delete

[smoothie]

Why do you want to fuck with me?

Why does it matter what I say?

Especially if you are going to successfully attack XMR right?

You will have the last laugh if what you claim is true, no?

You will have proved all of us wrong who oppose you in your claims to "kill" XMR.

I see no problem here, as you will be viewed in a good light as keeping to your word should your claims actually come true to a 'T'.

As a publicly opposed party to your claims of "killing" XMR....please prove me wrong.

[1714137935]

1714137935

[1714137935]

1714137935

[smooth]

Unless of course your target market is not BTT, so you don't a fuck what they think. Let the astute ones join the ride if they want. And your target market aren't investors, so they don't even think of that.

Again, that's all cool, but how do you pay for the project? Self funded? That means (somewhat) rich people. At least by my definition. Yours might be "not irresponsible" but either way few are included.

You can do what Monero is doing which is people working part time, voluntary funding through donations, etc. We get some work done certainly, but it isn't exactly turbocharged. If the tortoise indeed wins the race, we may well do fine. You seem a bit panicked about the world, so perhaps you want things to move faster. You better have a good team of rich/non-irresponsible people lined up to make a run for it.

[smooth]

It should be quite clear to astute observers which coins are on such a [pump-and-dump] trajectory.

Maybe. One part of industrializing the process means getting better at selling it (if only because competitive pressure means the better scammers survive, but also learning and economies of scale). This happens in every speculative market -- over time scams get more professional and harder to identify.

Yeah Auroracoin

Aurora was quite a while ago in crypto years. Thus I infer that whoever is scamming now is better at it.

[BitcoinEXpress]

Why do you want to fuck with me?

Why does it matter what I say?

Especially if you are going to successfully attack XMR right?

You will have the last laugh if what you claim is true, no?

You will have proved all of us wrong who oppose you in your claims to "kill" XMR.

I see no problem here, as you will be viewed in a good light as keeping to your word should your claims actually come true to a 'T'.

As a publicly opposed party to your claims of "killing" XMR....please prove me wrong.

You're right nothing you say really matters.

Gotta kinda give you a little respect since you aren't one of these three months old newbie accounts yapping.

I will actually be in your area in December, maybe me, you and Nutildah could kill some beers and laugh about this stupid shit.

I don't take any of this personally.

Don't want anyone to get any wrong ideas, me and Smoothie friends from back in the day!  


~BCX~

[smoothie]

Why do you want to fuck with me?

Why does it matter what I say?

Especially if you are going to successfully attack XMR right?

You will have the last laugh if what you claim is true, no?

You will have proved all of us wrong who oppose you in your claims to "kill" XMR.

I see no problem here, as you will be viewed in a good light as keeping to your word should your claims actually come true to a 'T'.

As a publicly opposed party to your claims of "killing" XMR....please prove me wrong.

You're right nothing you say really matters.

Gotta kinda give you a little respect since you aren't one of these three months old newbie accounts yapping.

I will actually be in your area in December, maybe me, you and Nutildah could kill some beers and laugh about this stupid shit.

I don't take any of this personally.

Don't want anyone to get any wrong ideas, me and Smoothie friends from back in the day!  


~BCX~

Let me know when you are in my neck of the woods. Bring your ability to log in to bitcointalk.org to prove your identity as BitcoinEXpress and to be civil is all I would ask. 

[TheFascistMind]

Unless of course your target market is not BTT, so you don't a fuck what they think. Let the astute ones join the ride if they want. And your target market aren't investors, so they don't even think of that.

Again, that's all cool, but how do you pay for the project? Self funded? That means (somewhat) rich people. At least by my definition. Yours might be "not irresponsible" but either way few are included.

You can do what Monero is doing which is people working part time, voluntary funding through donations, etc. We get some work done certainly, but it isn't exactly turbocharged. If the tortoise indeed wins the race, we may well do fine. You seem a bit panicked about the world, so perhaps you want things to move faster. You better have a good team of rich/non-irresponsible people lined up to make a run for it.

Indeed that seems to be the case.

People who have not put themselves in a position to be entrepreneurs can't be. And thus I feel they are dilutive at the innovation stage. I base this opinion on real world experience of successfully launching for example WordUp which I coded in my basement and generated in the 1980s $100,000 a year in income, which is several times that in today's money. And repeating the feat in 1998 with Cool Page, generating up to $400,000 a year, which is several $million a year in today's money.

So I speak from accomplishment, not from BS. (sorry iCETARD)

[black_jesus]

 He failed to identify what the request was, who it was directed to, and who ignored it.  And guess what, he won't do it.  

Maybe because I have the secret feature called "PM" and it wasn't directed to you?

Just a guess.


~BCX~

I will take a wild guess. I had pondered in the past that BM had made some ultimatum in a PM.

He mentioned in one post that the distribution of mining power looked concentrated to him.

Apparently some people might have heavily mined XMR than others. Perhaps he is asking for better disclosure on who basically got a "premine". I realize this was raised by AnonyMint in the past and refuted. Just saying.

If that's the issue, maybe I can shed some light, but it depends on what period of time.  I was a fairly early XMR miner (first half of May - before the Lucas and then Wolf optimized miners, and before pools for a tiny bit).  And I had a decent but not unreasonably high percentage of the hashrate for a while.  If the concern is about the first couple weeks then I can't help.

[TheFascistMind]

Also by Zoid announcing the decision to retain the Boolberry name, it is possible that he might have caused those who invested in the new name choices to sell.

[NewLiberty]

But please allow me to point out an egregious flaw in your logic. Satoshi was mining when no one else was, so he got 100,000s of coins using only a few PCs to mine with. That is equivalent to a premine.

