[XMR] Monero Speculation

[Hueristic]

Deleted for off topic and personal attacks.

@Heuristic, I did think the original (re)post was reasonably on-topic. He was making a point that Monero's block size solution, while technically good, might not be so good in terms of appealing to powerful interests. These are market-relevant factors of potential interest to speculators.

It's Monero related so you can stop the female-like passive aggresive behavior, attacking people over trivial nonsense because they won't adhere to your synthetic, TV programmed, SJW propaganda political view.  Ted Kaczynski already proved years ago liberalism is a mental disorder based on inferiority complex.  It's absurd seeing a bunch of Seattle cucks running around pretending their behavior is the norm:

https://i.imgur.com/jAyJCgo.jpg

Fair enough on the on topic.

Removed a rant that was not warranted, apparently smooth had remove roach's response when I thought he had removed mine. My bad.

[1714730490]

1714730490

[1714730490]

1714730490

[1714730490]

1714730490

[1714730490]

1714730490

[1714730490]

1714730490

[1714730490]

1714730490

[ArticMine]

My view on block size issue and how it affects BTC vs BCH vs Mernero.  Mernero is technically the more "just" solution, but such a thing might not actually be beneficial if there is greater gain to be had by special interest groups backing the monopoly:

What special interest groups neglected to tell you about the block size issue:

From an economics point of view, trying to force the entire planet onto a fixed block size with low scaling is a pro-usury extortion stance.  Small blocks are a synthetic monopoly.  If criminal banks believe they can take control of this monopoly, either through getting a large percent of the transaction validators, or by taking control of all services that facilitate off-chain transactions like Coinbase (or lightning) since on-chain transactions are too expensive to use, then the criminal banks would likely support small blocks over large ones.

The solution to the problem is not 1 MB or 8 MB blocks.  Any system with a fixed block size is going to inherently be a pro-usury extortion scheme due to synthetic monopoly.  You would need to use a dynamic, scaling block size like Monero to fix that.

r0ach is correct.

Monero's adaptive blocksize limit poses a serious threat to special interest groups if those special interest groups are relying in whole or in part on centralized database solutions for digital payments. This threat is not immediate but rather long term and driven by the exponential falling cost of computing power, memory, digital storage and data transmission. To put this into perspective consider that Bitcoin was proposed in 2008 and launched in 2009. For comparison, the "special interest competition", multi purpose payment cards were conceived in 1949 and first launched in 1950 with Diner's Club.

When it comes to technological change it is correct that with present technology  Monero, on the main chain, could not provide the peak transactions per second of the VISA network. For the long term investor that is not the relevant question. The relevant question is how does Monero compare with the Diners Club in 1958 when it comes to reaching the current transactions per second of the VISA network? Let us not forget that the primary data processing technologies in 1958 were tabulating machines, punched cards and telegraph lines. It is here where Monero wins hands down.

Markets of course try to price in the future. The potential transactions per second in the future of the Monero Network is directly related to  the purchasing power of 1 XMR by the equation of exchange. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_of_exchange. The market's perception of the likelihood of  this future is reflected in the current price. This is the reason why I like the long term prospects of Monero and have sold all of my Bitcoins. Maybe the fact that I was a toddler in 1958 has provided me with a longer term perspective.  

[ArticMine]

monero stuck at that price because cryptonote still did not have the solution for its problem, it will goes no where untill next year or maybe it will goes down, there are a lot of good project outhere, they will compete with monero

Cryptonote alone does not have the solution to the scaling problem since it only has the adaptive blocksize limit with no permanent minimum block reward. Monero addresses the scaling problem with its adaptive blocksize and minimum, 0.6 XMR per 2 min block, blockreward. This is approximately equivalent to a 3 XBT per 10min block blockreward in Bitcoin.

[smooth]

Monero price increase in 2016 was not due some new markets opened. But was due that darkmarkets recognized Monero as best fungible currency. With few markets closing that recognition still stays as valid.

With all new people in crypto and so much more money and so much more media expose of Monero and so much more development that is allready big and just keeps increasing. I and many are surprised that Monero managed to increase its price only 3 times in 2017.

Monero's rise in 2016 was at the front end of a wave of increases in many coins including ETH, DASH, and XRP (and of course BTC). It is quite plausible that the stage was just set for explosive gains across the board after a couple of years of steady accumulation and steadily growing interest in the asset class, and while XMR just happened to catch a spark first, the spark wasn't the main reason for the explosion, the accumulation of fuel was.

