rpietila Altcoin Observer

[rpietila]

Listen, this is important:

If there is a sustained increase in the value of money, it must result from the economy sustainably growing more than the monetary base. This is not terrible long term. It is simply that everybody gets richer:
- savers get richer, since they can buy more even without interest on savings
- producers get more richer, because otherwise they would be saving instead of producing.

And the fact that the economy is growing more than the money supply, must stay in force. Otherwise it is no deflationary environment any more.

Therefore, "deflation" (sustained decrease of general price level) is always good and never bad. It is a market phenomenon that tells the society that "guys, we are doing good!"

[1714908732]

1714908732

[1714908732]

1714908732

[1714908732]

1714908732

[1714908732]

1714908732

[r0ach]

But the fact is that all inflationary crypto dies.  No one wants it.  Without a gun put to their head, no one will take inflationary money if there is any viable alternative.  Demurrage only works under duress.

If you've been paying attention, the government in the US is making or enforcing laws regarding cryptocurrency to empower the effects of Gresham's law, where holding deflationary currency just gets you more paperwork and taxes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham's_law

The only question is, was this coincidence or conspiracy to continue the status quo.

[dga]

Zoidberg put together a starting presentation about the improvements Boolberry has made to transaction anonymity:

http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It's nice - I hadn't quite grasped it well before, and this made the issue much more clear.

[celestio]

Zoidberg put together a starting presentation about the improvements Boolberry has made to transaction anonymity:

http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It's nice - I hadn't quite grasped it well before, and this made the issue much more clear.

Monero devs already made those improvements. See the below quote.

Whats up with this?
http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It refers to a well known privacy issue on CN coins. We've had a fix for this in the development for weeks now after corresponding with a Bitcoin core devs that should be more effective than the solution for Boolberry, we're just waiting until the core of the software is more mature before we roll it out.

[smooth]

Zoidberg put together a starting presentation about the improvements Boolberry has made to transaction anonymity:

http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It's nice - I hadn't quite grasped it well before, and this made the issue much more clear.

Monero devs already made those improvements. See the below quote.

No, not these improvements specifically, but we have a plan in place to address the same issues, after some other changes are made first (database, etc.)

[celestio]

Zoidberg put together a starting presentation about the improvements Boolberry has made to transaction anonymity:

http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It's nice - I hadn't quite grasped it well before, and this made the issue much more clear.

Monero devs already made those improvements. See the below quote.

No, not these improvements specifically, but we have a plan in place to address the same issues, after some other changes are made first (database, etc.)

Yea, sorry, I worded it wrong. I meant it's already thought out, and will come in place later.

[crypto_zoidberg]

Zoidberg put together a starting presentation about the improvements Boolberry has made to transaction anonymity:

http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It's nice - I hadn't quite grasped it well before, and this made the issue much more clear.

Monero devs already made those improvements. See the below quote.

Whats up with this?
http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It refers to a well known privacy issue on CN coins. We've had a fix for this in the development for weeks now after corresponding with a Bitcoin core devs that should be more effective than the solution for Boolberry, we're just waiting until the core of the software is more mature before we roll it out.

Just curious, can you(or someone) point me where exactly in sources did they fix it ?
May be i miss something, but as i konw they have the same core as bytecoin and didn't made a hardfork yet.

Zoidberg

[smooth]

Zoidberg put together a starting presentation about the improvements Boolberry has made to transaction anonymity:

http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It's nice - I hadn't quite grasped it well before, and this made the issue much more clear.

Monero devs already made those improvements. See the below quote.

Whats up with this?
http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It refers to a well known privacy issue on CN coins. We've had a fix for this in the development for weeks now after corresponding with a Bitcoin core devs that should be more effective than the solution for Boolberry, we're just waiting until the core of the software is more mature before we roll it out.

Just curious, can you(or someone) point me where exactly in sources did they fix it ?
May be i miss something, but as i konw they have the same core as bytecoin and didn't made a hardfork yet.

See last few replies -- celestio misspoke.

[crypto_zoidberg]

Zoidberg put together a starting presentation about the improvements Boolberry has made to transaction anonymity:

http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It's nice - I hadn't quite grasped it well before, and this made the issue much more clear.

Monero devs already made those improvements. See the below quote.

Whats up with this?
http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It refers to a well known privacy issue on CN coins. We've had a fix for this in the development for weeks now after corresponding with a Bitcoin core devs that should be more effective than the solution for Boolberry, we're just waiting until the core of the software is more mature before we roll it out.

Just curious, can you(or someone) point me where exactly in sources did they fix it ?
May be i miss something, but as i konw they have the same core as bytecoin and didn't made a hardfork yet.

See last few replies -- celestio misspoke.

Ok.
So, you going to make hard-fork in XMR to fix this ?

