[XMR] Monero Speculation

[wpalczynski]

Haha, absolutely not!  But when I hear "Satoshi Round Table" I think some meeting with the top dogs in development to talk about Bitcoin primarily... I understand now it's more of cryptocurrencies in general, which is awesome.  Will there be a video of it after the meeting is over?

I was there last year, it is a well marketed event but I am sure fluffypony can do without me this time  

The problem with that level people is that everyone is already hands full of work. I did not have the resources to start any projects with anyone there, but it was cool to shake hands with Roger Ver, Erik Voorhees, Brock Pierce, Vitalik Buterin etc. I pitched Crypto Kingdom in the main venue, but to my knowledge nobody bought in. CKG is up 1,000% in one year measured in fiat, 500% in BTC, but that would be peanuts for these guys anyway.

There will most probably be no video.

Fluffy's lifetime achievement - invitation to Satoshi Round Table. I'd love to find out who invited him...

I'd love to know your lifetime achievement as well... Sharing is caring  

He has a bright future behind him.

[1715597194]

1715597194

[1715597194]

1715597194

[1715597194]

1715597194

[jehst]

No matter what happens from here, no one can ever claim that this was a get rich quick scheme.

[americanpegasus]

Monero volume popping on Polo.  
  
We just had someone buy a big chunk all at once, all the way up the ask stack.  A nice start to the weekend?

[luigi1111]

No matter what happens from here, no one can ever claim that this was a get rich quick scheme.

primer-'s been claiming as much for months.

[americanpegasus]

No matter what happens from here, no one can ever claim that this was a get rich quick scheme.

Unfortunately you can't create a new, widely-adopted, decentralized monetary system without accidentally making a few early adopters rich in the process.  No matter how pure the intentions and tech, someone will likely get rich. 
 
All you can do is hope that it's the right people, with the right motives and morals. 
 
Monero is not a get rich quick scheme; it is the most powerful money in existence.  But if it succeeds the way we think it will, it's going to make a few people extraordinarily wealthy, and there's nothing we can do to stop that.

[binaryFate]

As a matter of fact, ironically many early adopters are still under water at the current price. Those that came later were (and are still partly) favored.

[Hueristic]

AFAIK (correct me if wrong), Poloniex does not hold the account owner personally at risk if the short game goes bust.

According to their Terms of Use, they do hold the account holder responsible:

If, after your positions and assets are liquidated, your account still contains insufficient funds to settle your debts to lenders, you will be responsible for any additional funds owed

However, if the account holder doesn't pay, the risk then theoretically falls next on the lender:

When you lend to other users using the Platform’s P2P lending system, you risk the loss of an unpaid principle if the borrower defaults on a loan and liquidation of the borrower's account fails to raise sufficient funds to cover his or her debt.

In practice, I agree true black swan risks probably exist (aside from those that exist outside the lending system altogether).

I was under the impression that once the value of your accounts assets were reached on your short that your position was auto closed, so how can the lender end up paying for the shorter?

[americanpegasus]

Speaking of shorts, it looks like our mystery shorter dumped 3000 more borrowed coins and may be placing some of that imposing sell wall.  
  
At this point they may be 'pot committed' and will get liquidated at an increasingly narrower margin of error.  They will continue to pile shorted coins on to avert the loss, digging their hole deeper and deeper until the slightest buying pressure creates a titanic liquidation of their position.  
  
Mystery shorter, you are playing a dangerous game.  Good luck, and I hope you will recover from the impending loss in time.

[Hueristic]

...

This community is so "polluted" ...

iCEBRAKER was a former CEO of Hashfast, criminal ASIC scammer with a lawsuit in progress.
No wonder he's all-in in Monero, he had to 'wash' his stolen bitcoins...

It's kind of interesting that iCEBREAKER was apparently mixed up in this scam ( http://www.deanslyons.com/PDFs/2014-03-25-Plaintiff-s-First-Amended-Petition.pdf ; interesting aside - who'd have thought you'd see bitcointalk screenshots in court proceedings) with cypherdoc, and subsequently they each ended up on opposite sides of the big block/small block bitcoin debate. Since they were both allegedly paid shills for hashfast, maybe blockstream is now paying iCEBREAKER for shilling and coinbase is paying cypherdoc to shill blocksize arguments. Who knows, maybe fluffypony is paying iCEBREAKER for shilling Monero

All I see is 2 of his posts in the middle of others, noting to say he was involved. But I'm not reading that whole PDF.

http://www.deanslyons.com/PDFs/2014-03-25-Plaintiff-s-First-Amended-Petition.pdf

[Hueristic]

Speaking of shorts, it looks like our mystery shorter dumped 3000 more borrowed coins and may be placing some of that imposing sell wall.  
  
