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

[David Latapie]

you fan of XMR want XRM to be a succes do the same as me and follow twitter, like facebook sign in the forum and show the world you using and support Monero.

^ Good advice

I just created an account and made my first post:
https://forum.monero.cc/20/general-discussion/108/support-monero-and-show-the-world-you-like-this-coin

Edit:
RETWEET: https://twitter.com/GEO_Jan/status/540793471616155649

Retweeted

So you're looking for a good developer and you have a way to compensate them if they are found?

We do.

It shouldn't be that hard to find a developer looking for work.

To find a dev is easy. To find a reliable dev for this work is not. But we keep trying. Hard

Since the fraud revelation linked in this post, the CryptoNote.org whitepaper has 404'd (part of the fraud was that this document was digitally signed with an obviously-wrong-by-multiple-years timestamp, so I guess that's why..). Do you or anyone have a link to a citable document describing their ring signature scheme? –  Andrew Poelstra Aug 25 at 15:27

?

To an outsider looking in that part of the thread looks like an accusation is unanswered. I don't have write permission there so maybe you want to drop this link as a answer to his request?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg9752751#msg9752751

From what I've read there as a whole I'd say he is a good supporter of this coin. That article is a great read. Wish I was younger and could soak this stuff up like I used to. Getting old blows.

Andrew is Andytoshi Hel self-taught cryptography so you could also
Regarding the cryptonote part, this is a different topic, unrelated to the list I posted above. What he mentionned is that Cryptonote delete the PDF and added a new, corrected one with the same URL to try to hide the fact, as smooth mentionned. I'll add a comment.

[1680141935]

1680141935

[1680141935]

1680141935

[1680141935]

1680141935

[smooth]

If there was a proper funding framework in place this could be improved significantly.

As we (and fluffypony in particular), stated it, the issue is not funding (not now), but finding good enough developper and them familiarizing themselves with the code. More money won't make things evolve faster, at least for the coin.

Same thing for "code review, cryptography review": code review is being done as we speak, and cryptography review also - we exchange with our academic cryptographer on a litterally daily basis.

I did not know Lighthouse, seems interesting

sr: "stop trading, baby" ;-)

I stand corrected.  I thought funding was an issue as it's been brought up before. 

So you're looking for a good developer and you have a way to compensate them if they are found?

It shouldn't be that hard to find a developer looking for work. 

1. I have no idea why you think it isn't hard to find good developers. Apart from this project I can tell you that they are not easy to find and almost none are looking for work (some are always looking for better work though, but see #2 below).

2. The biggest issue with developers won't be solved by a little bit of funding here or there. People looking for a full time job are not candidates unless we have a whole lot more funding, because we are light years away from having the sort of ongoing budget that would be needed to hire people in that manner. When hiring people looking for project/freelance work, some work out, some don't (and even the ones who do work out require a lot of involvement with the core team) and it is hard to keep continuity because they have other clients and other potential projects come along.

This coin needs to grow, a lot, before it makes sense for the project to be hiring full time people (which would only come with large sponsorship that could only come with growth) or for Monero-related businesses pay people to work on the core technology (as they do for bitcoin).

So build software and services, spread the word, and hopefully something significant can begin to take hold. Otherwise we are just fooling ourselves here. Let's face it, a coin -- no matter how good -- doesn't do anything by itself, it can only be useful for doing other things.

[Hueristic]

...I'll add a comment.

That should work.

...
1. I have no idea why you think it isn't hard to find good developers. Apart from this project I can tell you that they are not easy to find and almost none are looking for work (some are always looking for better work though, but see #2 below)....

I've watched Noble go through 3 or 4 of them trying to do a POS change without changing Chains and all have failed. so I don't think it's that easy to find a good one. And from what I've seen here you guys have a great crew! I truly enjoy reading all of your posts.

[forevernoob]

Regarding infinite minting: this is both yes and no and is detailled in the OP
no, because the "regular emission" is 18.4 millions, so close to Bitcoin
yes, because we may implement a "tail emission", which is not present in Bitcoin. This tail emission would very small but also infinite. The point of this tail emission would be to provide an alternative to Satoshi's decision that "after BTC is fully mined, transaction fees will suffice to encourage continuous mining", something on which we disagree - hence tail emission.

Regarding "facts about the coin", I suggest you start by reading this:

• https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf
• http://monero.cc/downloads/whitepaper_review.pdf
• http://lab.monero.cc
• https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=721045 and particularly https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=721045.msg8477489#msg8477489
• http://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/2nu9rg/darkcoin_anoncoin_shadowcash_monero/cmh5ekr
• And finally to get an idea of the present state, you can read our Monday Monero Missives on the ANN: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449

Interesting reads.
Inflation is a interesting subject. The question is if tail emissions hurt the value of the coin or not.
I don't like inflationary coins. But Monero is obviously not some shitcoin like DOGE.
I mean at least there seems to be some thought put in to the decision to have tail emission.

Care to elaborate why you think tail emission is necessary? Is it the fear of hash power decreasing if the reward for miners drops?

