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

[liteon]

It´s at 0.0011 for most regions in the US and at 0.0021 in western europe, at least with Nvidia GPUs, CPU and AMD may be a little higher.

I am from Germany, power cost is ~ 0.30 USD (25 euro cents) here, but many companies provide you with free power during the winter if you are willing to take care of the temperature during winter in their warehouses. Keep them above 0°C to avoid burst water pipes.

So, by your words, we shall all do that?
To avoid loss?

[1713275559]

1713275559

[1713275559]

1713275559

[silencesilence]

I feel major WAR today.... after Monero Monday Missive!

Network
Hash Rate: 18.49 MH/sec
Block Found: 2 minutes ago
Difficulty: 1162983830
Blockchain Height: 279336
Last Reward: 13.5105 XMR

Monero is alive  

24-hour Volume: 293 BTC / 160686 XMR
Price:0.00195467
https://poloniex.com/exchange/btc_xmr


VOTE for MONERO Please - https://www.cryptsy.com/coinvotes

[dEBRUYNE]

I feel major WAR today.... after Monero Monday Missive!

Network
Hash Rate: 18.49 MH/sec
Block Found: 2 minutes ago
Difficulty: 1162983830
Blockchain Height: 279336
Last Reward: 13.5105 XMR

Monero is alive  

24-hour Volume: 293 BTC / 160686 XMR
Price:0.00195467
https://poloniex.com/exchange/btc_xmr


VOTE for MONERO Please - https://www.cryptsy.com/coinvotes

Cryptsy already stated they will add monero soon. We better vote at btc38 (http://www.btc38.com/trade/vote_for_trade_en.html) to target the chinese audience.

[RentaMouse]

Moneropool.com is down to 30% of net hash currently, which is an improvement but its still not a good distribution for network security.

If anyone can find a way to get those miners to understand that you dont earn any more from a pool which finds a block every 5min compared to every 5hrs they should get a prize. Pool uptime and fees are the critical factor, a pool which averages half a day of downtime per month is like another 1.5% on its fees.

[smooth]

Moneropool.com is down to 30% of net hash currently, which is an improvement but its still not a good distribution for network security.

If anyone can find a way to get those miners to understand that you dont earn any more from a pool which finds a block every 5min compared to every 5hrs they should get a prize. Pool uptime and fees are the critical factor, a pool which averages half a day of downtime per month is like another 1.5% on its fees.

Pool downtime shouldn't be a big factor since you can and should set up backup pools in your miner.

[binaryFate]

I'm so tired...
Guys can you please post that missive so that I can go to bed?... 

[RentaMouse]

Moneropool.com is down to 30% of net hash currently, which is an improvement but its still not a good distribution for network security.

If anyone can find a way to get those miners to understand that you dont earn any more from a pool which finds a block every 5min compared to every 5hrs they should get a prize. Pool uptime and fees are the critical factor, a pool which averages half a day of downtime per month is like another 1.5% on its fees.

Pool downtime shouldn't be a big factor since you can and should set up backup pools in your miner.

Depends on the miner, although I must admit I havent checked recently, but only Claymore's used to support backup pools

[smooth]

Depends on the miner, although I must admit I havent checked recently, but only Claymore's used to support backup pools

I'm pretty sure yvg's miner does too.

That's pretty terrible though. Who wants to be paid to add to wolf's and/or tsiv?

[dewdeded]

It's easy. Moneropool.com owner should sell/redirect his "unhealthy" traffic to other pools and just charge a fair fee from them.

Just set a maximum of hash power like 30% and if this is reached transparantly redirect new incoming mining traffic/connections via load balancing to other pools, that are intrested in getting this traffic. The balancing should be done transparently (like transparent HTTP proxys), meaning its automatically the miner doesnt have to change something/his setup.

I would propose the pool that receives the traffic and MP.com do an 75%/25% split on the fees, earned from the traffic they got fro MP.com.  (in other words: the mining traffic buying pool is paying a 25% charge for MP.coms service of providing this mining traffic/miners)


You guys get what I am trying to say. And obvious this isnt new or rocket science. It's the exact same thing e.g. ghash.io & coinotron did in history, when they got much % of the hashpower of BTC/LTC.

The question is how can the moneropool.com owner be motivated to setup this kind of solution.

[dEBRUYNE]

I'm so tired...
Guys can you please post that missive so that I can go to bed?... 

Smooth said that fluffypony was travelling, so there could be some delay.

[BanditryAndLoot]

Grabbed this from the DRK thread, thought that anyone trading on Poloniex would like to know .. seeing as how Poloniex is such a large part of our volume.

http://altcoinpress.com/2014/10/fincen-ruling-us-government-ramps-up-war-on-cryptocurrency/

Looks like the site is having trouble:

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) today issued two administrative rulings regarding digital currency. And the government has apparently decided to go with the nuclear option.

The first ruling published today relates to the application of FinCEN regulations to a virtual currency trading platform, while the second ruling discusses the application of FinCEN regulations to a virtual currency payment system.