At this point they may be 'pot committed' and will get liquidated at an increasingly narrower margin of error.  They will continue to pile shorted coins on to avert the loss, digging their hole deeper and deeper until the slightest buying pressure creates a titanic liquidation of their position.  
  
Mystery shorter, you are playing a dangerous game.  Good luck, and I hope you will recover from the impending loss in time.

what sell wall?

[dEBRUYNE]

AFAIK (correct me if wrong), Poloniex does not hold the account owner personally at risk if the short game goes bust.

According to their Terms of Use, they do hold the account holder responsible:

If, after your positions and assets are liquidated, your account still contains insufficient funds to settle your debts to lenders, you will be responsible for any additional funds owed

However, if the account holder doesn't pay, the risk then theoretically falls next on the lender:

When you lend to other users using the Platform’s P2P lending system, you risk the loss of an unpaid principle if the borrower defaults on a loan and liquidation of the borrower's account fails to raise sufficient funds to cover his or her debt.

In practice, I agree true black swan risks probably exist (aside from those that exist outside the lending system altogether).

I was under the impression that once the value of your accounts assets were reached on your short that your position was auto closed, so how can the lender end up paying for the shorter?

If there is insufficient ask liquidity to close his short.

[dEBRUYNE]

Speaking of shorts, it looks like our mystery shorter dumped 3000 more borrowed coins and may be placing some of that imposing sell wall.  
  
At this point they may be 'pot committed' and will get liquidated at an increasingly narrower margin of error.  They will continue to pile shorted coins on to avert the loss, digging their hole deeper and deeper until the slightest buying pressure creates a titanic liquidation of their position.  
  
Mystery shorter, you are playing a dangerous game.  Good luck, and I hope you will recover from the impending loss in time.

what sell wall?

I guess he means those walls at 200k and up to 246k.

[iCEBREAKER]

Speaking of shorts, it looks like our mystery shorter dumped 3000 more borrowed coins and may be placing some of that imposing sell wall.  
  
At this point they may be 'pot committed' and will get liquidated at an increasingly narrower margin of error.  They will continue to pile shorted coins on to avert the loss, digging their hole deeper and deeper until the slightest buying pressure creates a titanic liquidation of their position.  
  
Mystery shorter, you are playing a dangerous game.  Good luck, and I hope you will recover from the impending loss in time.

If there is a Monero Bearwhale (couch, Otoh, cough) he's got pockets deep enough to avoid margin calls.  Let him keep borrowing XMR, so they must eventually be repaid with (hopefully non-dust) interest, preferably raising the bottom of some local minimum in the process.

[americanpegasus]

If there is insufficient ask liquidity to close his short.

This is the real danger of lending: you know your XMR are being used to short XMR (likely), and you can also expect at least a few black swan rises over the history of our currency.  
  
If you have coins out while someone is using your coins to short, the resulting squeeze could destroy your principal - even though you are explicitly long due to holding XMR in the first place.  
  
Perhaps in an ecosystem as large as BTC this risk is minimal, but for a microcap like XMR the risk is overwhelming we have at least a few of these black swan moves ahead of us.  To me it isn't worth the risk to loan out my XMR at the moment, especially since the XMR market on Polo isn't very developed (yet) so you know your Moneros aren't being used to long other coins - only to exclusively short XMR.  
  
This puts the lenders in a precarious situation where they gain crumbs for helping short the coin, but could lose catastrophically along with the shorter if the inevitable happens.  Thus, to me, lending Monero at the moment is just a slightly less risky way to short it.

[Hueristic]

AFAIK (correct me if wrong), Poloniex does not hold the account owner personally at risk if the short game goes bust.

According to their Terms of Use, they do hold the account holder responsible:

If, after your positions and assets are liquidated, your account still contains insufficient funds to settle your debts to lenders, you will be responsible for any additional funds owed

However, if the account holder doesn't pay, the risk then theoretically falls next on the lender:

When you lend to other users using the Platform’s P2P lending system, you risk the loss of an unpaid principle if the borrower defaults on a loan and liquidation of the borrower's account fails to raise sufficient funds to cover his or her debt.