[smooth]

Zoidberg put together a starting presentation about the improvements Boolberry has made to transaction anonymity:

http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It's nice - I hadn't quite grasped it well before, and this made the issue much more clear.

Monero devs already made those improvements. See the below quote.

Whats up with this?
http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It refers to a well known privacy issue on CN coins. We've had a fix for this in the development for weeks now after corresponding with a Bitcoin core devs that should be more effective than the solution for Boolberry, we're just waiting until the core of the software is more mature before we roll it out.

Just curious, can you(or someone) point me where exactly in sources did they fix it ?
May be i miss something, but as i konw they have the same core as bytecoin and didn't made a hardfork yet.

See last few replies -- celestio misspoke.

Ok.
So, you going to make hard-fork in XMR to fix this ?

Future plans will be discussed....in the future

I would add though, that we are not convinced that the BBR approach is obviously the best one. It has disadvantages, I'm pretty sure you are already aware of them, and have decided on what you believe to be the appropriate trade offs. We will do the same. With respect to the trade-offs, I will leave it to you to discuss your own coin rather than make comments that could be interpreted as "trashing" another coin (not intended that way in any case).

[r0ach]

When XMR forks, change the block time back to it's original 2 minutes.  I would personally make the block reward a continuous 1% as well.  The risk for the coin failing is far higher set to 0 or a small number than it is for 1%.  It's a no brainer chess move.  We already know less than 1% is useless, as seen in coins like Quark.  1% is the lowest the non-zero, continuous block reward should be, maybe even going as high as 2%, but I would use 1% as a conservative number.

These numbers have not imploded gold, and there will be far far higher XMR lost per year than gold misplaced or lost per year.

[rpietila]

These numbers have not imploded gold, and there will be far far higher XMR lost per year than gold misplaced or lost per year.

Gold's block reward is adjustable. In times of low population growth and low economic activity, it is very near to zero. It can also reach upwards of 2% per year in boom times. Since antiquity, it has averaged only 0.3%, much less than is probably needed for network security alone.

On the other hand, the fiat regime since 1971 shows the terrible mislocations of capital caused by the "contained" inflation averaging 6% per year.

0.7% per year => monetary base doubles in 100 years, goes up a 1000-fold in 1000 years.
1.4% per year => monetary base quadruples in 100 years, goes up a 1,000,000fold in 1000 years.
2.1% per year => monetary base goes up 700% in 100 years, a billionfold in 1000 years.
2.8% per year => monetary base goes up 16-fold in 100 years, a trillionfold in 1000 years.
3.5% per year => monetary base goes up 32-fold in 100 years, a quadrillionfold in 1000 years.

Anyone who takes the time to read the above list, realizes that no astute whale is going to buy things whose inflation is more than ~1.5% per year unless they are for short term speculation only, or there is another compelling consideration except inflation.

[Its About Sharing]

But the fact is that all inflationary crypto dies.  No one wants it.  Without a gun put to their head, no one will take inflationary money if there is any viable alternative.  Demurrage only works under duress.

If you've been paying attention, the government in the US is making or enforcing laws regarding cryptocurrency to empower the effects of Gresham's law, where holding deflationary currency just gets you more paperwork and taxes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham's_law

The only question is, was this coincidence or conspiracy to continue the status quo.

They are at the state of hoping to have some serious regulation in place in about two years time.
There will be minor regulatory controls implimented along the way.

HUGE money is entering the space. In two years time, the question is, will we be past the point
Of no return regarding cryptos? It most certainly looks so. The Trojan Horse has already entered
Zhe banking system.

It looks like the US will be for it. Weak currencies like the Argentinian one, will see a flood into
Cryptos. I really wonder, in this age of smartphones, if Greshams law even applies at all...

[kalisto]

Zoidberg put together a starting presentation about the improvements Boolberry has made to transaction anonymity:

http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It's nice - I hadn't quite grasped it well before, and this made the issue much more clear.

Monero devs already made those improvements. See the below quote.

Whats up with this?
http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It refers to a well known privacy issue on CN coins. We've had a fix for this in the development for weeks now after corresponding with a Bitcoin core devs that should be more effective than the solution for Boolberry, we're just waiting until the core of the software is more mature before we roll it out.

Just curious, can you(or someone) point me where exactly in sources did they fix it ?
May be i miss something, but as i konw they have the same core as bytecoin and didn't made a hardfork yet.

See last few replies -- celestio misspoke.

Ok.
So, you going to make hard-fork in XMR to fix this ?

Does this mean that without a hard-fork for XMR the used addresses can be exposed because most transactions where send without mixing level?

[smooth]

Does this mean that without a hard-fork for XMR the used addresses can be exposed because most transactions where send without mixing level?

