[XMR] Monero Speculation

[Globb0]

My experience of extra secret or sensitive information stuff it doesn't get entered into the core system, or it gets some how anonymised?

Why exactly would they need to put names and identities into a blockchain?

not only that if a user can be compromised then the information would be, regardless of the type of encryption.

[1715575151]

1715575151

[1715575151]

1715575151

[rpinola]

I still think people are not interested in anonymous blockchains as we expected. That's why Monero is hanging out in these regions. When people beware of the importance of it, Monero will be much more valuable most probably.

Eh, people are not interested in any blockchain by this logic, if you refer to price action. Monero is not doing anything special, just going with the flow.

[Whtwabbit]

It seems FBI found use case for non transparent blockchains like Monero

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AHHo9OXiwE&feature=youtu.be&t=40m35s

Blockchain is the best way to secure the information. I think you will see all banks to come to the blockchain. Keeping records through blockchain, because it will become the best way to do so. You cant break the blockchain, you cant change anything on the blockchain. So that bring us to last thing. You cant change anything on blockchain. To some little things that have to be worked out, like example we have many witness programs. So if we know who the person is and we cant change who the person is, then that become the jeopardy to that witness. So the privacy issue comes into play about. Those are the things that has to be tweaked out.

This guy likes "blockchain" mentions it in six times in six sentences in a row, but fails to mention "Bitcoin" LOL

Wait--you mean Bitcoin is the only blockchain and he couldn't be referring to the technology that Bitcoin uses?

No he could be referring to Bitcoin gold, Verge and the others I can't remember, "Blockchain" works great

[Billy Bunter]

With regard to Tari, I understand the details of this project have still to be finalized and speculation on it is premature. That said, what I've read so far is that Tari is to 'built on top fo Monero' which has been taken to mean that Tari will be merged mined alongside Monero. In other words, that Tari will benefit from the security that the Monero network offers (should Monero miners decide to implement it).

Question: does Tari need permission from the Monero community to do this? If Tari wasn't being led by FP would this be an issue for the Monero community? Is there any cost to Monero from merge mining Tari? Is there any benefit to Monero from merge mining Tari?

Why, in other words, should the Monero community agree to this (assuming they have a say in the matter)? I don't have a position on it, just wondering if there are opposing perspectives on the issue.

[kateyau]

Actually, I know this is a suggestion that is always recommended, but why not just wait it out and leave the XMR in your wallet, be patient and claim your fork coins after the dust has settled on all the possible vulnerabilities and threats? I am actually not claiming the forks for Monero but I did that with Bitcoin last year and faced no issues. Maybe you lose some money after the spike, but in fact I made more selling my Bcash long after the fork when it shot up in price later on.

[rinus]

From January till now the highs get lower and the lows as well. ( usd terms ). I wonder when we will see a reversal. To be honest, I feel a bit worried , not only for xmr but the whole cryptospace

[pönde]

Yea I am worried too. The Bitcoin decline started at the end of last year when Bitcoin futures were taken in use. Futures can be used to manipulate gold, oil, silver, fiat, wheat and what ever, so why not crypto. The Futures do not bring any money to the commodity they represent, so no wonder that happens.

When the Bitcoin has declined more than the alts have been able to increase, they have lost too.

So what do you think what the Bitcoin futures have to do with the decline?

[Whtwabbit]

Yea I am worried too. The Bitcoin decline started at the end of last year when Bitcoin futures were taken in use. Futures can be used to manipulate gold, oil, silver, fiat, wheat and what ever, so why not crypto. The Futures do not bring any money to the commodity they represent, so no wonder that happens.

When the Bitcoin has declined more than the alts have been able to increase, they have lost too.

So what do you think what the Bitcoin futures have to do with the decline?

I don't understand the whole futures thing, they don't don't take delivery so isn't it similar to betting on a horse race but the betting on the horse race has nothing to do with the actual horse race (unless they manipulate the race via losing on purpose)
like the Circle app where you can only deposit and withdraw USD to "trade" coins that don't exist, all it does is take money/demand from the real market

[pönde]

Yea I am worried too. The Bitcoin decline started at the end of last year when Bitcoin futures were taken in use. Futures can be used to manipulate gold, oil, silver, fiat, wheat and what ever, so why not crypto. The Futures do not bring any money to the commodity they represent, so no wonder that happens.

