Bitcoin Forum
August 10, 2020, 06:15:27 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.20.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 [2001] 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 ... 2106 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation  (Read 3247436 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic. (2 posts by 2 users deleted.)
GingerAle
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246
Merit: 1008


View Profile WWW
December 02, 2018, 05:54:52 PM
 #40001


Basically, the blockreward can be seen like a set of training wheels that keeps bitcoin up and running.

Long ago it was decided that Monero would take an alternative route, wherein having those wheels available to prevent the bicycle from falling over is good, and the tradeoff of having an infinite supply of monero is acceptable.

Tiny wheels, tiny infinity.


That’s interesting... Never thought of it like that before. So the 1mB block size is a hard set rule and the miners will always hit that (considering how many txs there always are ) and aren’t dissuaded somehow against ever going above 1 mB due to some game theory?

yeah, thats the fundamental concept of transaction fees set out in the bitcoin whitepaper
Quote
Once   a   predetermined   number   of   coins   have   entered
circulation, the incentive can transition entirely to transaction fees and be completely inflation
free.

in bitcoin, yeah, there is now a 1 mb block size limit, and in general the incentive to keep it that way is to create a fee market. If you want to get into the next 1 MB block, then your gonna pay for it.

< Track your bitcoins! > < Track them again! > <<< [url=https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1qomqt/what_a_landmark_legal_case_from_mid1700s_scotland/] What is fungibility? >>> 46P88uZ4edEgsk7iKQUGu2FUDYcdHm2HtLFiGLp1inG4e4f9PTb4mbHWYWFZGYUeQidJ8hFym2WUmWc p34X8HHmFS2LXJkf <<< Free subdomains at moneroworld.com!! >>> <<< If you don't want to run your own node, point your wallet to node.moneroworld.com, and get connected to a random node! @@@@ FUCK ALL THE PROFITEERS! PROOF OF WORK OR ITS A SCAM !!! @@@@
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
ArticMine
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268
Merit: 1041


Monero Core Team


View Profile
December 02, 2018, 07:12:05 PM
 #40002


Basically, the blockreward can be seen like a set of training wheels that keeps bitcoin up and running.

Long ago it was decided that Monero would take an alternative route, wherein having those wheels available to prevent the bicycle from falling over is good, and the tradeoff of having an infinite supply of monero is acceptable.

Tiny wheels, tiny infinity.


That’s interesting... Never thought of it like that before. So the 1mB block size is a hard set rule and the miners will always hit that (considering how many txs there always are ) and aren’t dissuaded somehow against ever going above 1 mB due to some game theory?

yeah, thats the fundamental concept of transaction fees set out in the bitcoin whitepaper
Quote
Once   a   predetermined   number   of   coins   have   entered
circulation, the incentive can transition entirely to transaction fees and be completely inflation
free.

in bitcoin, yeah, there is now a 1 mb block size limit, and in general the incentive to keep it that way is to create a fee market. If you want to get into the next 1 MB block, then your gonna pay for it.


The fundamental problem with Bitcoin's so called fee market to replace the block reward is that there is zero justification for the above statement in Bitcoin whitepaper. The fact that this statement was embedded into what is otherwise a work of genius does not make the statement true. It also does not provide any justification for the game theory that statement implies. In fact there are many arguments that this fee market will not work in the absence of a block reward or where fees become the dominant source of revenue for miners.  

One very interesting argument for the failure of the Satoshi fee market is actually in Monero itself. If one looks at a miner acting in her best interests adding transactions to a Monero block, the miner will add the highest paying transactions first. This can be approximated by the highest fee per byte transaction first if the individual transaction weight is very much less than the effective median block weight.  When the penalty free portion is used up our miner will continue to add transactions until the incremental penalty paid for adding a transaction exceeds the fees paid by the transaction. Since the incremental penalty is proportional to the block reward it follows that the total fees per block paid are also proportional to the block reward. Competition between miners will ensure that. Furthermore the total fees per block are independent of the block weight. The net result of this is that if the block reward goes to zero the total fees paid per block also goes to zero. One conclusion is that in a Bitcoin like coin with a falling block reward in order for the Satoshi fee market to even have a chance of working the penalty in terms of the block reward for increasing the block size (weight) must be stiffer than that in Monero. One can then see the rationale for Bitcoin core's strict block weight limit.