[aminorex]

Getting old blows.

It has its advantages.  What is the alternative?  Like Erdös, I find amphetamine sufficient to keep the mind nimble.

[smooth]

Care to elaborate why you think tail emission is necessary? Is it the fear of hash power decreasing if the reward for miners drops?

There is a sort of impossible triangle between decentralization, mining incentive, and zero inflation.

If you have decentralization and zero inflation you likely don't have a mining incentive because competition will drive transaction fees down to their marginal cost.

Therefore we feel that zero inflation (from mining) must go and a low rate of inflation is acceptable. Also, in practice there will inevitably be some lost coins so actual inflation will be even lower and may be zero or even negative (if lost coins are more than the mining inflation), but even in this case you still have mining incentives as long as there is minting.

We are serious about decentralization and that will remain a central focus of the project along with privacy. It is also critical to privacy because otherwise miners can be in a position to start imposing requirements (such as identification) on transactions.

[shojayxt]

If there was a proper funding framework in place this could be improved significantly.

As we (and fluffypony in particular), stated it, the issue is not funding (not now), but finding good enough developper and them familiarizing themselves with the code. More money won't make things evolve faster, at least for the coin.

Same thing for "code review, cryptography review": code review is being done as we speak, and cryptography review also - we exchange with our academic cryptographer on a litterally daily basis.

I did not know Lighthouse, seems interesting

sr: "stop trading, baby" ;-)

I stand corrected.  I thought funding was an issue as it's been brought up before. 

So you're looking for a good developer and you have a way to compensate them if they are found?

It shouldn't be that hard to find a developer looking for work. 

1. I have no idea why you think it isn't hard to find good developers. Apart from this project I can tell you that they are not easy to find and almost none are looking for work (some are always looking for better work though, but see #2 below).

2. The biggest issue with developers won't be solved by a little bit of funding here or there. People looking for a full time job are not candidates unless we have a whole lot more funding, because we are light years away from having the sort of ongoing budget that would be needed to hire people in that manner. When hiring people looking for project/freelance work, some work out, some don't (and even the ones who do work out require a lot of involvement with the core team) and it is hard to keep continuity because they have other clients and other potential projects come along.

This coin needs to grow, a lot, before it makes sense for the project to be hiring full time people (which would only come with large sponsorship that could only come with growth) or for Monero-related businesses pay people to work on the core technology (as they do for bitcoin).

So build software and services, spread the word, and hopefully something significant can begin to take hold. Otherwise we are just fooling ourselves here. Let's face it, a coin -- no matter how good -- doesn't do anything by itself, it can only be useful for doing other things.

I suppose I was looking at things from the wrong perspective.  Hiring a qualified full time developer is one thing.  Hiring a good developer for project/freelance work is entirely different as they may or not continue to be available in the future in which case you would need to go through the process all over again.  Which is apparently what you're having to do.

[smooth]

I suppose I was looking at things from the wrong perspective.  Hiring a qualified full time developer is one thing.  Hiring a good developer for project/freelance work is entirely different as they may or not continue to be available in the future in which case you would need to go through the process all over again.  Which is apparently what you're having to do.

Exactly. Plus even when you find someone, they may have other commitments and not be available right away or full time even for the duration of the project and so forth. It is challenging but only from the perspective of banging out huge quantities of code, which isn't necessarily what we need now. We are able to continue to make steady progress on the coding side. But to really be effective, we need to build the community and network of applications (beyond mining, exchanges, and specualtion -- that's a start, but not useful long term).

[Hueristic]

Getting old blows.

..What is the alternative?  ...

Staying young would be preferable.

...It is also critical to privacy because otherwise miners can be in a position to start imposing requirements (such as identification) on transactions.

I don't quite understand this.

... But to really be effective, we need to build the community and network of applications (beyond mining, exchanges, and specualtion -- that's a start, but not useful long term).

And Market integration. Is there any thoughts on something like Open Bazaar?

[e-coinomist]

Is Monero "limited" like BTC, or does it have infinite "minting" of new coins?

Regarding infinite minting: this is both yes and no and is detailled in the OP
no, because the "regular emission" is 18.4 millions, so close to Bitcoin
yes, because we may implement a "tail emission", which is not present in Bitcoin. This tail emission would very small but also infinite. The point of this tail emission would be to provide an alternative to Satoshi's decision that "after BTC is fully mined, transaction fees will suffice to encourage continuous mining", something on which we disagree - hence tail emission.

Good to see someone recognized. Yes, Bitcoin will die after some third or fourth block halving. Enough pure POW Altcoins demonstrated that exprimentally. And SHA ASICS might get out of operation temporarily to avoid power costs, but that doesn't make them stop existing. Readily available for the attack once Hashrate has fallen into reachable areas.  Then BOOM, simple as that. Predictable.

[smooth]

...It is also critical to privacy because otherwise miners can be in a position to start imposing requirements (such as identification) on transactions.

I don't quite understand this.

