they will have to attack the entire userbase to get any information.  

. Monero is not a pump and dump.  If you look closely at most coins - it's a game.  Get in early, create a restriction on supply (in comparison to the availability of early supply) to force the prices up quickly so early holders can dump fast.  Throw in some features after you've got your early coins to drive demand.

    Darkcoin for instance had a massive insta mine where the first blocks were dumping out tons of coins.  After being released they re-defined the number of coins they were going to release to be much less.  And in addition they created demand for the coin by forcing mixers to have 1,000 coins.  (All done to force the price up relative to the price of obtaining coins in the first 2 - 4 weeks).  

    XC is similar - all of the coins were mined in a 100 day PoW.  After the PoW stage the features that were thought to add value began to be implemented.  This game is all about driving wealth for those who not only get in early.  But have inside information about what direction a coin is going to go (features added, etc) AFTER massive initial supply has gone to the original adopters / insider information people.

    The main reason Monero price is struggling now is because it hasn't done this.  It's releasing like 20,000 coins per day I think?  I would prefer the release schedule of BBR - but BBR was a late adopter (1 month after).

. Monero avoids gimmicks but does focus on future proofing.  

    BBR made the decision to prune ring signatures.  Which if I understand correctly makes it impossible to mathematically prove previous transactions were actually anonymous without the code base (or something along these lines).  I 100% want to figure out how to make the blockchain smaller per transaction - but I feel like being conservative about keeping proof of anonymity is a decision that bodes well for the future of the coin.

    Monero is working on a database to reduce blockchain size that BBR will probably implement.  They are also working on a comprehensive front end.  Rather than quickly finishing they are cleaning up the code base as they go to make future development less expensive.

    Monero didn't get caught in the SuperNET hype.  I could be missing something here - I honestly could.  But the best I can understand the SuperNET is more like an exchange that is built into the wallet that can use another coins features by triggering two trades.  Trade Bitcoindark for BBR -> send BBR to person -> trade back to bitcoindark (someone please correct me if I'm wrong).  Based on what I've read on both the SuperNET and the BlockNET I'm 99% certain they are both gimmicks.  Both require code implementations into a wallet.  It won't bode well for a coin that legitimately has a future - to buy into a gimmick that was created primarily to allow a developer to offload his coin assets to create a demand.

The fact that (from what I can tell) several holders of Monero's are bitcoin whales and were there at the very beginning of the coin means that the price has always been high compared to other coins.  The volume if you shrink coinmarketcap down to Monero's inception reveals that there is a LOT of trading going on compared to other coins over the course of time.

To wrap up - I'm fairly confident that if nothing on the cryptocurrency market changes (there are no significant contenders - which I DO BELIEVE there is room for one to come absolutely dominate the market but it would have to be a work of genius) then Monero is the clear winner in the anonymity PoW race.  I believe the value crypto is strongly tied to psuedo anonymity & perhaps full anonymity when people discover they can have it.

Edit:  In my opinion the two things needed for the darkmarket are coin longevity & volume.  They care less about speculation than stability.  Monero hasn't been around long enough for longevity.  Volume is as good as it is on any other privacy alt - but not near enough.  Speculation or other venues will probably have to grow it significantly before the darkmarket becomes interested (my .02)

Nice post! For people interest in the bolded part:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=740112.0

[1713879348]

1713879348

[1713879348]

1713879348

[1713879348]

1713879348

[1713879348]

1713879348

[1713879348]

1713879348

[1713879348]

1713879348

[dEBRUYNE]

Big dump, and then big pump!

These very big sells (> 10 BTC), is it some miner dude selling all his coins in packages? Doesn't seem reasonable to sell all these coins at once... a slow going sell procedure usually comes with a higher average price. Weird situation.. who's that dude?

No.  It's speculative dumping of one form or another.  Plenty of people have very short time-horizons and little tolerance for low prices.