Edit: One interesting anecdote: Fees in Monero are actually based upon the above.

Concerned that blockchain bloat will lead to centralization? Storing less than 4 GB of data once required the budget of a superpower and a warehouse full of punched cards. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/87/IBM_card_storage.NARA.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_card
BldSwtTrs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 977
Merit: 1003


View Profile
December 02, 2018, 07:28:23 PM
 #40003


I believe the power of Bitcoin and Monero (I see virtually NO other useful blockchain projects) will be stronger than the power of traditional finance.  And as the "big boys" pick it up to "fix" it, control, it etc they will be changed more than it is.


God I hope that is true, I believe it too BUT remains to be seen.

Been in a discussion lately with a good friend (only real world person I know who's also into crypto) and his confidence has been badly shaken by the speed and depth of this CryptoWinter period we're in now.

I still believe, however.

Question remains, you said "bitcoin and monero" and XMR of course but... WHICH "bitcoin"??

I think there are a few other possible worthy contenders too... DigiByte appears possibly the last genuine opportunity to buy ANY "real crypto" under a penny.

Oh, maybe even Doge too, LOL.

But not much else, really.  

Either it'll all fail or one of these, XMR BTC BCH DGB DOGE (any others?) -OR- something that does NOT EXIST yet... will prevail.

P.S. {Edit} Forgot left out Litecoin in there... only on the *theory* that MAYBE if BTC really becomes "gold for bankers" and $50 transaction fees to move $1 Million per coin, then little-brother LTC tags along becoming as the transaction-purpose coin.  This is the THEORY I believe Litecoiners cling to, but... anyone really believe it will actually play out this way???  I have no clue so don't attack me on it, just sayin'... LOL

When it comes to cryptowinter.  Yeah it's hard.  And this one has been soul crushing to me at times. And I do not think it is quite over.   I am a terrible trader, so I do not trade.  That is not why I am interested in BTC and XMR.  But look at my join date (not a brag... if only I was smart enough then to buy the 5000 BTC I considered buying on my porch when it was ~$2.).  I have seen several of these winters.

As to the "Which is the real BTC?".  I have an EXTREMELY strong option on this.  There is ONE Bitcoin.  And it is BTC.  We could go into the depth of reasons why, but it's not for this thread.  Craig Wright is a conman.  Ver is a troubled narcissistic idealist.  And for different reasons they have tried to wrestle the title of Bitcoin away from BTC and have created two centralized shitcoins and done great damage to the reputation of crypto.  Could I be wrong?  Sure... and I will pay dearly for it if I am.  My bet is where my belief is.

Here's the thing.  Decentralized, permissionless, censorship resistant money is either going to be successful or not.  If it is not then we have seen the peak.  It will never have another all time high.  BCHABC, BCHSV, XRP, ETH, ALL the ICOs, and virtually ALL the ALTS are *NOT* decentralized, permissionless, censorship resistant money.

But if it is successful then then I think next upswing (whether its in a month or 5 years) will be so shocking that the average public will not believe it.  The mechanics of the system and the unprecedented nature of this invention will cause a most breathtaking effect when they kick in.

And Monero is the only complimentary blockchain that *is* Decentralized, permissionless, censorship resistant money but offers something Bitcoin CANNOT.  That is an opaque blockchain.  Bitcoin will never do that.  Layer two can be as MimbleWimbled as they like...  but layer one will ALWAYS be transparent.

Monero also stands a chance of failure.  Moreso than bitcoin by an order of magnitude in my opinion.  But it also stands a chance to be a continued success in a way no other altcoin can even touch.

