rpietila Altcoin Observer

[TheFascistMind]

You will know soon. What I've thought out is very preliminary so please don't jump to conclusions.

[Este Nuno]

You will know soon. What I've thought out is very preliminary so please don't jump to conclusions.

Alright.

*patiently waits eating popcorn*

[TheFascistMind]

I no longer want to short Monero. You can rest easier. What I found can be fixed (if it isn't already). I believe I found BCX's exploit, although it is possible I found one that is different than his. And I believe he is incorrect about it not being fixable. At first thought, I too also thought it was a "coin killer".

Note I haven't worked through one part of the math so it is still possible that I am incorrect about this being an exploit, but I think I got the key epiphany of the exploit which makes it is possible.

It is also possible that this was already thought of and mitigated. I haven't checked the source code to verify. This is all conceptual at this point.

[vipgelsi]

Anyone think litecoin will recover like dogecoin has these last weeks?

[Quanttek]

Sorry, but this makes no sense. 5% of today's hashrate could 51% attack the coin.

Seriously, all these discussions lately about changing fundamental stuff just because people are not happy with the price are tiring.
Changing the fundamentals of a coin because you want an immediate increase in price is wrong. Given the stability of XMR despite the fact that it is everything but user friendly for the average Joe, and all the attacks, I'd say the fundamentals in terms of emissions are about perfect.

 

AMEN

You know what would be an interesting experiment. Actually trying it. Because my theory is that a change like this would make the price go down, exactly the opposite of what people usually proposing such changes intend.

No, I'm not seriously suggesting this for XMR, but I would love to see the experiment happen.

No you don't want to try it, I have seen this experiment happen before, it was after Dogecoin decided not to fix the emission limit, I remember some whales talked to the devs to reconsider at no avail, the result you see today, a dying coin with no hopes, with a community getting its fix of small good news and micro pumps once in a while. A coin need whale and investors.

I personally think inflation is an extremely important thing, that's not yet taken seriously. A defaltionary currency encourages holding (fixed supply, naturally increasing demand=rising price) and not spending, thus the holders hold on to it, until they spent it, which drives the cycle down and the currency will loose more and more rapidly value until it starts again to rise and the cycle of death continues, which no economy can sustain. Just look over at Japan and you can clearly see how much it has failed. While inflation may discourage holders and investors in the early days and drive down the price short teram, it is extremely important "to redistribute the wealth from the holders to the spenders" (Anonymint somewhere in this thread) to allow an exononmy to work properly. The only reason this is working out currently with Bitcoin is that it will take years until it is deflationary and so far it's inflation has worked out to great effect(?)

[Quanttek]

I no longer want to short Monero. You can rest easier. What I found can be fixed (if it isn't already). I believe I found BCX's exploit, although it is possible I found one that is different than his. And I believe he is incorrect about it not being fixable. At first thought, I too also thought it was a "coin killer".

Note I haven't worked through one part of the math so it is still possible that I am incorrect about this being an exploit, but I think I got the key epiphany of the exploit which makes it is possible.

It is also possible that this was already thought of and mitigated. I haven't checked the source code to verify. This is all conceptual at this point.

Already messaged smooth, tacotime or fluffypony about this? I think it would be easier to work the exploit with the help of them or their mathematicians out

[Este Nuno]

Anyone think litecoin will recover like dogecoin has these last weeks?

What news is in the pipeline for LTC?

From what I understand doge has a big mining decrease coming up as well as them releasing 'Dogeparty' which is a fork of Counterparty as far as I know.

[Este Nuno]

Sorry, but this makes no sense. 5% of today's hashrate could 51% attack the coin.

Seriously, all these discussions lately about changing fundamental stuff just because people are not happy with the price are tiring.
Changing the fundamentals of a coin because you want an immediate increase in price is wrong. Given the stability of XMR despite the fact that it is everything but user friendly for the average Joe, and all the attacks, I'd say the fundamentals in terms of emissions are about perfect.

 

AMEN

You know what would be an interesting experiment. Actually trying it. Because my theory is that a change like this would make the price go down, exactly the opposite of what people usually proposing such changes intend.

No, I'm not seriously suggesting this for XMR, but I would love to see the experiment happen.

No you don't want to try it, I have seen this experiment happen before, it was after Dogecoin decided not to fix the emission limit, I remember some whales talked to the devs to reconsider at no avail, the result you see today, a dying coin with no hopes, with a community getting its fix of small good news and micro pumps once in a while. A coin need whale and investors.