In practice, I agree true black swan risks probably exist (aside from those that exist outside the lending system altogether).

I was under the impression that once the value of your accounts assets were reached on your short that your position was auto closed, so how can the lender end up paying for the shorter?

If there is insufficient ask liquidity to close his short.

Ok, As a intellectual exercise lets say your goal is to lose as much of lenders assets as possible, how would you do this and what would it cost (for optimal effect)? As an aside what could you do to hedge this action or even benefit from it?

[smooth]

If you have coins out while someone is using your coins to short, the resulting squeeze could destroy your principal - even though you are explicitly long due to holding XMR in the first place.  

You are trying to be long, yes. But what you are actually long is not XMR itself (which would mean holding the private keys), but someone else's promise to pay you XMR.

This can contribute to a sort of waterfall black swan risk, since people who want to be long seeing their long exposure wiped out might induce them to try to replace it in the market, leading to even more short losses (on the other hand, the synthetic longs'  losses may reduce demand due to negative wealth effect).

Or you could just hold your private keys.

[americanpegasus]

Ok, As a intellectual exercise lets say your goal is to lose as much of lenders assets as possible, how would you do this and what would it cost (for optimal effect)? As an aside what could you do to hedge this action or even benefit from it?

You are asking how you could damage the lenders intentionally?  You could do it, but I don't think you could profit on it.  You would need to take them up on their loans, even at extremely high interest rates - really create a lending frenzy.  Use those loans to set up elaborate sell walls near-the-money.  Ensure you have only minimum margin requirements in this account #1. 
 
Then, with account #2 you could have to place a titanic buy order, eating through all your self-errected near-the-money walls at once and skyrocketing the price by a major % amount.  This would liquidate your account #1, and force Polo to try to repay the lenders.  But since your account #2 is still driving up the price an irrational amount the lenders would not be able to be compensated. 
 
This would cost you significantly because you would eat the losses from having account #1 liquidated even though you would end up with a substantial portion of XMR in account #2. 

Or you could just hold your private keys.

Cold blooded, as usual.  And correct.  I think once the official GUI comes out you will start seeing more people store XMR away in their own private keys.  Is that sensical or rational?  No, but it's how it will likely go down.

[Hueristic]

Ok, As a intellectual exercise lets say your goal is to lose as much of lenders assets as possible, how would you do this and what would it cost (for optimal effect)? As an aside what could you do to hedge this action or even benefit from it?

You are asking how you could damage the lenders intentionally?  You could do it, but I don't think you could profit on it.  You would need to take them up on their loans, even at extremely high interest rates - really create a lending frenzy.  Use those loans to set up elaborate sell walls near-the-money.  Ensure you have only minimum margin requirements in this account #1. 
 
Then, with account #2 you could have to place a titanic buy order, eating through all your self-errected near-the-money walls at once and skyrocketing the price by a major % amount.  This would liquidate your account #1, and force Polo to try to repay the lenders.  But since your account #2 is still driving up the price an irrational amount the lenders would not be able to be compensated. 
 
This would cost you significantly because you would eat the losses from having account #1 liquidated even though you would end up with a substantial portion of XMR in account #2. 

Yes but this does not take into account other exchanges and the bots that will auto arbitrage.

[ArticMine]

...

Or you could just hold your private keys.

Cold blooded, as usual.  And correct.  I think once the official GUI comes out you will start seeing more people store XMR away in their own private keys.  Is that sensical or rational?  No, but it's how it will likely go down.

It is the classic, since long before any crypto - currency existed, and most effective way to squeeze the shorts to the wall. Take delivery.

[americanpegasus]

Yes but this does not take into account other exchanges and the bots that will auto arbitrage.

 
  
Sure, but the point was to hurt lenders to the max extent, right?  If the subsequent ultra-buy happened fast enough, it is assumed that Polo isn't going to wait for some arbitrage opportunity to liquidate and assign losses.  This will happen automatically.  
  
Now whether you can profit from the resulting self-induced arbitrage is another story.  
  
Bottom line:  these alts are so small they are ripe for manipulation and should not be trusted as legitimate markets.  Even Bitcoin is prone to manipulation, and us 100x so.