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm556



Monero offers something else that Bitcoin does not; namely an adaptive block weight and tail minimum emission that allows for scaling on the main chain. This lack of on chain scaling lies at the heart of the BCH split from XBT and the further split of BSV from BCH. When something as simple as increasing the transactions per second that a blockchain requires a a highly controversial and political hard fork it is hardly surprising to see the splits, wars and personality clashes we have in Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Satoshi Vision.

On another note Bitcoin has already failed since it cannot meet the design purpose in the Satoshi paper namely a peer to peer cash like digital currency. This is primarily due to the fixed block size.

Edit: Litecoin has the same problem as Bitcoin with scaling; namely the fixed block size and falling lock reward.
Hi ArticMine, Bitcoin SV just want to increase the number of transactions and transaction fees without a blocksize limit. What do you think is wrong with this approach?
ArticMine
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268
Merit: 1041


Monero Core Team


View Profile
December 02, 2018, 07:47:31 PM
 #40004

...
Hi ArticMine, Bitcoin SV just want to increase the number of transactions and transaction fees without a blocksize limit. What do you think is wrong with this approach?

As I mentioned above. If there is competition between miners then as the block reward goes to zero so do the total fees per block since the "penalty" in terms of block reward is less than that in Monero. At this point there is no incentive for the POW and the coin becomes insecure. The alternative is a mining cartel or monopoly that sets minimum fees. Quite apart from the centralization involved I have serious doubts  such a cartel will be sustainable in the long term since individual members will cheat.

A good current example is Bytecoin which is for the time being is secured by the Bitmain ASICs. The question in my mind is how long will this last as the block reward continues to fall.  The current block reward in Bytecoin per block is ~1200 BCN if one applies the 10^4 factor that would be equivalent to ~0.12 XMR or about 20% of the tail emission in Monero. By the way I prefer to see Bytecoin as the canary in the coal mine for falling block rewards as opposed to the scam in the pre or ninja mine.

Concerned that blockchain bloat will lead to centralization? Storing less than 4 GB of data once required the budget of a superpower and a warehouse full of punched cards. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/87/IBM_card_storage.NARA.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_card
BldSwtTrs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 977
Merit: 1003


View Profile
December 02, 2018, 08:53:06 PM
 #40005

...
Hi ArticMine, Bitcoin SV just want to increase the number of transactions and transaction fees without a blocksize limit. What do you think is wrong with this approach?

As I mentioned above. If there is competition between miners then as the block reward goes to zero so do the total fees per block since the "penalty" in terms of block reward is less than that in Monero. At this point there is no incentive for the POW and the coin becomes insecure. The alternative is a mining cartel or monopoly that sets minimum fees. Quite apart from the centralization involved I have serious doubts  such a cartel will be sustainable in the long term since individual members will cheat.

A good current example is Bytecoin which is for the time being is secured by the Bitmain ASICs. The question in my mind is how long will this last as the block reward continues to fall.  The current block reward in Bytecoin per block is ~1200 BCN if one applies the 10^4 factor that would be equivalent to ~0.12 XMR or about 20% of the tail emission in Monero. By the way I prefer to see Bytecoin as the canary in the coal mine for falling block rewards as opposed to the scam in the pre or ninja mine.
Mmh... let's think in a world where there is no longer any block reward.

Why would the total fees go to zero?

Miners would add as much transactions as they can, adding highest fee transactions first. So I don't see how you end up with "there is no more incentive for the POW".
Johnny Mnemonic
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 793
Merit: 511



View Profile
December 02, 2018, 09:59:19 PM
 #40006

Long ago it was decided that Monero would take an alternative route, wherein having those wheels available to prevent the bicycle from falling over is good, and the tradeoff of having an infinite supply of monero is acceptable.

If by "acceptable" you mean "bloody awesome" then I agree with you! If only we had an exponentially increasing supply, say one percent or so, then we'd really be cookin'!