I personally think inflation is an extremely important thing, that's not yet taken seriously. A defaltionary currency encourages holding (fixed supply, naturally increasing demand=rising price) and not spending, thus the holders hold on to it, until they spent it, which drives the cycle down and the currency will loose more and more rapidly value until it starts again to rise and the cycle of death continues, which no economy can sustain. Just look over at Japan and you can clearly see how much it has failed. While inflation may discourage holders and investors in the early days and drive down the price short teram, it is extremely important "to redistribute the wealth from the holders to the spenders" (Anonymint somewhere in this thread) to allow an exononmy to work properly. The only reason this is working out currently with Bitcoin is that it will take years until it is deflationary and so far it's inflation has worked out to great effect(?)

Perhaps some of what you say may be true in certain cases, but with regards to Bitcoin I think it's fairly clear that the current rate of 10% yearly inflation is doing a fair amount of harm. There doesn't appear to be sufficient demand yet to sustain some of the higher prices that have been touched on by Bitcoin in the last year.

[rpietila]

Sorry, but this makes no sense. 5% of today's hashrate could 51% attack the coin.

Seriously, all these discussions lately about changing fundamental stuff just because people are not happy with the price are tiring.
Changing the fundamentals of a coin because you want an immediate increase in price is wrong. Given the stability of XMR despite the fact that it is everything but user friendly for the average Joe, and all the attacks, I'd say the fundamentals in terms of emissions are about perfect.

 

AMEN

You know what would be an interesting experiment. Actually trying it. Because my theory is that a change like this would make the price go down, exactly the opposite of what people usually proposing such changes intend.

No, I'm not seriously suggesting this for XMR, but I would love to see the experiment happen.

No you don't want to try it, I have seen this experiment happen before, it was after Dogecoin decided not to fix the emission limit, I remember some whales talked to the devs to reconsider at no avail, the result you see today, a dying coin with no hopes, with a community getting its fix of small good news and micro pumps once in a while. A coin need whale and investors.

I personally think inflation is an extremely important thing, that's not yet taken seriously. A defaltionary currency encourages holding (fixed supply, naturally increasing demand=rising price) and not spending, thus the holders hold on to it, until they spent it, which drives the cycle down and the currency will loose more and more rapidly value until it starts again to rise and the cycle of death continues, which no economy can sustain. Just look over at Japan and you can clearly see how much it has failed. While inflation may discourage holders and investors in the early days and drive down the price short teram, it is extremely important "to redistribute the wealth from the holders to the spenders" (Anonymint somewhere in this thread) to allow an exononmy to work properly. The only reason this is working out currently with Bitcoin is that it will take years until it is deflationary and so far it's inflation has worked out to great effect(?)

Perhaps some of what you say may be true in certain cases, but with regards to Bitcoin I think it's fairly clear that the current rate of 10% yearly inflation is doing a fair amount of harm. There doesn't appear to be sufficient demand yet to sustain some of the higher prices that have been touched on by Bitcoin in the last year.

If Bitcoin was fully mined, such as Quark, there would be nobody even remotely interested in buying it, and the price would be down even more, with no sign or prospect of recovery.

[uufgh]

Some people are just looking for excuses to start a fight. Either they are naturally childish and belligerent or they deliberately try to divide and spread FUD.

Now wonder who have interest to weaken both XMR and BBR communities by playing them off against each other...

[TheFascistMind]

I no longer want to short Monero. You can rest easier. What I found can be fixed (if it isn't already). I believe I found BCX's exploit, although it is possible I found one that is different than his. And I believe he is incorrect about it not being fixable. At first thought, I too also thought it was a "coin killer".

Note I haven't worked through one part of the math so it is still possible that I am incorrect about this being an exploit, but I think I got the key epiphany of the exploit which makes it is possible.

It is also possible that this was already thought of and mitigated. I haven't checked the source code to verify. This is all conceptual at this point.

Already messaged smooth, tacotime or fluffypony about this? I think it would be easier to work the exploit with the help of them or their mathematicians out

I prefer a quick payout and they can handle it from there.

I have other things to do and would like this done in the next hour or so.

Or I can signout and check back next chance I come up for air from my other more important work.