It is another way of saying that centralized miners can start to impose blacklists, whitelists, redlists, and other intrusive requirements on transactions.

Monero has things like ring signatures, stealth address, etc. to protect privacy and reduce censorship but this still relies on the miners to operate the network in a neutral manner. If they are concentrated enough, they can start imposing requirements.

Too much mixing? No "SafeChain approved" tag? Etc. Sorry, your transaction never gets into a block.

[smooth]

Is Monero "limited" like BTC, or does it have infinite "minting" of new coins?

Regarding infinite minting: this is both yes and no and is detailled in the OP
no, because the "regular emission" is 18.4 millions, so close to Bitcoin
yes, because we may implement a "tail emission", which is not present in Bitcoin. This tail emission would very small but also infinite. The point of this tail emission would be to provide an alternative to Satoshi's decision that "after BTC is fully mined, transaction fees will suffice to encourage continuous mining", something on which we disagree - hence tail emission.

Good to see someone recognized. Yes, Bitcoin will die after some third or fourth block halving. Enough pure POW Altcoins demonstrated that exprimentally. And SHA ASICS might get out of operation temporarily to avoid power costs, but that doesn't make them stop existing. Readily available for the attack once Hashrate has fallen into reachable areas.  Then BOOM, simple as that. Predictable.

To be fair our tail mining is designed to be small too (like bitcoin after a few halvings but before no subsidy), so until the things are more clear from experience or there is stronger research to support an existential need for more radical changes, we are only slightly better off. Still, at least we have recognized some aspect of the potential failure mode and eliminated it.

[smooth]

And Market integration. Is there any thoughts on something like Open Bazaar?

Open Bazaar is definitely something we are interested in supporting. We need multisig for that, and some other work that is also planned.

[liteon]

There is so many things to do for this coin to success.
Main question: are the dev's paid?
Because if they are, then they aren't doin it so smooth.
Who am I to say that?
I am a single XMR miner & supporter.
It's not about how much do I have or how much will I have.
It's about coin success. Goes slow, work more. Still slow? Go harder. Wanna success? Push more!

[smooth]

Main question: are the dev's paid?

If by "dev" you mean people doing the coding, some have, some haven't.

If by "dev" you mean the core team responsible for leading the project, then definitely not. Not only are we not paid but we have covered about 80% of the costs of the project out of our own pockets. We are all negative for a large amount of time and money. We do it because we believe in the project and want to see it succeed.

Who am I to say that?

The boss. We work for the community.

I am a single XMR miner & supporter.

Thank you for your support

[Hueristic]

...It is also critical to privacy because otherwise miners can be in a position to start imposing requirements (such as identification) on transactions.

I don't quite understand this.

It is another way of saying that centralized miners can start to impose blacklists, whitelists, redlists, and other intrusive requirements on transactions.

Monero has things like ring signatures, stealth address, etc. to protect privacy and reduce censorship but this still relies on the miners to operate the network in a neutral manner. If they are concentrated enough, they can start imposing requirements.

Too much mixing? No "SafeChain approved" tag? Etc. Sorry, your transaction never gets into a block.

Thanks, that made sense to me.

And Market integration. Is there any thoughts on something like Open Bazaar?

Open Bazaar is definitely something we are interested in supporting. We need multisig for that, and some other work that is also planned.

NOW I see why everyone has been harping Multisig. I wasn't aware it was a per-requiset. Someday I may read a paper but not today. Thanks for answering all the questions!

[saddambitcoin]

What is the best programming language to learn for Monero?

I have a lot of time on my hands and much motivation.

[smooth]

NOW I see why everyone has been harping Multisig. I wasn't aware it was a per-requiset.

"coins that support multisig transactions could be added in the future " http://forum.openbazaar.org/index.php?p=/discussion/31/altcoin-support

The Open Bazaar project has said they will accept pull requests to add support for other coins (presumably this assumes the coding is good). Meaning other people have to do the work, but they won't stand in the way.  Even if not included directly, we can do a fork. Either way multisig is needed. That is fundamental to how OB works.

Thanks for answering all the questions!

You are welcome.

[smooth]

What is the best programming language to learn for Monero?

I have a lot of time on my hands and much motivation.

If you want to develop improvements to Monero itself, then C++.

If you want to develop add on software or services that us it (more needed IMO), then any modern language with a JSON-RPC library is fine.

[liteon]

If by "dev" you mean people doing the coding, some have, some haven't.

I ment about coding, sorry for being confusive about it.

If by "dev" you mean the core team responsible for leading the project, then definitely not. Not only are we not paid but we have covered about 80% of the costs of the project out of our own pockets. We are all negative for a large amount of time and money. We do it because we believe in the project and want to see it succeed.

Yeah, I'm aware of it. Just liked this coin so much, until those days when price gone so madly down.
I'm still in it, just not giving it so much hope, as support of buyout was really weak.
Strong fiat/buy support can bring the price back up...
But no projects, like app's and market use of currency to make it spendable as a Bitcoin.
Something that make people want it. Somewhere to spend it. Not just buy and sell.