Do even mature economies not grow by at least one percent per year?
Febo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2226
Merit: 1190



View Profile
December 02, 2018, 10:55:08 PM
 #40007

Long ago it was decided that Monero would take an alternative route, wherein having those wheels available to prevent the bicycle from falling over is good, and the tradeoff of having an infinite supply of monero is acceptable.

If by "acceptable" you mean "bloody awesome" then I agree with you! If only we had an exponentially increasing supply, say one percent or so, then we'd really be cookin'!

Do even mature economies not grow by at least one percent per year?

USA had 8 such years in past 56.

.BitDice.               ▄▄███▄▄
           ▄▄██▀▀ ▄ ▀▀██▄▄
      ▄▄█ ▀▀  ▄▄█████▄▄  ▀▀ █▄▄
  ▄▄██▀▀     ▀▀ █████ ▀▀     ▀▀██▄▄
██▀▀ ▄▄██▀      ▀███▀      ▀██▄▄ ▀▀██
██  ████▄▄       ███       ▄▄████  ██
██  █▀▀████▄▄  ▄█████▄  ▄▄████▀▀█  ██
██  ▀     ▀▀▀███████████▀▀▀     ▀  ██
             ███████████
██  ▄     ▄▄▄███████████▄▄▄     ▄  ██
██  █▄▄████▀▀  ▀█████▀  ▀▀████▄▄█  ██
██  ████▀▀       ███       ▀▀████  ██
██▄▄ ▀▀██▄      ▄███▄      ▄██▀▀ ▄▄██
  ▀▀██▄▄     ▄▄ █████ ▄▄     ▄▄██▀▀
      ▀▀█ ▄▄  ▀▀█████▀▀  ▄▄ █▀▀
           ▀▀██▄▄ ▀ ▄▄██▀▀
               ▀▀███▀▀
        ▄▄███████▄▄
     ▄███████████████▄
    ████▀▀       ▀▀████
   ████▀           ▀████
   ████             ████
   ████ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ████
▄█████████████████████████▄
██████████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██████████
████                   ████
████                   ████
████                   ████
████                   ████
████                   ████
████▄                 ▄████
████████▄▄▄     ▄▄▄████████
  ▀▀▀█████████████████▀▀▀
        ▀▀▀█████▀▀▀
▄▄████████████████████████████████▄▄
██████████████████████████████████████
█████                            █████
█████                            █████
█████                            █████
█████                            █████
█████                     ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
█████                   ▄█▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█▄
█████                   ██          ██
█████                   ██          ██
█████                   ██          ██
██████████████████▀▀███ ██          ██
 ████████████████▄  ▄██ ██          ██
   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██          ██
             ██████████ ██          ██
           ▄███████████ ██████▀▀██████
          █████████████  ▀████▄▄████▀
[/]
ArticMine
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268
Merit: 1041


Monero Core Team


View Profile
December 03, 2018, 12:32:29 AM
 #40008

...
Mmh... let's think in a world where there is no longer any block reward.

Why would the total fees go to zero?

Miners would add as much transactions as they can, adding highest fee transactions first. So I don't see how you end up with "there is no more incentive for the POW".

Why would anyone pay a fee with an unlimited blocksize? Where is the economic scarcity?

Edit: What one gets is either a race to the bottom if there is real competition among miners or a cartel that may support fees for a while.

Concerned that blockchain bloat will lead to centralization? Storing less than 4 GB of data once required the budget of a superpower and a warehouse full of punched cards. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/87/IBM_card_storage.NARA.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_card
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2436
Merit: 1658


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
December 03, 2018, 01:57:04 AM
 #40009

... Furthermore the total fees per block are independent of the block weight. The net result of this is that if the block reward goes to zero the total fees paid per block also goes to zero. One conclusion is that in a Bitcoin like coin with a falling block reward in order for the Satoshi fee market to even have a chance of working the penalty in terms of the block reward for increasing the block size (weight) must be stiffer than that in Monero. One can then see the rationale for Bitcoin core's strict block weight limit. ...