[smooth]

I no longer want to short Monero. You can rest easier. What I found can be fixed (if it isn't already). I believe I found BCX's exploit, although it is possible I found one that is different than his. And I believe he is incorrect about it not being fixable. At first thought, I too also thought it was a "coin killer".

Note I haven't worked through one part of the math so it is still possible that I am incorrect about this being an exploit, but I think I got the key epiphany of the exploit which makes it is possible.

It is also possible that this was already thought of and mitigated. I haven't checked the source code to verify. This is all conceptual at this point.

Already messaged smooth, tacotime or fluffypony about this? I think it would be easier to work the exploit with the help of them or their mathematicians out

I prefer a quick payout and they can handle it from there.

I have other things to do and would like this done in the next hour or so.

Or I can signout and check back next chance I come up for air from my other more important work.

You will hear imminently

[iCEBREAKER]

VIA tally = 17 Pietila Points

Monero tally = 18   

VIA loses points for being small, but a tiny cap doubles more easily...

this poll is carefully crafted FALLACY designed to make Monero look good.

*** Posted by a hardcore Monero Stooge who is spamming the VIA thread ***.
Keep this toxic garbage AWAY  FROM  VIA...
All Monero references should be deleted from the VIA thread.

VIA is a great coin with a fabulous network and Gen 2.0 services rolling out...
Monero is a one trick anon pony... with no wallet, no security and every botnet gunning for it.

Peter Todd had tweeted that the base Monero code is "atrocious"...
Meaning it's a maintenance/security nightmare...
And would have been scrapped and .
re-written by professionals

You sound mad bro.  Is it because VIA is crashing while XMR holds steady?  Keep calm and nom cheap coins.

There are two wallets for Monero.  You must be new here if you didn't know that already.  Try reading the OP sometime.

The Monero pony's "one trick" of 100% real anon is a game-changer.  That's why it's market cap is so many times higher than VIA.

The Monero devs agree with PT, and his statement was the result of being hired by them to evaluate the CN/XMR code.

The CN code is being gradually scrapped and re-written by professionals.  Have patience grasshopper.

The Pietila Point Scale is objective, and I agree with all of its criteria for evaluation except for the ones which discriminate against small coins.  But I'm not a whale of RP's stature and understand why he uses them.

VIA is just a clone of Counterparty, ported to a friendly blockchain instead of the hostile BTC one.  Some say that approach is rife with conflicts of interest.  And the fake burn for XCH was shady.  Keep attacking Monero, and I'll write more about VIA's problems.  Is that what you want?   

[umair9829]

VIA tally = 17 Pietila Points

Monero tally = 18   

VIA loses points for being small, but a tiny cap doubles more easily...

this poll is carefully crafted FALLACY designed to make Monero look good.

*** Posted by a hardcore Monero Stooge who is spamming the VIA thread ***.
Keep this toxic garbage AWAY  FROM  VIA...
All Monero references should be deleted from the VIA thread.

VIA is a great coin with a fabulous network and Gen 2.0 services rolling out...
Monero is a one trick anon pony... with no wallet, no security and every botnet gunning for it.

Peter Todd had tweeted that the base Monero code is "atrocious"...
Meaning it's a maintenance/security nightmare...
And would have been scrapped and .
re-written by professionals

You sound mad bro.  Is it because VIA is crashing while XMR holds steady?  Keep calm and nom cheap coins.

There are two wallets for Monero.  You must be new here if you didn't know that already.  Try reading the OP sometime.

The Monero pony's "one trick" of 100% real anon is a game-changer.  That's why it's market cap is so many times higher than VIA.

The Monero devs agree with PT, and his statement was the result of being hired by them to evaluate the CN/XMR code.

The CN code is being gradually scrapped and re-written by professionals.  Have patience grasshopper.

The Pietila Point Scale is objective, and I agree with all of its criteria for evaluation except for the ones which discriminate against small coins.  But I'm not a whale of RP's stature and understand why he uses them.

VIA is just a clone of Counterparty, ported to a friendly blockchain instead of the hostile BTC one.  Some say that approach is rife with conflicts of interest.  And the fake burn for XCH was shady.  Keep attacking Monero, and I'll write more about VIA's problems.  Is that what you want?   

Thank you iCEBREAKER, I found lots of useful info in your post. I was wondering what the deal with VIA is.

I really like Counterparty but just like you said, the whole burn thing was shady. That and the fact that it is "hostile" to the blockchain keeps me out.