So do you mean after whales accumulate enough, they will pump the price? I hope the price goes up slowly, not pump and dump.

My comment was referring the past, specifically late 2016 and early 2017. Whatever we might hope for in the future, the price increases during that period were certainly not slow, nor were they pump-and-dump in the sense that most (but not all, of course) of the gains have been retained. Despite being rapid, it was a significant and meaningful repricing, and so far a sustainable one.

[Hueristic]

My view on block size issue and how it affects BTC vs BCH vs Mernero.  Mernero is technically the more "just" solution, but such a thing might not actually be beneficial if there is greater gain to be had by special interest groups backing the monopoly:

What special interest groups neglected to tell you about the block size issue:

From an economics point of view, trying to force the entire planet onto a fixed block size with low scaling is a pro-usury extortion stance.  Small blocks are a synthetic monopoly.  If criminal banks believe they can take control of this monopoly, either through getting a large percent of the transaction validators, or by taking control of all services that facilitate off-chain transactions like Coinbase (or lightning) since on-chain transactions are too expensive to use, then the criminal banks would likely support small blocks over large ones.

The solution to the problem is not 1 MB or 8 MB blocks.  Any system with a fixed block size is going to inherently be a pro-usury extortion scheme due to synthetic monopoly.  You would need to use a dynamic, scaling block size like Monero to fix that.

Is there a reason why you just posted the obvious in a thread that's topic is not even remotely associated with the matter you are commenting on? And why do you always quote yourself.

r0ach is correct. ...

Why quote me? I did not say he was incorrect, I said he was pointing out the obvious (at least to us in this thread) and that this discussion should be in a different topic. Either way if you want to elaborate on his statement (which by the way came in response to nothing I saw) then by all means do it but not in a means in which you quote me as if correcting me.

[goin2mars.]

My view on block size issue and how it affects BTC vs BCH vs Mernero.  Mernero is technically the more "just" solution, but such a thing might not actually be beneficial if there is greater gain to be had by special interest groups backing the monopoly:

What special interest groups neglected to tell you about the block size issue:

From an economics point of view, trying to force the entire planet onto a fixed block size with low scaling is a pro-usury extortion stance.  Small blocks are a synthetic monopoly.  If criminal banks believe they can take control of this monopoly, either through getting a large percent of the transaction validators, or by taking control of all services that facilitate off-chain transactions like Coinbase (or lightning) since on-chain transactions are too expensive to use, then the criminal banks would likely support small blocks over large ones.

The solution to the problem is not 1 MB or 8 MB blocks.  Any system with a fixed block size is going to inherently be a pro-usury extortion scheme due to synthetic monopoly.  You would need to use a dynamic, scaling block size like Monero to fix that.

r0ach is correct.

Monero's adaptive blocksize limit poses a serious threat to special interest groups if those special interest groups are relying in whole or in part on centralized database solutions for digital payments. This threat is not immediate but rather long term and driven by the exponential falling cost of computing power, memory, digital storage and data transmission. To put this into perspective consider that Bitcoin was proposed in 2008 and launched in 2009. For comparison, the "special interest competition", multi purpose payment cards were conceived in 1949 and first launched in 1950 with Diner's Club.

When it comes to technological change it is correct that with present technology  Monero, on the main chain, could not provide the peak transactions per second of the VISA network. For the long term investor that is not the relevant question. The relevant question is how does Monero compare with the Diners Club in 1958 when it comes to reaching the current transactions per second of the VISA network? Let us not forget that the primary data processing technologies in 1958 were tabulating machines, punched cards and telegraph lines. It is here where Monero wins hands down.

Markets of course try to price in the future. The potential transactions per second in the future of the Monero Network is directly related to  the purchasing power of 1 XMR by the equation of exchange. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_of_exchange. The market's perception of the likelihood of  this future is reflected in the current price. This is the reason why I like the long term prospects of Monero and have sold all of my Bitcoins. Maybe the fact that I was a toddler in 1958 has provided me with a longer term perspective.  

One current example that may be relevant:

Do consumers prefer ISP's with plans offering unlimited data or do they settle for a data cap?

I am finding an increasing amount of people can't keep under a few gigabytes a month, where just years ago, the same people could do without.