There is a significant amount of wealth going back into fiat.  People are cashing out altcoin-btc-fiat.  It's not isolated to XMR.  Many people think btc will go down significantly and are getting out for now.  

The rumors of an imminent regulatory crackdown on crypto may have something to do with it. Although I don't expect Monero to be affected one bit (if the rumors even turn out to be true) some other projects could very well be affected, and the market is not necessarily so discriminating.

I think this is more focused on the so-called 2.0 coins, which issue "shares/securities". Could get pretty nasty if the SEC gets involved and really wants to crack it down. IIRC NewLiberty had a more detailed post about this, maybe he or others could elaborate more on this. I don't know the specific "rules" of the SEC when issuing shares/securities.

[rdnkjdi]

- For a simple game like this that actually generates you money in the lower levels, it's easily possible to get 1,000,000 players.

Your judgement is seriously impaired.

1,000,000 people play second life.

You're creating a 2d form of second life specifically for crypto currency.  I think your adoption number estimates of 1,000,000 (or even 1/100th of that) is over optimistic.  I think it's a great step in the right direction for crypto - but perhaps a baby one.

Time will tell.

[smooth]

I think Monero has a bit of a PR/marketing handicap currently - on the news sites I'm constantly seeing semi-anon altcoins like DRK and ANON being described as things like

DRK I think is somewhat legitimate to get that kind of coverage because it is 2+ times our size and has been around longer. Though I don't rule out some pump-and-dump at work given the instamine and shady launch described earlier.

ANON is where you see the pump-and-dump dynamics at work, with someone fairly obviously paying for that coverage on an insignificant size coin with scam technology. My view on these is that they come and go, we've been through about 10 already.

Maybe we do want to more aggressively get our message out there though. Seems like a good task for MEW.

[rpietila]

I think your adoption number estimates of 1,000,000 (or even 1/100th of that) is over optimistic.  

10 days from idea to game was also considered optimistic by many, as well as the $4,000 revenue from selling non-redeemable ingame items, in the first 3 days since launch.

Miracles happen when the right people are around

[rdnkjdi]

10 days from idea to game was also considered optimistic by many, as well as the $4,000 revenue from selling non-redeemable ingame items, in the first 3 days since launch.

Miracles happen when the right people are around Smiley

I hope it works out great

Is there a download yet - or are people still just buying gold?

[rpietila]

10 days from idea to game was also considered optimistic by many, as well as the $4,000 revenue from selling non-redeemable ingame items, in the first 3 days since launch.

Miracles happen when the right people are around

I hope it works out great

Is there a download yet - or are people still just buying gold?

From Sunday the game databases including character (and possessions) registry, building registry and city map are viewable online. The browser-based interactive version of the game is scheduled to launch 2014-11-16.

[surfer43]

The level of having standard anonymity on all transactions in a coin (in my mind) increases the anonymity by as much adoption as the coin has.  Instead of the powers that be being able to narrow down trying to track or trace the 5% of transactions that are anonymous they will have to attack the entire userbase to get any information.  

Boolberry is conservative with standard anonymity: it makes sure all transactions have >1 mixin. Some transactions with Monero are not entirely anonymous (some can have mixin=0).

Monero is not a pump and dump.  If you look closely at most coins - it's a game.  Get in early, create a restriction on supply (in comparison to the availability of early supply) to force the prices up quickly so early holders can dump fast.  Throw in some features after you've got your early coins to drive demand.

As far as I know, most coins do not change their supply after starting, and do not have an extremely fast emission. A "pump and dump" is a coin that has been pumped and dumped. Monero has increased in price from 0.0002 BTC to just under 0.01 BTC, and has since fallen to just above 0.002 BTC. A 5000% increase qualifies as a "pump" and a 80% decrease qualifies as a "dump". If Monero is not a pump and dump, then most coins are not pump and dumps so what's your point?  If Monero does change its emission like is actually being considered by the MEW, then it is in every way a ridiculously hypocritical pump and dump.