The issue arises if all the other outputs with which you mixed are spent with mix=0 transactions, but your output is not spent, and this fact is known to the observer (for example the recipient). In fact if you use a high mixing factor this probably won't happen even if most transactions are mix=0, because there will usually be a few that are not mix=0 so not observable as spent.

In general though, the volume of transactions on the XMR network (or any of the cryptonote networks) is too low to provide a high level of privacy without extreme levels of mixing (and maybe not even then). Mixing relies on a needle-in-a-haystack principle and if the haystack is small, then trying to hide the needle is futile.

These issues will be addressed in various ways once the volume of transactions on the network is higher, and that alone will help a lot too.

If you are looking for the best privacy you can get currently, you should move your coins around between a few of your own wallets (with medium to high mixing each time, and taking care to avoid an identifiable pattern of timing) before sending them to their eventual destination. By doing that you are creating your own (small) haystack. But again, the potential for mixing to provide robust privacy on a lightly-used network is still limited.

[AnonyMint]

These numbers have not imploded gold, and there will be far far higher XMR lost per year than gold misplaced or lost per year.

Gold's block reward is adjustable. In times of low population growth and low economic activity, it is very near to zero. It can also reach upwards of 2% per year in boom times. Since antiquity, it has averaged only 0.3%, much less than is probably needed for network security alone.

On the other hand, the fiat regime since 1971 shows the terrible mislocations of capital caused by the "contained" inflation averaging 6% per year.

0.7% per year => monetary base doubles in 100 years, goes up a 1000-fold in 1000 years.
1.4% per year => monetary base quadruples in 100 years, goes up a 1,000,000fold in 1000 years.
2.1% per year => monetary base goes up 700% in 100 years, a billionfold in 1000 years.
2.8% per year => monetary base goes up 16-fold in 100 years, a trillionfold in 1000 years.
3.5% per year => monetary base goes up 32-fold in 100 years, a quadrillionfold in 1000 years.

Anyone who takes the time to read the above list, realizes that no astute whale is going to buy things whose inflation is more than ~1.5% per year unless they are for short term speculation only, or there is another compelling consideration except inflation.

Nonsense. You are not investing for 100 years. The nominal rise is meaningless. If the population + productivity is growing at the same rate, then there is 0 (ZERO!) relative nominal growth.

You are exaggerating because you don't show the relative figures.

So what determines the ideal %?

I suggested the long-term rate of debasement should mirror the population + productivity growth.

http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange2/current/lectures/human_pop/human_pop.html

The factors affecting global human population are very simple. They are fertility, mortality, initial population, and time. The current growth rate of ~1.3% per year is smaller than the peak which occurred a few decades ago (~2.1% per year in 1965-1970)

http://www.nber.org/papers/w15834

Its conclusion is that over the next 20 years (2007-2027) growth in real potential GDP will be 2.4 percent (the same as in 2000-07), growth in total economy labor productivity will be 1.7 percent, and growth in the more familiar concept of NFPB sector labor productivity will be 2.05 percent.

So that is a range between 1.3 + 1.7 = 3% to 2.1 + 2.05 = 4.2%, i.e. 3 - 4%.

[AnonyMint]

Q: What is 3% annual debasement to a layman?

A: $25 per month for $10,000 in savings.

Q: What is 1% annual debasement to a layman?

A: $8.33 per month for $10,000 in savings.

But if the demand increases faster than the supply of the coin (i.e. the population rises) and or the production of the economy rises (i.e. productivity rises), it could eliminate those costs above because in the former case the price of the coin rises and in the latter case the purchasing power of each coin rises.

[illodin]

Zoidberg put together a starting presentation about the improvements Boolberry has made to transaction anonymity:

http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It's nice - I hadn't quite grasped it well before, and this made the issue much more clear.

Monero devs already made those improvements. See the below quote.

No, not these improvements specifically, but we have a plan in place to address the same issues, after some other changes are made first (database, etc.)

So it's vaporware?

is implemented in 2 weeks.

So vaporware. Let's take up the discussion again when it (or whatever other vaporware) is implemented and demonstrated to work in the field.

[smooth]

Zoidberg put together a starting presentation about the improvements Boolberry has made to transaction anonymity:

http://www.slideshare.net/boolberry/boolberry-solves-cryptonoteflaws-37055246

It's nice - I hadn't quite grasped it well before, and this made the issue much more clear.

Monero devs already made those improvements. See the below quote.

No, not these improvements specifically, but we have a plan in place to address the same issues, after some other changes are made first (database, etc.)

So it's vaporware?

Exactly right, which is why I corrected the misstatement (by celestio) that the improvements had already been made.

[digicoin]

Until now, BBR leads CryptoNote coins in fixing bugs and implementing core features. I hope that XMR can catch up it soon.

XMR has most crowded teams (7 devs, BBR has 3 or 4 devs)