Obviously a simplification, but being able to pass only 100Gb a month through my ISP seems just as barbaric as being able to pass only ~4.4 Gb a month with bitcoin.

The isp would probably just throttle my connection, maybe charge me overage costs. In bitcoin I would have to pay increasing tx fees, to prevent the speed at which my tx passes to not be throttled. If my isp were to charge too much, I would look at a second ISP. If bitcoin were to charge too much, I would look for a different way to pay, like another blockchain or payment processor.

[ArticMine]

Why quote me? ...

Quote removed

[novag]

Next Target 75$

https://www.tradingview.com/chart/XMRUSDT/i7JrQ7Zz-XMR-USDT-1DAY-CHART

[KeyJockey]

People complaining that Monero isn't "going up" but just wanna point out we're holding pretty steady in the high-forty-bucks range, $50-ish, all while BTC is hitting new peaks in $3300+ range

In other words this is normal for last few months, i.e. as pointed out often in the past XMR's seemed to 'rachet-up' about TEN BUCKS a throw, from time to time, approximately every couple months.

So IMHO at Fifty Bucks-ish right now?  "This Is Fine"... 

[Febo]

People complaining that Monero isn't "going up" but just wanna point out we're holding pretty steady in the high-forty-bucks range, $50-ish, all while BTC is hitting new peaks in $3300+ range

In other words this is normal for last few months, i.e. as pointed out often in the past XMR's seemed to 'rachet-up' about TEN BUCKS a throw, from time to time, approximately every couple months.

So IMHO at Fifty Bucks-ish right now?  "This Is Fine"... 

Yes we went over $50 only twice and now we are really close to it again. It is sort of only matter of time when we will break it again.

[tleilaxu_eyes]

I noticed XMR's chart was pretty impressive in the spring and bought then. Made a good 50% on that buy. Bought in again semi recently and am waiting for that huge Monero push. I like the coin, but I also like the %ages (:

[GymForVitalik]

I understand correctly that the project does not have regular funding?

[Hueristic]

I understand correctly that the project does not have regular funding?

Used to be most pools gave to the Dev pool but not sure of what the deal is these days.

[doc12]

Wtf is going on the weekly MACD is in the reds since 13 fucking weeks.

[rangedriver]

Wtf is going on the weekly MACD is in the reds since 13 fucking weeks.

"The longer it's in the red, the sooner it will be in the green."

[arbitrage]

https://100xinvestors.com/ What is going to be speeked about?
I see ZenCash team member Rob Viglione and Riccardo Spagni from Monero are listed there. In every case this is really good for spreading of importance of privacy! I love Monero and ZenCash, all cryptocurrencies that fighting for basic principles of freedom!

[GymForVitalik]

After closing the alpha somewhere else takes this coin in the dark markets?

[cryptimus prime]

Wtf is going on the weekly MACD is in the reds since 13 fucking weeks.

"The longer it's in the red, the sooner it will be in the green."

The night is darkest just before the dawn.

[rangedriver]

Wtf is going on the weekly MACD is in the reds since 13 fucking weeks.

"The longer it's in the red, the sooner it will be in the green."

The night is darkest just before the dawn.

Ode to Monero.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M7gKZqgHn4

[aminorex]

I am feeling very....patient.   All of the factors for a level-up event are solidifying.  Multisig fully funtioning in HEAD could be the catalyst that unleashes all of those mounting forces, but the forces will continue to mount for a long while after that.

What forces?  Well, the rush of BTC back into exchanges, will lead to demand.  As BCH retraces and tops out headed for another leg down, XMR is a logical allocation fraction.  BTC transaction costs are still outrageous, and XMR remains far more economic, besides being fungible.

On a slightly longer term, the new leading DNMs will be Monero users.  SR1 drove BTC to $100, back in a day when DNM volumes we're a small fraction of what they are today.  Given the float problems and likely backdoors of ZEC, XMR dominance seems assured, and 4 digits can't be far behind.

Longer term, the war on cash is global and escalating.  The supply of non-inflationary low-income assets is constantly shrinking relative to the balance sheets of the banks (central, peripheral, and shadow alike), making XMR very appealing as a reserve asset.  Banking secrecy is almost completely gone now, and XMR is simply the only horse in that race, the others still fumbling at their gates while the race is half-way over.

There are many other factors which will play out on varying time scales, these are just some of the most obvious and largest.  Please add your own.

I would love to see an insider summary on the state of paybee.