BBR made the decision to prune ring signatures.  Which if I understand correctly makes it impossible to mathematically prove previous transactions were actually anonymous without the code base (or something along these lines).  I 100% want to figure out how to make the blockchain smaller per transaction - but I feel like being conservative about keeping proof of anonymity is a decision that bodes well for the future of the coin.

There is absolutely no evidence that pruning reduces anonymity.

Monero didn't get caught in the SuperNET hype.  I could be missing something here - I honestly could.  But the best I can understand the SuperNET is more like an exchange that is built into the wallet that can use another coins features by triggering two trades.  Trade Bitcoindark for BBR -> send BBR to person -> trade back to bitcoindark (someone please correct me if I'm wrong).  Based on what I've read on both the SuperNET and the BlockNET I'm 99% certain they are both gimmicks.  Both require code implementations into a wallet.  It won't bode well for a coin that legitimately has a future - to buy into a gimmick that was created primarily to allow a developer to offload his coin assets to create a demand.

As far as I know the exchange happens behind the scenes so each coin participating can use the features of other coins, e.g. A NXT user uses BBR's anonymity without buying BBR. This requires no change to the protocol of participating coins. Even if SuperNET is a "gimmick" it won't affect Boolberry or its future.

To wrap up - I'm fairly confident that if nothing on the cryptocurrency market changes (there are no significant contenders - which I DO BELIEVE there is room for one to come absolutely dominate the market but it would have to be a work of genius) then Monero is the clear winner in the anonymity PoW race.  I believe the value crypto is strongly tied to psuedo anonymity & perhaps full anonymity when people discover they can have it.

This is ridiculous sentiment. Monero will be the only CryptoNote with long term success, and will eliminate all the other fair forks of Bytecoin because it was the first fork by less than three weeks? Monero is anything but the clear winner.

[Come-In-Behind]

The level of having standard anonymity on all transactions in a coin (in my mind) increases the anonymity by as much adoption as the coin has.  Instead of the powers that be being able to narrow down trying to track or trace the 5% of transactions that are anonymous they will have to attack the entire userbase to get any information.  

Boolberry is conservative with standard anonymity: it makes sure all transactions have >1 mixin. Some transactions with Monero are not entirely anonymous (some can have mixin=0).

Monero is not a pump and dump.  If you look closely at most coins - it's a game.  Get in early, create a restriction on supply (in comparison to the availability of early supply) to force the prices up quickly so early holders can dump fast.  Throw in some features after you've got your early coins to drive demand.

As far as I know, most coins do not change their supply after starting, and do not have an extremely fast emission. A "pump and dump" is a coin that has been pumped and dumped. Monero has increased in price from 0.0002 BTC to just under 0.01 BTC, and has since fallen to just above 0.002 BTC. A 5000% increase qualifies as a "pump" and a 80% decrease qualifies as a "dump". If Monero is not a pump and dump, then most coins are not pump and dumps so what's your point?  If Monero does change its emission like is actually being considered by the MEW, then it is in every way a ridiculously hypocritical pump and dump.

BBR made the decision to prune ring signatures.  Which if I understand correctly makes it impossible to mathematically prove previous transactions were actually anonymous without the code base (or something along these lines).  I 100% want to figure out how to make the blockchain smaller per transaction - but I feel like being conservative about keeping proof of anonymity is a decision that bodes well for the future of the coin.

There is absolutely no evidence that pruning reduces anonymity.

Monero didn't get caught in the SuperNET hype.  I could be missing something here - I honestly could.  But the best I can understand the SuperNET is more like an exchange that is built into the wallet that can use another coins features by triggering two trades.  Trade Bitcoindark for BBR -> send BBR to person -> trade back to bitcoindark (someone please correct me if I'm wrong).  Based on what I've read on both the SuperNET and the BlockNET I'm 99% certain they are both gimmicks.  Both require code implementations into a wallet.  It won't bode well for a coin that legitimately has a future - to buy into a gimmick that was created primarily to allow a developer to offload his coin assets to create a demand.

