[XMR] Monero Speculation

[TPTB_need_war]

Wow! You must be a billionaire!

And your point is? Either my predictions were correct or they weren't. Did you have a point?

Do you think I would be as objective if I was invested. Use your brain please (ego butthurt shit doesn't help a person be rational).

A person who can predict the future with enough certainty (even if he/she is not 100 % right) can accumulate a significiant wealth with a few trades only.
Let's say, a person predicted silver to rise from 10 usd to 48 usd, you made 4.8 times your money. Then predicting (and shorting) btc all the way down from 1000 usd to 200 usd you made 5 times your money (minus the cost of shorting), then buying XMR for 20 cents each when btc was at the bottom and you closed the short in btc and then selling XMR at 1.65 you made 8 times your money.... Even if you started this type of trading with only 1000 usd you would have ended up being pretty well ROI (from 1 k to around 200 k).

I missed this post. So last reply here.

When I started to realize I had the ability to identify key inflection points and if I didn't push myself to find them and waited until they just were obvious to me, i.e. waited for my opportunities, then I realized I would need to have my funds and assets positioned so that I could take advantage of these rare moments of insight. But I have never been in  a position since that realization, to be organized that way. I live in the wrong country. I don't have a permanent address in the USA. I don't have a USA driver's license or utility bill, etc..

For example, when I was almost ready to short BTC from $320 down this past summer, I was wary not only because I have no experience with Bitfinex, but also because their KYC terms are not explicit enough. I might even up with a frozen account.

My life is far too behind schedule even to keep up with basic things of life such as taking a shower more than once a month. How in the hell could I possibly manage speculating properly. I am just being realistic.

The money I have is for paying bills so I can code.

And commenting here is one of the stupidest things I've ever done.

And also winning by speculating feels to me like I cheated my own life (my reason for wanting to do it recently was just desperation about my ill health and needing more money to make some big change). I am so talented as a programmer and creator, then I will take away time from that to go take some other speculator's money. Seems to not be my purpose in life, even though I guess it does provide liquidity to the market. I'd feel much better about myself creating something that helped so many people than just being a liquidity cog in a financial wheel. To imagine myself spending all my days in a thread like this just staring at bid/ask walls would feel to me as though I wasted my talent. So I guess my heart was never in the execution side of it. I enjoyed the analysis, because I love mental challenges and conceptual ideas. The execution feels like I am only a bean counter or a robot. I got interested in silver for ideological reasons. The getting rich part was just a way to hold me until my next big project success. It wasn't in my mind the path for my wealth. The path for my wealth has always been what I can create, not speculate. Although during creation I must also speculate on market needs and such, I apply a rational approach to that.

In short, I don't belong here in this thread. You all are not my people. We don't have the same interests and outlook on what we are prioritizing in our lives. You guys (or at least most of the vocal ones) are all idolizing money.

I (now) realize you weren't slandering me. Thanks.

[1715530140]

1715530140

[1715530140]

1715530140

[1715530140]

1715530140

[1715530140]

1715530140

[balaks]

Can the moderators start banning people who flame please? It really detracts from the thread and makes the entire XMR community look bad. Please can the discussion continue without people being horrible.

[pinky]

Selling volume is declining, we also saw some wicks indicating that buyers are still present and closely watching. I am speculating that we might see some buying pressure to 0.003-0.0033 to mess up with shorters and then retest and hopefully double bottom. However we must take into the account that daily trend is still bearish and I would treat it as such. Weekly trend is caught in the range between 0.001-0.004.

Good Analysis.

Short-term noise that no one can possibly predict anything with better than 50/50 odds. In short, useless post for speculators who want quick gains and thus are destined to lose their shirts.

It is not even proper day trading methodology.

It's about risk. There are traders that have 95% and there are traders that have 20% winning rate - winning % is useless parameter as is your reply.

[smooth]

Deleted because personal attacks are not allowed.

So he calls people he disagrees with "'tards" and you don't delete his posts? My post was way less offensive. You should apply your moderation powers equally.

I'm not reading this thread 24/7 and I haven't read the entire exchange. The one I deleted was near the end, so I saw it.

Crowdsourcing of moderation is welcome. I you see a post that violates the rules, send me the link

[TrueCryptonaire]

Deleted because personal attacks are not allowed.

So he calls people he disagrees with "'tards" and you don't delete his posts? My post was way less offensive. You should apply your moderation powers equally.

His thread his rules.