When the Bitcoin has declined more than the alts have been able to increase, they have lost too.

So what do you think what the Bitcoin futures have to do with the decline?

I don't understand the whole futures thing, they don't don't take delivery so isn't it similar to betting on a horse race but the betting on the horse race has nothing to do with the actual horse race (unless they manipulate the race via losing on purpose)
like the Circle app where you can only deposit and withdraw USD to "trade" coins that don't exist, all it does is take money/demand from the real market

Well I guess that it is. The futures take the money to them selves, futures, out of the real market, in this case Bitcoin. I think this is true since the volume of Bitcoin declines, or any real market that has futures. And this is possible because people are stupid enough to invest in futures instead of real commodities, like Bitcoin or Gold. If they did invest to the real markets, the Futures had no effect on anything since the real demand on real commodities would set the price to the real level.

The Circle app also seems to be just an other Future. It takes money out of the real market.

And why not people would not use these futures and Circle app, since I think they are much more easy to use than wallets, paper wallets, GUIs CLIs and exchanges. The stupidity of the people just bring money for the ones who offer these easy to use services, which do not have any link to real market and world.

I guess crypto world has to have some way or app to invest on real crypto, which is at least as easy to use, as to invest on these futures.

[mnemonicsoup]

If they bet on Bitcoin to drop (short Futures) and dump a little BTC right on time, they can make the Futures a self for filling prophecy, no?

It does look like manipulation is happening:

[CryptoPH]

If they bet on Bitcoin to drop (short Futures) and dump a little BTC right on time, they can make the Futures a self for filling prophecy, no?

It does look like manipulation is happening:

Wow, seriously! 

[tokeweed]

^  But notice how the volatility is tightening up.  And that 'self fulfilling prophecy' (or the current predictability) could stop happening over and over if the rest of the market start exploiting it, if that makes any sense.

[CryptoPH]

^  But notice how the volatility is tightening up.  And that 'self fulfilling prophecy' (or the current predictability) could stop happening over and over if the rest of the market start exploiting it, if that makes any sense.

Indeed, though tightening volatility may result to change in directions (up or down). This takes huge volume from whales or institutional investors to lift-up the trend.
Oh well, I'm talking about BTC again. But I guess that should be able to lift-up XMR prices too.

[Globb0]

Consecutive green hourlies. 

[Whtwabbit]

If they bet on Bitcoin to drop (short Futures) and dump a little BTC right on time, they can make the Futures a self for filling prophecy, no?

It does look like manipulation is happening:

This is interesting, 2x 666 high and low
Bitcoin high "19" "666"
(Disclaimer: I am a coincidence theorist)

[cAPSLOCK]

With regard to Tari, I understand the details of this project have still to be finalized and speculation on it is premature. That said, what I've read so far is that Tari is to 'built on top fo Monero' which has been taken to mean that Tari will be merged mined alongside Monero. In other words, that Tari will benefit from the security that the Monero network offers (should Monero miners decide to implement it).

Question: does Tari need permission from the Monero community to do this? If Tari wasn't being led by FP would this be an issue for the Monero community? Is there any cost to Monero from merge mining Tari? Is there any benefit to Monero from merge mining Tari?

Why, in other words, should the Monero community agree to this (assuming they have a say in the matter)? I don't have a position on it, just wondering if there are opposing perspectives on the issue.

Since Monero is a permissionless blockchain (in other words there are no limits as to who can use it, mine it, or validate it) you would be right the community does not really have a "say" in the matter.  At least insofar as whether or not a L2 solution can be built atop, and use the blockchain.  This is also true with Counterparty, Lightning, and Eltoo on the BTC blockchain.

On the other hand fees are built into a blockchain to stop the possible abuse.  In his recent report (can be found on reddit) Dr. Noether talks about the implementation of bulletproofs and how this might present a need for Monero to make changes to it's fee structure so the chain is not abused.  So if Tari is sucessful enough to be writing tons of data to the L1 chain we might, as a community, need to talk about what fees look like.