As far as I know the exchange happens behind the scenes so each coin participating can use the features of other coins, e.g. A NXT user uses BBR's anonymity without buying BBR. This requires no change to the protocol of participating coins. Even if SuperNET is a "gimmick" it won't affect Boolberry or its future.

To wrap up - I'm fairly confident that if nothing on the cryptocurrency market changes (there are no significant contenders - which I DO BELIEVE there is room for one to come absolutely dominate the market but it would have to be a work of genius) then Monero is the clear winner in the anonymity PoW race.  I believe the value crypto is strongly tied to psuedo anonymity & perhaps full anonymity when people discover they can have it.

This is ridiculous sentiment. Monero will be the only CryptoNote with long term success, and will eliminate all the other fair forks of Bytecoin because it was the first fork by less than three weeks? Monero is anything but the clear winner.

To point something out, I believe when rdnkjdi is saying "not a pump and dump", he means the coin is not made solely for the purpose of pumping and dumping to gain profit, like many altcoins out there, which is true. While I don't think there's a clear winner, yet, I do believe that Monero is in the top there. There's just....something about BBR that displeases me.

(I am not invested in Monero yet, so do not take my words as those of a desperate investor)

[mafostedu]

Could somebody please help me to resolve this issue ?
I was out of town & away from my home PC so I didn't updated my blockchain for almost 3 months,
Last week when I came back I downloaded the latest wallet from the OP & also the blockchain (2.3 GB .bin file) from the link provided in the OP.

After that when I ran bitmonerod.exe my blockchain was still  about 40-45 days behind so, left it overnight running & in the morning it was done with synchronization.
But then when I run simplewallet.exe, it gives me a weird message,

2014-Oct-23 11:04:45.414355 bitmonero wallet v0.8.8.4-771b531
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.208800 Loaded wallet keys file, with public address: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.208800 file not found: xmr, starting with empty blockchain
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.208800 Opened wallet: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.599823 Starting refresh...
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.681828 Failed to invoke http request to  http://localhost:18081/getblocks.bin, wrong response code: 500
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.681828 ERROR ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:282 !r. THROW EXCEPTION: error::no_connection_to_daemon
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.703829 ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:282:struct tools::error::no_connection_to_daemon: no connection to daemon, request = getblocks.bin
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.709829 Another try pull_blocks (try_count=0)...
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.749831 Failed to invoke http request to  http://localhost:18081/getblocks.bin, wrong response code: 500
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.750831 ERROR ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:282 !r. THROW EXCEPTION: error::no_connection_to_daemon
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.750831 ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:282:struct tools::error::no_connection_to_daemon: no connection to daemon, request = getblocks.bin
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.750831 Another try pull_blocks (try_count=1)...
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.771833 Failed to invoke http request to  http://localhost:18081/getblocks.bin, wrong response code: 500
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.771833 ERROR ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:282 !r. THROW EXCEPTION: error::no_connection_to_daemon
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.772833 ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:282:struct tools::error::no_connection_to_daemon: no connection to daemon, request = getblocks.bin
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.772833 Another try pull_blocks (try_count=2)...
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.794834 Failed to invoke http request to  http://localhost:18081/getblocks.bin, wrong response code: 500
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.794834 ERROR ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:282 !r. THROW EXCEPTION: error::no_connection_to_daemon
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.794834 ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:282:struct tools::error::no_connection_to_daemon: no connection to daemon, request = getblocks.bin
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.794834 ERROR ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:358 pull_blocks failed, try_count=3
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.803834 Error: refresh failed: no connection to daemon. Please, make sure daemon is running. Blocks received: 0