In ruling FIN-2014-R011, FinCEN states that any and all cryptocurrency exchanges must become licensed as a money transmitter including crypto-only exchanges:

    As explained in the Guidance, a person is an exchanger and a money transmitter if the person accepts convertible virtual currency from one person and transmits it to another person as part of the acceptance and transfer of currency, funds, or other value that substitutes for currency.

In ruling FIN-2014-R012, the agency confirms that any and all payment processors are obliged to register as money transmitters, significantly increasing the cost of entry in becoming a digital payments provider.

    As described above, the Company is an exchanger under the Guidance because it engages as a business in accepting and converting the customer’s real currency into virtual currency for transmission to the merchant. The fact that the Company uses its cache of Bitcoin to pay the merchant is not relevant to whether it fits within the definition of money transmitter.

Once labeled a money transmitter, a business wishing to continue operating must pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to become licensed in each of the 50 states. And that’s only the beginning of the regulatory costs and legal hoop jumping.

paperworkIn addition, companies are required to register with FinCEN, conduct a comprehensive risk assessment of its exposure to money laundering, implement an Anti-Money Laundering Program based on such risk assessment, and comply with various record keeping, reporting and transaction monitoring obligations, in addition to meeting several other requirements.

It is interesting to note that the government classifies Bitcoin as a digital “property” for taxation purposes, but as a digital “money” for regulatory and licensing purposes.

Do you think Bitcoin can survive this latest atomic bomb blast? Log in below using your favorite social media network and weigh in on the discussion.

[generalizethis]

Why is the XMR emission curve so much steeper than with other PoW coins?  Is there a benefit to flattening out sooner?

Bit of a sore point that one, the emission curve is something we got stuck with from the original incarnation of Bitmonero, which had an autocratic solo dev who knew best.... It was then forked by the current team and so you can tell what the people preferred, but the emission curve stayed.

Really nice to have that info, thank you.  How big of a problem does this pose to an investor?

Pretty significant to be honest. Monero will have 18.4 million total/max coins. 14.72 million (80%) will be mined in the first 4 years. Currently, we're at 4.2 million in circulation.

The first 4 years, has heavy inflation. This gives investors an incentive to buy in at the end of that timeframe. And 4 years in crypto is a long time, with a significant chance that something better will come into the market.

14,720,000 X .75 = $25,200,000 @48 months

average yearly inflation: $6,300,000 for first four years or .25 (25%)

--------------------

2,760,000 X .75 =  $2,070,000 @??months


I'm a word guy, so correct away--I won't feel bad. Is it really that high? Or am I that high?

Wouldn't a longer/lower emissions curve benefit everyone? Bitcoin's around 10% and it hits pockets of inflation resistance that create downward pressure on the price. I'm a Deluezean at heart, so I believe volatility shows growth, but wonder if Bitcoin will hit an insurmountable dip that a better crypto can build from....

[UnicornFarts]

Grabbed this from the DRK thread, thought that anyone trading on Poloniex would like to know .. seeing as how Poloniex is such a large part of our volume.

http://altcoinpress.com/2014/10/fincen-ruling-us-government-ramps-up-war-on-cryptocurrency/

*Sigh* I need to pull mine off but I'm afraid to.  Maybe the devs have a webwallet.

With the ITO/ICO's Poloniex has gotten involved in (from what I understand)

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/sec-sends-inquiry-letters-hundreds-bitcoin-companies-unregistered-securities/

That might make it even worse.


Edit:  Looks like this news spooked someone - back down to 17's

[smooth]

Wouldn't a longer/lower emissions curve benefit everyone?

It wouldn't clearly benefit miners, unless the price went up enough to offset the reduced rewards. If some of the miners depart, the coin becomes less secure.

It wouldn't necessarily benefit the reputation or adoption of the coin, since it looks like an instamine. If you have been involved for the past six months, you got the benefit of large numbers of coins being minted and traded at low (and even increasingly lower) prices. Then mining gets cut and everyone but the early adopters gets to fight over a smaller supply, or pay up to buy from early adopters' stashes.

It also wouldn't necessarily benefit confidence in (and again reputation of) the coin. If it is considered acceptable to change once, it could be acceptable to change again. No one knows where that leads, and it is hard for anyone who is buying to know what he or she is buying.

Also a slower curve now means higher inflation later, for a longer period of time. Pay now or pay later?

This is not a the sort of change to be made lightly. I most certainly preferred a slower curve at the start. Now, I'm not sure the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.

[generalizethis]

Wouldn't a longer/lower emissions curve benefit everyone?

It wouldn't clearly benefit miners, unless the price went up enough to offset the reduced rewards. If some of the miners depart, the coin becomes less secure.

It wouldn't necessarily benefit the reputation or adoption of the coin, since it looks like an instamine. If you have been involved for the past six months, you got the benefit of large numbers of coins being minted and traded at low (and even increasingly lower) prices. Then mining gets cut and everyone but the early adopters gets to fight over a smaller supply, or pay up to buy from early adopters' stashes.