[smooth]

As if the discussion of botnets and CPU mining is irrelevant to speculating on Monero's future, given Monero is the only real CPU mined coin of significance.

I definitely think that is relevant. The problem is that the exchange seems to have veered off into personalities and angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin topics such as the definition of the term 'free market'. People can discuss what they want (some people love to argue over the definitions of words), but that stuff is just clutter here.

On the topic of botnets, this philosophical exchange ignores that fact that no one has contested my claim that the 1+ million or so bot nodes that would needed to soak up the Monero hash rate don't exist, nor are botnets driving the difficulty to a level where non-botnets can't mine profitably. Therefore something is discouraging botnets from mining Monero. The relevance to speculation might be asking what that is causing that and whether it will change in the future.

Unless we can answer that question the topic of botnets may not be all that relevant to Monero after all.

For example.

Hypothesis: Most or all of the botnets in the world are controlled by the same entity or group. They are indeed mining Monero but limiting their hash rate (not competing with each other) to maintain profitability even at the cost of lower coin output.

[rdnkjdi]

As if the discussion of botnets and CPU mining is irrelevant to speculating on Monero's future, given Monero is the only real CPU mined coin of significance.

I definitely think that is relevant. The problem is that the exchange seems to have veered off into personalities and angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin topics such as the definition of the term 'free market'. People can discuss what they want (some people love to argue over the definitions of words), but that stuff is just clutter here.

On the topic of botnets, this philosophical exchange ignores that fact that no one has contested my claim that the 1+ million or so bot nodes that would needed to soak up the Monero hash rate don't exist, nor are botnets driving the difficulty to a level where non-botnets can't mine profitably. Therefore something is discouraging botnets from mining Monero. The relevance to speculation might be asking what that is causing that and whether it will change in the future.

Unless we can answer that question the topic of botnets may not be all that relevant to Monero after all.

For example.

Hypothesis: Most or all of the botnets in the world are controlled by the same entity or group. They are indeed mining Monero but limiting their hash rate (not competing with each other) to maintain profitability even at the cost of lower coin output.

Correct me if I'm wrong but ... the GPU miner rendered botnets much less profitable than they were in Monero no?  And primecoin and pretty much anything else that used to be CPU only.

The sideshow on freemarket vs blackmarket was important (imo) because freemarket is the concept that everyone is on a level playing field.  Blackmarket is essentially "those who don't get caught win" situation (which can include intelligence or location).   In fact often the value of what they provide is artificially jacked up by being a black market (it's the risk you are paying for not the service).  Auto weapons in Australia are 10X as as expensive as the US, Marijuana is cheaper in Colorado with a regulated market than a "black market" everywhere else.

So the idea that black market = free market = fair price just doesn't add up.  The privileged (those in countries that don't prosecute botnets) or the smart (those who don't get caught) will monopolize the market prices (as opposed to turnip prices).   Pretty much exactly like bitcoin.

[smooth]

As if the discussion of botnets and CPU mining is irrelevant to speculating on Monero's future, given Monero is the only real CPU mined coin of significance.

I definitely think that is relevant. The problem is that the exchange seems to have veered off into personalities and angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin topics such as the definition of the term 'free market'. People can discuss what they want (some people love to argue over the definitions of words), but that stuff is just clutter here.

On the topic of botnets, this philosophical exchange ignores that fact that no one has contested my claim that the 1+ million or so bot nodes that would needed to soak up the Monero hash rate don't exist, nor are botnets driving the difficulty to a level where non-botnets can't mine profitably. Therefore something is discouraging botnets from mining Monero. The relevance to speculation might be asking what that is causing that and whether it will change in the future.

Unless we can answer that question the topic of botnets may not be all that relevant to Monero after all.

For example.

Hypothesis: Most or all of the botnets in the world are controlled by the same entity or group. They are indeed mining Monero but limiting their hash rate (not competing with each other) to maintain profitability even at the cost of lower coin output.

Correct me if I'm wrong but ... the GPU miner rendered botnets much less profitable than they were in Monero no?  And primecoin and pretty much anything else that used to be CPU only.

True in XPM (in my understanding which is limited). Not true in XMR, GPU and CPU are comparable efficiency.

[rdnkjdi]

Hmmmmm .... was curious so did some digging.

http://monerotalk.org/t/wolfs-xmr-cpuminer-way-faster-than-lucasjones/33

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=638915.0

200h/s with a $300 CPU vs 800h/s with a $300 GPU.  That's more than 4X difference (one motherboard + ram can run 6 GPU's) if power consumption is similar.  If it's not I'm comparing apples and oranges.