At the same time bitmonerod.log reads the following,

2014-Oct-23 11:02:31.377688 [P2P1][188.2.54.196:18080 OUT]Sync data returned unknown top block: 272598 -> 272778 [180 blocks (0 days) behind]
SYNCHRONIZATION started
2014-Oct-23 11:03:24.909750 [P2P3][85.69.78.14:18080 OUT] SYNCHRONIZED OK
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.646826 [RPC0]ERROR c:\users\ric_000\desktop\bitmonero\src\rpc\core_rpc_server.h:68 Failed to on_get_blocks()
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.710829 [RPC0]ERROR c:\users\ric_000\desktop\bitmonero\src\rpc\core_rpc_server.h:68 Failed to on_get_blocks()
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.750831 [RPC1]ERROR c:\users\ric_000\desktop\bitmonero\src\rpc\core_rpc_server.h:68 Failed to on_get_blocks()
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.772833 [RPC0]ERROR c:\users\ric_000\desktop\bitmonero\src\rpc\core_rpc_server.h:68 Failed to on_get_blocks()

Anybody ?

[rdnkjdi]

This is ridiculous sentiment.

I really don't believe it is a ridiculous sentiment (to state as fact would be ridiculous - but for me to believe it is not.)

I feel Boolberry made a big mistake having James pump the coin with the SuperNET and that eventually some nasty things are going to come out.  If no changes were made to the official software and James / SuperNET was an independent actor then his actions would not reflect on boolberry and the other coins involved in the supernet.  However - if it/he turns out to be a bad actor then it will reflect badly on the SuperNET alliance.  

Boolberry has done everything it can to catch up to Monero.  It releases fewer coins slower.  It has a GUI.  It's joined the SuperNET.  It hasn't had ongoing threats to destroy it.  It shrunk the blockchain.  And yet it still lags behind at approximately 10% of the Monero market cap.

In the same way I assume you can judge the interest in a coin by how it reacts to good news (good news & the coin barely goes up.  Like bitcoin being adopted by PayPal which was supposed to be the holy grail barely going up.  And then a massive sell off afterwards.).   I also presume that a coin that is ahead of another coin in the progress spectrum (smaller blockchain size, official GUI, etc) but lags behind in price by a margin of 10 times (more if you consider the coin release schedule) is the clear loser between the two.  And that the market has made it's choice.

I hold as many BBR's as XMR's as a hedge & I like it.  But the market seems to have chosen.

[smooth]

The level of having standard anonymity on all transactions in a coin (in my mind) increases the anonymity by as much adoption as the coin has.  Instead of the powers that be being able to narrow down trying to track or trace the 5% of transactions that are anonymous they will have to attack the entire userbase to get any information.  

Boolberry is conservative with standard anonymity: it makes sure all transactions have >1 mixin. Some transactions with Monero are not entirely anonymous (some can have mixin=0).

That is not what it does.

The confusion about these things is somewhat astounding.

This is ridiculous sentiment. Monero will be the only CryptoNote with long term success, and will eliminate all the other fair forks of Bytecoin because it was the first fork by less than three weeks? Monero is anything but the clear winner.

Monero (Bitmonero) launch date: 18 April
Boolberry (Honeypenny) launch date: 17 May

"Less than three weeks?"

Your argument is that a "small" difference in launch date shouldn't matter. I don't agree and the market doesn't agree. But we can certainly agree to disagree. Nevertheless please don't lie about the difference.

[surfer43]

The level of having standard anonymity on all transactions in a coin (in my mind) increases the anonymity by as much adoption as the coin has.  Instead of the powers that be being able to narrow down trying to track or trace the 5% of transactions that are anonymous they will have to attack the entire userbase to get any information.  

Boolberry is conservative with standard anonymity: it makes sure all transactions have >1 mixin. Some transactions with Monero are not entirely anonymous (some can have mixin=0).

That is not what it does.

The confusion about these things is somewhat astounding.

Oops. BBR allows you to specify that transactions using your outputs as inputs use mixin>0, or if they should use mixin=0, or it doesn't matter.