Can you elaborate on this or link me to a discussion that does? I know your quite familiar with the bitcoin codebase and appreciate the time you spend explaining this.
I have no time nor skillset left to do so anymore.

By the way I prefer to see Bytecoin as the canary in the coal mine for falling block rewards as opposed to the scam in the pre or ninja mine.

Nice observation but the two are not mutually exclusive. Tongue

As I mentioned above. If there is competition between miners then as the block reward goes to zero so do the total fees per block since the "penalty" in terms of block reward is less than that in Monero. At this point there is no incentive for the POW and the coin becomes insecure. The alternative is a mining cartel or monopoly that sets minimum fees. Quite apart from the centralization involved I have serious doubts  such a cartel will be sustainable in the long term since individual members will cheat.


I would think the onus would become the responsibility of the holders to secure their own reserves. I am not sure of what arguments there are i this regard.




“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
Last of the V8s
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554
Merit: 3921


Be a bank


View Profile
December 03, 2018, 02:46:15 AM
Merited by cAPSLOCK (1), kurious (1)
 #40010

fyi re the eventual fee market in btc, thought you fellows might be interested to read some of theymos' commentary and ideas in amongst here
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6cbogv/the_blocksize_political_compass_to_find_out_where/

birr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 816
Merit: 535


View Profile
December 03, 2018, 07:39:06 AM
 #40011

fyi re the eventual fee market in btc, thought you fellows might be interested to read some of theymos' commentary and ideas in amongst here
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6cbogv/the_blocksize_political_compass_to_find_out_where/

This is interesting

Q.  There should be a dynamic limit, based on the median size of the previous blocks

A.  Strongly disagree, that's just another way of letting miners decide.

Assuming for the sake of argument that Theymos's point is valid, what does this say about Monero?
Globb0
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324
Merit: 1872


Fragging up a storm


View Profile
December 03, 2018, 09:18:14 AM
 #40012

Don't they also risk a normal size block coming through quicker?


.freebitcoin.       ▄▄▄█▀▀██▄▄▄
   ▄▄██████▄▄█  █▀▀█▄▄
  ███  █▀▀███████▄▄██▀
   ▀▀▀██▄▄█  ████▀▀  ▄██
▄███▄▄  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ▄▄██████
██▀▀█████▄     ▄██▀█ ▀▀██
██▄▄███▀▀██   ███▀ ▄▄  ▀█
███████▄▄███ ███▄▄ ▀▀▄  █
██▀▀████████ █████  █▀▄██
 █▄▄████████ █████   ███
  ▀████  ███ ████▄▄███▀
     ▀▀████   ████▀▀
BITCOIN
DICE
EVENT
BETTING
WIN A LAMBO !

.
            ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████▄▄▄▄▄
▄▄▄▄▄██████████████████████████████████▄▄▄▄
▀██████████████████████████████████████████████▄▄▄
▄▄████▄█████▄████████████████████████████▄█████▄████▄▄
▀████████▀▀▀████████████████████████████████▀▀▀██████████▄
  ▀▀▀████▄▄▄███████████████████████████████▄▄▄██████████
       ▀█████▀  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ▀█████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
.PLAY NOW.
BldSwtTrs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 977
Merit: 1003


View Profile
December 03, 2018, 11:12:59 AM
 #40013

...
Mmh... let's think in a world where there is no longer any block reward.

Why would the total fees go to zero?

Miners would add as much transactions as they can, adding highest fee transactions first. So I don't see how you end up with "there is no more incentive for the POW".

Why would anyone pay a fee with an unlimited blocksize? Where is the economic scarcity?

Edit: What one gets is either a race to the bottom if there is real competition among miners or a cartel that may support fees for a while.
Well, one would pay a fee to get his transaction included in a block. Miners won't include non fee paying transactions, they won't consume their resources for nothing.