[smooth]

Hmmmmm .... was curious so did some digging.

http://monerotalk.org/t/wolfs-xmr-cpuminer-way-faster-than-lucasjones/33

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=638915.0

200h/s with a $300 CPU vs 800h/s with a $300 GPU.  That's more than 4X difference (one motherboard + ram can run 6 GPU's) if power consumption is similar.  If it's not I'm comparing apples and oranges.

That assumes you are buying equipment specifically to mine. If you're not, then similar power consumption means overall efficiency is similar. Also I don't think th power consumption is similar, if looking at the most efficient CPUs (either server models or low power embedded models)

Also, none of this would really matter to botnets would it?

[spatula]

As if the discussion of botnets and CPU mining is irrelevant to speculating on Monero's future, given Monero is the only real CPU mined coin of significance.

I definitely think that is relevant. The problem is that the exchange seems to have veered off into personalities and angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin topics such as the definition of the term 'free market'. People can discuss what they want (some people love to argue over the definitions of words), but that stuff is just clutter here.

On the topic of botnets, this philosophical exchange ignores that fact that no one has contested my claim that the 1+ million or so bot nodes that would needed to soak up the Monero hash rate don't exist, nor are botnets driving the difficulty to a level where non-botnets can't mine profitably. Therefore something is discouraging botnets from mining Monero. The relevance to speculation might be asking what that is causing that and whether it will change in the future.

Unless we can answer that question the topic of botnets may not be all that relevant to Monero after all.

For example.

Hypothesis: Most or all of the botnets in the world are controlled by the same entity or group. They are indeed mining Monero but limiting their hash rate (not competing with each other) to maintain profitability even at the cost of lower coin output.

My guess is that many botnets might shy away from mining XMR as it would severely impact the victims computing experience. The more noticeable the malware, the higher the detection/removal rate. Perhaps limiting the processing power dedicated to mining to a fraction of full capacity might also explain the low total network hashrate.

[rdnkjdi]

Also, none of this would really matter to botnets would it?

Well I mean I would assume that it would only from an economic perspective.  The more efficient GPU miners are the fewer CPU botnets you'll see (take away incentive and they go away ... probably not many botnets mining bitcoin anymore).  If GPU's were 100X more efficient than CPU's then hashrate would meet price like it always does and you'd be losing computers on your botnet from people detecting them so economically it just wouldn't make sense. 

[TPTB_need_war]

I leave and you'll start talking tech shop. Not fair!

200h/s with a $300 CPU vs 800h/s with a $300 GPU.

Too bad someone didn't notice that an AMD 5350 has an exceptionally fast carryless multiply instruction for such a dirt cheap CPU and extremely low power consumption.

(oh and remember I am just a useless piece of shit  )

[smooth]

As if the discussion of botnets and CPU mining is irrelevant to speculating on Monero's future, given Monero is the only real CPU mined coin of significance.

I definitely think that is relevant. The problem is that the exchange seems to have veered off into personalities and angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin topics such as the definition of the term 'free market'. People can discuss what they want (some people love to argue over the definitions of words), but that stuff is just clutter here.

On the topic of botnets, this philosophical exchange ignores that fact that no one has contested my claim that the 1+ million or so bot nodes that would needed to soak up the Monero hash rate don't exist, nor are botnets driving the difficulty to a level where non-botnets can't mine profitably. Therefore something is discouraging botnets from mining Monero. The relevance to speculation might be asking what that is causing that and whether it will change in the future.

Unless we can answer that question the topic of botnets may not be all that relevant to Monero after all.

For example.

Hypothesis: Most or all of the botnets in the world are controlled by the same entity or group. They are indeed mining Monero but limiting their hash rate (not competing with each other) to maintain profitability even at the cost of lower coin output.

My guess is that many botnets might shy away from mining XMR as it would severely impact the victims computing experience. The more noticeable the malware, the higher the detection/removal rate. Perhaps limiting the processing power dedicated to mining to a fraction of full capacity might also explain the low total network hashrate.

The detection issue is my preferred theory, but based on no evidence. If a bot node has a value, the increased attrition rate is a clear cost to mining.

This is also somewhat factored into my estimate of 1+ million nodes. Using high performance desktops only about 60K would be needed, but I assume that all botnet nodes are degraded in efficiency from this near-ideal by some combination of:

1. Not being powered up all the time
2. Limiting mining rate to reduce detection
3. Being older/slower CPUs, running in 32 bit mode, etc.
4. Being laptops.