This is ridiculous sentiment. Monero will be the only CryptoNote with long term success, and will eliminate all the other fair forks of Bytecoin because it was the first fork by less than three weeks? Monero is anything but the clear winner.

Monero (Bitmonero) launch date: 18 April
Boolberry (Honeypenny) launch date: 17 May

"Less than three weeks?"

I was referring to Fantomcoin. But that's a scam also because it is merged mined right?

Your argument is that a "small" difference in launch date shouldn't matter. I don't agree and the market doesn't agree. But we can certainly agree to disagree.

By "market" do you mean "rpietila"? A single actor can maintain this market cap. Even rpietila admits the market cap is "not exactly much", and that he commands a larger wealth. The current price differences between CryptoNote currencies will not matter in a year.

[rpietila]

By "market" do you mean "rpietila"? A single actor can maintain this market cap. Even rpietila admits the market cap is "not exactly much", and that he commands a larger wealth. The current price differences between CryptoNote currencies will not matter in a year.

It does matter. This rpietila bought into Monero in a serious way in July, still owns it, and does not own any of the other CN coins.

During all this time, no other CN coin has been able to attract an investor of my caliber, for a reason or another. An exception might be BBR, who got some backing from jl777, although is now again in a decline as it is not clear if SuperNet can deliver or not.

The current price differences (about an order of magnitude) matter as much as an order of magnitude does - a lot. Even XMR is so small still that my investor network with 9-figure net worth, can not yet buy into it. The other CN coins are doomed into being small, because an investment of €10,000 into them is utterly impossible, and even €1,000 would move the price greatly. There is no magical mechanism for building market cap and liquidity in a coin, it is hard work and requires dedication. For a time I felt that BBR was gaining some traction, now (as the price has again crashed) it does not feel interesting at all. XMR continues to feel interesting because of its large and wealthy ownerbase. I would not have got into the position where I am, if I was the wealthiest XMR owner. Prudent investors do not want to stretch and end up in a position where they are the sole supporter of the coin.

[smooth]

The level of having standard anonymity on all transactions in a coin (in my mind) increases the anonymity by as much adoption as the coin has.  Instead of the powers that be being able to narrow down trying to track or trace the 5% of transactions that are anonymous they will have to attack the entire userbase to get any information.  

Boolberry is conservative with standard anonymity: it makes sure all transactions have >1 mixin. Some transactions with Monero are not entirely anonymous (some can have mixin=0).

That is not what it does.

The confusion about these things is somewhat astounding.

Oops. BBR allows you to specify that transactions using your outputs as inputs use mixin>0, or if they should use mixin=0, or it doesn't matter.

And that's a questionable "improvement" for a variety of reasons, some of which were explained by the inventors of cryptonote. Do you know better than they do?

I was referring to Fantomcoin. But that's a scam also because it is merged mined right?

I have no idea why people didn't like Fantomcoin. It might very well be merged mining, or they didn't like the developer or there was already a good enough Cryptonote coin or the name or any number of other reasons. What does that have to do with anything?

Your argument is that a "small" difference in launch date shouldn't matter. I don't agree and the market doesn't agree. But we can certainly agree to disagree

By "market" do you mean "rpietila"? A single actor can maintain this market cap. Even rpietila admits the market cap is "not exactly much", and that he commands a larger wealth. The current price differences between CryptoNote currencies will not matter in a year.

rpietila is certainly part of the market. He's an independent actor. If he decided he likes Monero better for whatever reasons (and he's explained some of them -- you may not agree with some of his reasons -- which is fine) that's his prerogative.

However, it is worth noting that Monero's leadership position was well in place before rpietila got involved (5/25, so 5-6 weeks post launch. EDIT: he said in previous reply that he didn't buy big until July), and he picked Monero for some very good reasons, including that very leadership position. What has happened since then has been more than absence of a change (or a reason for a change) than any real change.