It seems you are assuming that competition will drive the price (of a transaction) below miners' costs. Which makes no economics sense. Price will stay above costs, even in a very competitive environment.
TheFuzzStone
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498
Merit: 1427


thefuzzstone.github.io


View Profile WWW
December 03, 2018, 12:03:10 PM
 #40014



kurious
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2198
Merit: 1514



View Profile
December 03, 2018, 02:41:22 PM
 #40015

fyi re the eventual fee market in btc, thought you fellows might be interested to read some of theymos' commentary and ideas in amongst here
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6cbogv/the_blocksize_political_compass_to_find_out_where/


Good to see you stepping in, V8 - your comments will be welcomed I am sure - even if you choose to offer some healthy scepticism.   The quality of debate is pretty good here.

Ref: Theymos - actually he surprised me with how open and measured he is.  He is far more nuanced and less dogmatic than I would have expected, it was an interesting read. How it relates to the Monero tail emission is not clear, as we just don't know yet.  However, Monero will reach this point before BTC does, as the end of the 'normal' block reward will be reached before BTC's.

That said, even if Monero is successful once it transitions into its tail emission (or a failure of a.n.other POW coin following the end of block reward proves the concept iffy) I can't see Bitcoin changing.  Mainly as all the bitcoins out there will have owners with a huge vested interest in no further coins being issued.  Both coins' paths have been set - albeit Monero is probably more able to make a change than Bitcoin since it is not quite seen as 'holy writ' in the way Bitcoin is.

I think - as Theymos said, the end of the block reward is unlikely to sink Bitcoin and a 'fix' will be found to make fees pay for the continuance of network security performed by miners somehow.  But even Theymos admitted there are huge issues with fees, mining and transactions that are not optimal and do not really work as envisaged.

Crypto is still new and must face all kinds of issues - some already known and some yet to be seen.  Monero's tail emission is a possible fix for the post-block reward issue.  It has yet to be proven and until it is, it's just a different theoretical approach to Bitcoin's.

Ta for the merit; cordially reciprocated.

我想要火箭和火车
cAPSLOCK
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2632
Merit: 1706


Holding my Breath


View Profile
December 03, 2018, 03:48:58 PM
 #40016

fyi re the eventual fee market in btc, thought you fellows might be interested to read some of theymos' commentary and ideas in amongst here
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6cbogv/the_blocksize_political_compass_to_find_out_where/


What brings you to these parts, stranger?

This is interesting.  I may be more conservative than many of my fellow Monero fans.

Blocksize score -31.2498

Flexibility score -27.69228
generalizethis
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1031


Facts are more efficient than fud


View Profile WWW
December 03, 2018, 03:57:11 PM
 #40017

The mining rewards debate seems like a waste of keystrokes given none of us (barring some incredible advancements--fingers crossed) will live to see it happen and there's an argument to be made that a superior quantum money will exist long before mining rewards becomes an issue. I just don't see us or BTC lasting long enough to find out.

Febo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2226
Merit: 1190



View Profile
December 03, 2018, 03:57:39 PM
 #40018

fyi re the eventual fee market in btc, thought you fellows might be interested to read some of theymos' commentary and ideas in amongst here
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6cbogv/the_blocksize_political_compass_to_find_out_where/

This is interesting

Q.  There should be a dynamic limit, based on the median size of the previous blocks

A.  Strongly disagree, that's just another way of letting miners decide.

Assuming for the sake of argument that Theymos's point is valid, what does this say about Monero?

Monero have tail emission. This cant work without one. So yes theymos is totally right.