@TPTB_need_war The AMD cpus are generally much more cost efficient than Intel across the board for XMR mining (and some people have noticed this). The APU models can mine on both the CPU and GPU.

[TPTB_need_war]

@TPTB_need_war The AMD cpus are generally much more cost efficient than Intel across the board for XMR mining (and some people have noticed this). The APU models can mine on both the CPU and GPU.

Yes but that isn't my point. Try again.

Hint: what ratio of carryless multiply instructions to other instructions does Cryptonite use and what is the optimum possible in a memory hard hash.

(note this is my old hash design and I am willing to give it away so no harm to do this now)

[TPTB_need_war]

...angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin topics such as the definition of the term 'free market'...but that stuff is just clutter here.

On the topic of botnets, this philosophical exchange ignores...

I'm very surprised (should I be?) that you downplay the critical importance and apparently lack the understanding of what makes a free market and how central that is to our entire reason to be here.

Free market = decentralized market.

Duh.

You won't answer your question until you understand that. And then you will understand I had it all figured out from my first post.

Sigh.

(answer to your question is opportunity cost)

[smooth]

@TPTB_need_war The AMD cpus are generally much more cost efficient than Intel across the board for XMR mining (and some people have noticed this). The APU models can mine on both the CPU and GPU.

Yes but that isn't my point. Try again.

Hint: what ratio of carryless multiply instructions to other instructions does Cryptonite use and what is the optimum possible in a memory hard hash.

(note this is my old hash design and I am willing to give it away so no harm to do this now)

Cryptonight does not use carryless multiplication. Another hash algorithm could use it but that is not relevant to XMR at this time (maybe propose on the technical improvements thead?). Some ARM chips support it too at very low cost.

[rdnkjdi]

Too bad someone didn't notice that an AMD 5350 has an exceptionally fast carryless multiply instruction for such a dirt cheap CPU and extremely low power consumption.

Hmmmm interesting.  Trying to find hashrate. 

I don't recall accusing you of being useless   

[smooth]

I'll leave how I derived these numbers as an exercise to the reader for now with the hint that it is almost entirely objective.

smoothie replied before you wrote your post:

So then basically everything you've said is just words.

No facts/proof to back up your bold claims.

No worries. On to the next thread...

Hypocrisy is not meritocracy. It is even worse in that it is self-defeating.

You may not like how I presented it as a bit of a puzzle, but it isn't an extraordinary claim. What does Dash have that would support a higher price/cap:

1. Does it have more development as evidenced by github metrics (commits, etc.)?
2. Does it have more more discussion on neutral forums such as reddit/twitter/etc.
3. Does it have evidence of more transaction usage outside of investors?
4. Does it have more trading volume?
5. Does it have more available liquidity on order books?
6. Is it primarily traded on a different/better exchange making it accessible to more/different investors?
7. Does it have better search rankings (have to be a bit careful here to not find detergent ads, etc.)
8. Does it have more coverage by journalists, including bloggers, podcasts, etc.? (Especially unpaid coverage.)
9. Does have more/better recognition for soundness by influential technical experts?
10. Is there evidence of new users joining the community at a higher rate?

The answer to all of these is no. The two are either comparable or Monero is stronger.

Now if you ask why the price/cap is what it is, the obvious answer has to do with supply dynamics.

Let's not forget that until recently Bytecoin was also ranked higher than Monero for a year or more, at times quite a bit higher, while at the same time failing on most or all of the above metrics along with others. Those of us looking at the fundamentals said the very same thing -- that it was where it was because of supply dynamics, not fundamentals. Sure enough Bytecoin is now at about 1/2 of Monero's market cap, and was recently much lower than that.

Obsession with market cap (and cap ranking, price) as a particularly meaningful indicator of anything is a blind spot of many crypto investors. Don't be blind.

[smooth]

Also, none of this would really matter to botnets would it?

Well I mean I would assume that it would only from an economic perspective.  The more efficient GPU miners are the fewer CPU botnets you'll see (take away incentive and they go away ... probably not many botnets mining bitcoin anymore).  If GPU's were 100X more efficient than CPU's then hashrate would meet price like it always does and you'd be losing computers on your botnet from people detecting them so economically it just wouldn't make sense. 

Okay but they're not 100x more efficient. I can mine on my CPU profitably right now while paying for electricity. That wouldn't be the case with a GPU-only coin as you described.