[smooth]

A "pump and dump" is a coin that has been pumped and dumped. Monero has increased in price from 0.0002 BTC to just under 0.01 BTC, and has since fallen to just above 0.002 BTC. A 5000% increase qualifies as a "pump" and a 80% decrease qualifies as a "dump". If Monero is not a pump and dump, then most coins are not pump and dumps so what's your point?  

This is a misconception about the term, likely due to the double meaning of the word dump (and to a lesser extent pump). It doesn't simply mean that the price went up and down. By that (incorrect) definition every single asset that has ever fluctuated in price becomes a pump and dump. They aren't.

As used in "pump-and-dump" it means the insiders are selling ("dumping") their large holdings at high prices after they have artificially inflated the price generally using insider information and/or false or misleading statements ("pumping").

That hasn't happened here, and is essentially impossible compared to most altcoin (or penny stock) pump-and-dump scams because there are no insiders with large initial holdings, as there are with penny stock schemes, coin premines, instamines, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pump_and_dump
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/pumpanddump.asp

[xulescu]

Could somebody please help me to resolve this issue ?
I was out of town & away from my home PC so I didn't updated my blockchain for almost 3 months,
Last week when I came back I downloaded the latest wallet from the OP & also the blockchain (2.3 GB .bin file) from the link provided in the OP.

After that when I ran bitmonerod.exe my blockchain was still  about 40-45 days behind so, left it overnight running & in the morning it was done with synchronization.
But then when I run simplewallet.exe, it gives me a weird message,

2014-Oct-23 11:04:45.414355 bitmonero wallet v0.8.8.4-771b531
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.208800 Loaded wallet keys file, with public address: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.208800 file not found: xmr, starting with empty blockchain
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.208800 Opened wallet: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.599823 Starting refresh...
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.681828 Failed to invoke http request to  http://localhost:18081/getblocks.bin, wrong response code: 500
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.681828 ERROR ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:282 !r. THROW EXCEPTION: error::no_connection_to_daemon
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.703829 ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:282:struct tools::error::no_connection_to_daemon: no connection to daemon, request = getblocks.bin
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.709829 Another try pull_blocks (try_count=0)...
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.749831 Failed to invoke http request to  http://localhost:18081/getblocks.bin, wrong response code: 500
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.750831 ERROR ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:282 !r. THROW EXCEPTION: error::no_connection_to_daemon
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.750831 ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:282:struct tools::error::no_connection_to_daemon: no connection to daemon, request = getblocks.bin
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.750831 Another try pull_blocks (try_count=1)...
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.771833 Failed to invoke http request to  http://localhost:18081/getblocks.bin, wrong response code: 500
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.771833 ERROR ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:282 !r. THROW EXCEPTION: error::no_connection_to_daemon
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.772833 ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:282:struct tools::error::no_connection_to_daemon: no connection to daemon, request = getblocks.bin
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.772833 Another try pull_blocks (try_count=2)...
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.794834 Failed to invoke http request to  http://localhost:18081/getblocks.bin, wrong response code: 500
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.794834 ERROR ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:282 !r. THROW EXCEPTION: error::no_connection_to_daemon
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.794834 ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:282:struct tools::error::no_connection_to_daemon: no connection to daemon, request = getblocks.bin
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.794834 ERROR ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:358 pull_blocks failed, try_count=3
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.803834 Error: refresh failed: no connection to daemon. Please, make sure daemon is running. Blocks received: 0

At the same time bitmonerod.log reads the following,

2014-Oct-23 11:02:31.377688 [P2P1][188.2.54.196:18080 OUT]Sync data returned unknown top block: 272598 -> 272778 [180 blocks (0 days) behind]
SYNCHRONIZATION started
2014-Oct-23 11:03:24.909750 [P2P3][85.69.78.14:18080 OUT] SYNCHRONIZED OK
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.646826 [RPC0]ERROR c:\users\ric_000\desktop\bitmonero\src\rpc\core_rpc_server.h:68 Failed to on_get_blocks()
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.710829 [RPC0]ERROR c:\users\ric_000\desktop\bitmonero\src\rpc\core_rpc_server.h:68 Failed to on_get_blocks()
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.750831 [RPC1]ERROR c:\users\ric_000\desktop\bitmonero\src\rpc\core_rpc_server.h:68 Failed to on_get_blocks()
2014-Oct-23 11:04:53.772833 [RPC0]ERROR c:\users\ric_000\desktop\bitmonero\src\rpc\core_rpc_server.h:68 Failed to on_get_blocks()

Anybody ?