.BitDice.               ▄▄███▄▄
           ▄▄██▀▀ ▄ ▀▀██▄▄
      ▄▄█ ▀▀  ▄▄█████▄▄  ▀▀ █▄▄
  ▄▄██▀▀     ▀▀ █████ ▀▀     ▀▀██▄▄
██▀▀ ▄▄██▀      ▀███▀      ▀██▄▄ ▀▀██
██  ████▄▄       ███       ▄▄████  ██
██  █▀▀████▄▄  ▄█████▄  ▄▄████▀▀█  ██
██  ▀     ▀▀▀███████████▀▀▀     ▀  ██
             ███████████
██  ▄     ▄▄▄███████████▄▄▄     ▄  ██
██  █▄▄████▀▀  ▀█████▀  ▀▀████▄▄█  ██
██  ████▀▀       ███       ▀▀████  ██
██▄▄ ▀▀██▄      ▄███▄      ▄██▀▀ ▄▄██
  ▀▀██▄▄     ▄▄ █████ ▄▄     ▄▄██▀▀
      ▀▀█ ▄▄  ▀▀█████▀▀  ▄▄ █▀▀
           ▀▀██▄▄ ▀ ▄▄██▀▀
               ▀▀███▀▀
        ▄▄███████▄▄
     ▄███████████████▄
    ████▀▀       ▀▀████
   ████▀           ▀████
   ████             ████
   ████ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ████
▄█████████████████████████▄
██████████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██████████
████                   ████
████                   ████
████                   ████
████                   ████
████                   ████
████▄                 ▄████
████████▄▄▄     ▄▄▄████████
  ▀▀▀█████████████████▀▀▀
        ▀▀▀█████▀▀▀
▄▄████████████████████████████████▄▄
██████████████████████████████████████
█████                            █████
█████                            █████
█████                            █████
█████                            █████
█████                     ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
█████                   ▄█▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█▄
█████                   ██          ██
█████                   ██          ██
█████                   ██          ██
██████████████████▀▀███ ██          ██
 ████████████████▄  ▄██ ██          ██
   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██          ██
             ██████████ ██          ██
           ▄███████████ ██████▀▀██████
          █████████████  ▀████▄▄████▀
[/]
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2436
Merit: 1658


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
December 03, 2018, 05:56:36 PM
 #40019

It's interesting that my simple question of whether the bitcoin codebase precludes dynamic blocksize due to technical reasons would spark this debate here. I guess it's still a real hot button topic. One which I never wanted to get involved in as I personally see Bitcoin as a stepping stone that has moved into a different space of a store of value and cannot evolve to fulfill its initial role. But I also see that as a good thing, we need a safe dependable chain that is completely safe from the fuckery of TPTB.

I never understood the hate for alternate chains for alternate roles, it seems obvious to me to use different tools for different tasks.


fyi re the eventual fee market in btc, thought you fellows might be interested to read some of theymos' commentary and ideas in amongst here
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6cbogv/the_blocksize_political_compass_to_find_out_where/


What brings you to these parts, stranger?

This is interesting.  I may be more conservative than many of my fellow Monero fans.

Blocksize score -31.2498

Flexibility score -27.69228

There were quite a few questions I would have preferred to answer "I have no fucking clue" but here is what I came up with my best guesses.

Code:
Your position on the blocksize political compass

Blocksize score 9.37494

Flexibility score -10.76922

I think that means I am in disagreement with myself. Cheesy

Monero have tail emission. This cant work without one. So yes theymos is totally right.

Only right if you decouple it from tail emission which it should not be but apparently if you try to have that discussion people stick their fingers in their ears and yell to not hear you. But seriously there are tradeoffs and currently there is no way bitcoin will ever be used for everyone to buy their morning coffe so it's already moot.

It seems to me this is a good thing as it distances Bitcoin even farther from Monero as the spaces they are in are growing wider by each decision being made and therefore make them complimentory. now all we need is a immutable decentralized crosschain solution and I'd be happy as a pig in shit.

“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
EuSouBitcoin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 482
Merit: 251


View Profile
December 03, 2018, 06:05:04 PM
 #40020

Is this based on a subjective view, objective data, or both?

I’ve been watching Monero for a long time, I think this is one of the most profitable assets, but why I didn’t take it three years ago, although I thought to take a lot, I took just a few coins just like that.

It's a good time to buy, methinks.  Recent events rang my cheap bell.

You can't win if you don't play. But you can't play if you lose all your chips. First I found bitcoin (BTC). Then I found something better, Monero (XMR). See GetMonero.org
Pages: « 1 ... 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 [2001] 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 ... 2106 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!