It also wouldn't necessarily benefit confidence in (and again reputation of) the coin. If it is considered acceptable to change once, it could be acceptable to change again. No one knows where that leads, and it is hard for anyone who is buying to know what he or she is buying.

Also a slower curve now means higher inflation later, for a longer period of time. Pay now or pay later?

This is not a the sort of change to be made lightly. I most certainly preferred a slower curve at the start. Now, I'm not sure the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.

My thought is that price per coin would offset the loss in mining rewards, so the hash rate wouldn't be affected unless everyone migrated to larger pools to offset the lesser chance of reward.

See the point of acceptable change--how do you sell such a major strategical move?

Slower curve of inflation? Hmmm.... Maybe 2% with a hidden x% is something the bankers got right? 2% + x fee = how many years?

In Devs we trust. 

[Come-In-Behind]

Wouldn't a longer/lower emissions curve benefit everyone?

It wouldn't clearly benefit miners, unless the price went up enough to offset the reduced rewards. If some of the miners depart, the coin becomes less secure.

It wouldn't necessarily benefit the reputation or adoption of the coin, since it looks like an instamine. If you have been involved for the past six months, you got the benefit of large numbers of coins being minted and traded at low (and even increasingly lower) prices. Then mining gets cut and everyone but the early adopters gets to fight over a smaller supply, or pay up to buy from early adopters' stashes.

It also wouldn't necessarily benefit confidence in (and again reputation of) the coin. If it is considered acceptable to change once, it could be acceptable to change again. No one knows where that leads, and it is hard for anyone who is buying to know what he or she is buying.

Also a slower curve now means higher inflation later, for a longer period of time. Pay now or pay later?

This is not a the sort of change to be made lightly. I most certainly preferred a slower curve at the start. Now, I'm not sure the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.

My thought is that price per coin would offset the loss in mining rewards, so the hash rate wouldn't be affected unless everyone migrated to larger pools to offset the lesser chance of reward.

See the point of acceptable change--how do you sell such a major strategical move?

Slower curve of inflation? Hmmm.... Maybe 2% with a hidden x% is something the bankers got right? 2% + x fee = how many years?

In Devs we trust. 

Interesting. What if Monero eventually became partly PoS, similar to Peercoin or partly DPoS like Bitshares? It would have annual % increase, so even after the entire supply is mined out, you still get a certain % of coins every year proportional the # of coins you hold?

[David Latapie]

About the movie, we can start very simply by thinking about few questions around Monero :
 - How did you discover Monero ?
 - What interested you at first ?
 - Why are you supporting it ?
 - What is your contribution on the project ?
 - How do you imagine Monero in 3 years ?
You can add or remove questions. The point is to have something interesting to say on every point.
Having different answers will show the variety of people around the project but also how united people are.

Being that you are French I think you should produce the movie.

I will not do it alone. Everyone will participate and I'll find someone competent for the editing.

waxo has some professional contact with filmmakers. He lives in Paris, we are in excellent terms and I plan to see him at the beginning of December. Interested?

[rpietila]

It would have annual % increase, so even after the entire supply is mined out, you still get a certain % of coins every year proportional the # of coins you hold?

Just tell me what the wonder is the idea behind giving more coins in proportion of the existing coins? What does it accomplish?

[BanditryAndLoot]

waxo has some professional contact with filmmakers. He lives in Paris, we are in excellent terms and I plan to see him at the beginning of December. Interested?

Not sure about the level of seriousness about this film yet.

I could fish at a media outlet well known for Documentaries, Films, and Videos as well, if you would like?

I'll ask this weekend, or Monday about services or interests relating to such a thing. I think the last thing they covered was a bit different than Monero, in relation to alternative currencies, though.

[RentaMouse]

Grabbed this from the DRK thread, thought that anyone trading on Poloniex would like to know .. seeing as how Poloniex is such a large part of our volume.

http://altcoinpress.com/2014/10/fincen-ruling-us-government-ramps-up-war-on-cryptocurrency/

*Sigh* I need to pull mine off but I'm afraid to.  Maybe the devs have a webwallet.

With the ITO/ICO's Poloniex has gotten involved in (from what I understand)

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/sec-sends-inquiry-letters-hundreds-bitcoin-companies-unregistered-securities/

That might make it even worse.


Edit:  Looks like this news spooked someone - back down to 17's

I imagine some US based exchanges may find it desirable to move offshore sooner rather than later, but then one or two may feel there is more longterm value in staying and becoming more regulated as that would inspire more customer confidence. That would probably mean higher fees compared to the offshore exchanges, whether there is enough value in the altcoin market to support it I don't know.

All the more reason to be dealing in a currency that is inherently untraceable beyond the sender, limits the amount of data "they" can acquire with the addition of AML/KYC info to exchange accounts.