I don't know what causes the issue, but I've had it too when loading the [wallet.bin].key file without the [wallet.bin] file.

0. Close both the daemon and the client
1. Backup your [wallet.bin].key file securely
2. Delete your [wallet.bin] file
3. Start daemon, wait for sync
4. Start client, load your [wallet.bin].key
5. Type in client "refresh", and EITHER ....
5a. .... everything works, you are done OR ....
5b. .... type in client "save", then "exit" and then restart client and you should be done

In my case, I got that error when I loaded a wallet from [wallet.bin].key without the [wallet.bin] file. Typing "save" makes the client create the [wallet.bin] file, and after a restart it worked fine.

Let us know if you have further questions or if it fixed your problem!

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

A "pump and dump" is a coin that has been pumped and dumped. Monero has increased in price from 0.0002 BTC to just under 0.01 BTC, and has since fallen to just above 0.002 BTC. A 5000% increase qualifies as a "pump" and a 80% decrease qualifies as a "dump". If Monero is not a pump and dump, then most coins are not pump and dumps so what's your point?  

The point is that you, smurfer43, are an asshole.

[rdnkjdi]

I was referring to Fantomcoin. But that's a scam also because it is merged mined right?

I know little of fantomcoin - but my recollection was that Bytecoin was a scam & there were others.  Fantomcoin was likely not a scam (and I love merge mining).  But (in my mind) the nature of currencies is to pick a winner and push the others out.  I understand others don't feel this way.  When I talk I think in terms of the most likely to be adopted (Monero, BBR), the scams (Bytecoin, Darkcoin) and those that will just wither away (Vertcoin).  I only see three spots in crypto.  Bitcoin as the transparent ledger.  Smartcoin (contracts, turing, etc).  Anonymous coin since it still hasn't effectively been bundled into bitcoin.

A "pump and dump" is a coin that has been pumped and dumped. Monero has increased in price from 0.0002 BTC to just under 0.01 BTC, and has since fallen to just above 0.002 BTC. A 5000% increase qualifies as a "pump" and a 80% decrease qualifies as a "dump". If Monero is not a pump and dump, then most coins are not pump and dumps so what's your point?  

The point is that you, smurfer43, are an asshole.

Can we please.  PLEASE not resort to name calling?  I'm sick of the strict battlelines between coins and groups that are hostile to even the pretense of objectivity.

Fair point.  Perhaps my post should have read "If you look at coin emission - then pump and dump was the LAST thing in the world you would think of.  Monero's early (first year or two) coin emission makes it almost impossible to pump as effectively as (most) other coins.  The coin release schedule just wasn't built for a pump and dump.

BBR's chart might look similar to moneros but it's f***** up atm.  Look at volume over time.  The inflation majorly discourages pumping.  You'll get stuck out to dry if you try to pump because miners will just dump into you - too many moneros to effectively pump and be profitable at.  There are other coins you'd do better to hype.

Just my interpretation

Monero chart.



Darkcoin chart.



XCurrency chart.

[rpietila]

Fair point.  Perhaps my post should have read "If you look at coin emission - then pump and dump was the LAST thing in the world you would think of.  Monero's early (first year or two) coin emission makes it almost impossible to pump as effectively as (most) other coins.  The coin release schedule just wasn't built for a pump and dump.

Thanks, good interpretation, and nice charts. With the other coins, marketcap is now a fraction of the pump high, with Monero, it is down only 50%.