[paulsonnumismatics]

If Bitcoin was fully mined, such as Quark, there would be nobody even remotely interested in buying it, and the price would be down even more, with no sign or prospect of recovery.

I must assume from that sentence that you plan to sell your Bitcoins in a near future, lets say when 18-19 millions are mined? And/or the plan is that by time BTC is 10-20 times worth more? what will prevent that price to plummet then? adoption? thanks.
 

[smooth]

If Bitcoin was fully mined, such as Quark, there would be nobody even remotely interested in buying it, and the price would be down even more, with no sign or prospect of recovery.

I must assume from that sentence that you plan to sell your Bitcoins in a near future, lets say when 18-19 millions are mined? And/or the plan is that by time BTC is 10-20 times worth more? what will prevent that price to plummet then? adoption? thanks.

The wide adoption should really be achieved by then, which would give a reason to hold it or buy it (for use). Otherwise it likely won't ever be.

[puck2]

Monero is a one trick anon pony... with... every botnet gunning for it.

You mean CPUs all over the world ensuring its security and strength?

[infested999]

If Bitcoin was fully mined, such as Quark, there would be nobody even remotely interested in buying it, and the price would be down even more, with no sign or prospect of recovery.

I must assume from that sentence that you plan to sell your Bitcoins in a near future, lets say when 18-19 millions are mined? And/or the plan is that by time BTC is 10-20 times worth more? what will prevent that price to plummet then? adoption? thanks.

The wide adoption should really be achieved by then, which would give a reason to hold it or buy it (for use). Otherwise it likely won't ever be.

When someone buys, someone else sells. Which translates what you just said to "give a reason to hold it or buy it or sell it".

[NewLiberty]

Sorry, but this makes no sense. 5% of today's hashrate could 51% attack the coin.

Seriously, all these discussions lately about changing fundamental stuff just because people are not happy with the price are tiring.
Changing the fundamentals of a coin because you want an immediate increase in price is wrong. Given the stability of XMR despite the fact that it is everything but user friendly for the average Joe, and all the attacks, I'd say the fundamentals in terms of emissions are about perfect.

 

AMEN

You know what would be an interesting experiment. Actually trying it. Because my theory is that a change like this would make the price go down, exactly the opposite of what people usually proposing such changes intend.

No, I'm not seriously suggesting this for XMR, but I would love to see the experiment happen.

No you don't want to try it, I have seen this experiment happen before, it was after Dogecoin decided not to fix the emission limit, I remember some whales talked to the devs to reconsider at no avail, the result you see today, a dying coin with no hopes, with a community getting its fix of small good news and micro pumps once in a while. A coin need whale and investors.

I personally think inflation is an extremely important thing, that's not yet taken seriously. A defaltionary currency encourages holding (fixed supply, naturally increasing demand=rising price) and not spending, thus the holders hold on to it, until they spent it, which drives the cycle down and the currency will loose more and more rapidly value until it starts again to rise and the cycle of death continues, which no economy can sustain. Just look over at Japan and you can clearly see how much it has failed. While inflation may discourage holders and investors in the early days and drive down the price short teram, it is extremely important "to redistribute the wealth from the holders to the spenders" (Anonymint somewhere in this thread) to allow an exononmy to work properly. The only reason this is working out currently with Bitcoin is that it will take years until it is deflationary and so far it's inflation has worked out to great effect(?)

If bitcoin goes down in price more days than it goes up, but when it goes up it goes up more... then most days people ought to want to spend it, and only not spend it during those times the price is rapidly soaring? 

[rpietila]

My short take on this, is that the following must be considered:

- Perpetual network security (inflation must always be high enough to secure the network - typically only a problem in the late stage that most coins have not addressed)

- Perception of premine (BCN was rejected outright because the coin was 82% mined when it hit the public; IMO the same will happen with whatever coin and fully regardless if it has been "fair" all the time, the mere fact that it is used by a smallish number of people when it hits the latter part of its issuance is enough to convey this perception, even BTC is problematic in this sense already)

=> Therefore the optimal coin issuance should be either connected to the growth of its economy (which is problematic to do trustlessly, and has not been tried in any coin except perhaps emunie that I don't know about) or tailored to hit its mature phase only when the userbase of the coin is established.

I urge you to read it again because most of the pundits believe that exactly the opposite is good for the coin.