IMO, this is a problem we want to have as it means Monero is being used.

[Haladay]

Yea I am worried too. The Bitcoin decline started at the end of last year when Bitcoin futures were taken in use. Futures can be used to manipulate gold, oil, silver, fiat, wheat and what ever, so why not crypto. The Futures do not bring any money to the commodity they represent, so no wonder that happens.

When the Bitcoin has declined more than the alts have been able to increase, they have lost too.

So what do you think what the Bitcoin futures have to do with the decline?

Well, this is a hard question. Bitcoin futures seem to affect the whole market, not only BTC. Until now, I couldn't understand if it's good or bad for the environment. We will get this in the second half of this year.

Monero is under stress as well.

[Shnikes101]

With regard to Tari, I understand the details of this project have still to be finalized and speculation on it is premature. That said, what I've read so far is that Tari is to 'built on top fo Monero' which has been taken to mean that Tari will be merged mined alongside Monero. In other words, that Tari will benefit from the security that the Monero network offers (should Monero miners decide to implement it).

Question: does Tari need permission from the Monero community to do this? If Tari wasn't being led by FP would this be an issue for the Monero community? Is there any cost to Monero from merge mining Tari? Is there any benefit to Monero from merge mining Tari?

Why, in other words, should the Monero community agree to this (assuming they have a say in the matter)? I don't have a position on it, just wondering if there are opposing perspectives on the issue.

Since Monero is a permissionless blockchain (in other words there are no limits as to who can use it, mine it, or validate it) you would be right the community does not really have a "say" in the matter.  At least insofar as whether or not a L2 solution can be built atop, and use the blockchain.  This is also true with Counterparty, Lightning, and Eltoo on the BTC blockchain.

On the other hand fees are built into a blockchain to stop the possible abuse.  In his recent report (can be found on reddit) Dr. Noether talks about the implementation of bulletproofs and how this might present a need for Monero to make changes to it's fee structure so the chain is not abused.  So if Tari is sucessful enough to be writing tons of data to the L1 chain we might, as a community, need to talk about what fees look like.

IMO, this is a problem we want to have as it means Monero is being used.

Solid post. I'm out of merit otherwise would be showering you.

Love to see a coin that is actually used for its intended purpose. I know it's not possible but for me this goes back to someone's thought here of how interesting it would be to see transactions not including to/from exchange wallets. Compare that to other coins to potentially see what coins are truly being used for their intended purpose.

One can hope that eventually actual use/use case should rid us of most of the current useless alts.

[mnemonicsoup]

Aminorex, what do you think about the current situation? I know some folks who were calm in jan/feb but are a little worried now.

[Billy Bunter]

With regard to Tari, I understand the details of this project have still to be finalized and speculation on it is premature. That said, what I've read so far is that Tari is to 'built on top fo Monero' which has been taken to mean that Tari will be merged mined alongside Monero. In other words, that Tari will benefit from the security that the Monero network offers (should Monero miners decide to implement it).

Question: does Tari need permission from the Monero community to do this? If Tari wasn't being led by FP would this be an issue for the Monero community? Is there any cost to Monero from merge mining Tari? Is there any benefit to Monero from merge mining Tari?

Why, in other words, should the Monero community agree to this (assuming they have a say in the matter)? I don't have a position on it, just wondering if there are opposing perspectives on the issue.

Since Monero is a permissionless blockchain (in other words there are no limits as to who can use it, mine it, or validate it) you would be right the community does not really have a "say" in the matter.  At least insofar as whether or not a L2 solution can be built atop, and use the blockchain.  This is also true with Counterparty, Lightning, and Eltoo on the BTC blockchain.

On the other hand fees are built into a blockchain to stop the possible abuse.  In his recent report (can be found on reddit) Dr. Noether talks about the implementation of bulletproofs and how this might present a need for Monero to make changes to it's fee structure so the chain is not abused.  So if Tari is sucessful enough to be writing tons of data to the L1 chain we might, as a community, need to talk about what fees look like.

IMO, this is a problem we want to have as it means Monero is being used.

Good reply. But isn't there a difference between the Monero network being used (as in Tari) and Monero (the currency) being used?