I don't consider it equivalent because when he was doing it Bitcoin was worth exactly zero, and its immediate prospects for ever being worth anything were remote. It was huge gamble to even bother paying for the equipment, setting it up (my recollection is that his setup was speculated to be more than a few PCs), keep it going, pay for electricity, etc. It is possible he "borrowed" resources from an academic lab or something, but still it took time to set it up. It literally took years before the coins could be monetized at all, even to buy pizzas. I don't even know if, without the benefit of hindsight, what he was doing was a good investment on his time and (maybe) money. If he was running a scam, it was a very, very long con, and a risky one.

Today, the situation is different. Pretty much any coin can expect to be listed on some exchanges relatively quickly (some right from the start) and have a clearly established and monetizable value, making easy for a pump-and-dumper to make a few big announcements and cash out, with no real intention to use the money to develop the coin. In fact businesses exist that do this on an industrial scale. Thus the entire model is horribly tainted by the market for lemons problem.

The other problem is that even with the above (or perhaps because of it), the amount you can cash out even with a premine is pretty small. Zoidberg said he is getting about 750 USD per month from his deferred premine, and that is after the price of BBR has been pumped. Before recent development it might have been 100 USD per month or something (not sure of the exact numbers).

He could have done a non-deferred premine instead. Assuming the liquidity to cash that out at current prices existed (which it doesn't), he could only raise about 27K USD that way. Hardly enough to fund a project. Even increasing his premine from 1% to 10% would only be 270K USD, with vastly greater liquidity issues, and still not really enough to soundly fund such a project.

So as far as I can tell premines are a magnet for pump-and-dump scams and don't work very well for funding legitimate projects anyway. A better approach is needed.

There are a few exceptions, if you have a very high profile and can generate huge hype before you even start, like Ethereum.

The faucets were also a reasonable method to get folks familiar with the coin.  Exchanges have more or less supplanted the faucets.

[TheFascistMind]

The faucets were also a reasonable method to get folks familiar with the coin.  Exchanges have more or less supplanted the faucets.

Imo, faucets are a waste of precious resources. What I mean will be clearer if ever I can get my ideas out into the market.

[TheFascistMind]

Investors in Cryptonote coins should read this.

[TheFascistMind]

Once again for posterity:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=400235.msg8663871#msg8663871

Remember if you only have $100 in your economy, but it changes hands 1 million times per year, that is a $100 million nominal GDP.

Velocity is value. Excessive stored money is correlated with a Dark Age (we are still digging up bullion hordes from the Middle Ages).

[Este Nuno]

Also by Zoid announcing the decision to retain the Boolberry name, it is possible that he might have caused those who invested in the new name choices to sell.

Boolberrium, Auroolberry, Boolberrius. Compromise.   (reference for those who didn't follow the BBR name debate: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=801652.0)

I'll invest my bitcent in BBR if they change the name. Even though Boolberry is a cute name on it's own.

It would have been interesting to see the effect on the market though if in fact they did change it. DuckNote changed to DarkNote. DuckNote is a shit name though, so I'm not surprised they wanted to change it. Funny that they chose to go with the 2014 altcoin vogue tag of 'Dark' though.

[TheFascistMind]

DuckNote changed to DarkNote. ... Funny that they chose to go with the 2014 altcoin vogue tag of 'Dark' though.

Good reason to name your coin with one syllable (or not a concatenation of two words) so copy cats can't ride your coat tails. Why didn't Darkcoin just name it Dark? Now we have BitcoinDark, DarkNote, Darkcoin.

Honey can you send me some dark, I am low on funds.

That statement is funnier with ducks or fucks or shivers.

[rangedriver]

Also by Zoid announcing the decision to retain the Boolberry name, it is possible that he might have caused those who invested in the new name choices to sell.

Boolberrium, Auroolberry, Boolberrius. Compromise.  

I'll invest my bitcent in BBR if they change the name. Even though Boolberry is a cute name on it's own.

It would have been interesting to see the effect on the market though if in fact they did change it. DuckNote changed to DarkNote. DuckNote is a shit name though, so I'm not surprised they wanted to change it. Funny that they chose to go with the 2014 altcoin vogue tag of 'Dark' though.

DarkNote is a branding disaster - they should have stuck with duckNote which is in keeping with the random quirky anarchic and meaningless nature of modern branding, if not the universe in general.

In short, duckNote was harmless.

A successful anonymous coin should have a harmless name, so when it makes the case for the libertarian argument on Capitol Hill everyone will rally around and say YES. Anti-anonymity sorts will be throwing all kinds of words around like terrorism, child porn, drugs, money laundering, tax evasion....but thankfully, due to the cute nature of the particular ducks involved, liberty wins over an accommodating (and a little idiotic) heart.

But DarkNote? Darkcoin? Yeh good luck with that. The first objective of an anonymous coin would be to disassociate yourselves in the eyes of the media, public and government, of the "evils" of the darkweb... And look what you just done did? Handed it to them right on a plate.

Where's the cute ducks masquerading for the 2.3 trillion mafioso terror campaign? Did Gus Fring teach you nothing??

This is why Monero wins.

[TheFascistMind]

The name shouldn't have any thing to do with anonymity because ≈99% of the people have no clue what they would need anonymity for. That percent will improve over time, but far too late for us to scale up usership before Paypal, Apple Pay, etc.. take over.

And that is why the anonymity has to be automatic and it can't interfere (nor cause any tradeoffs) with the use as a currency.

This is why Monero wins.

This is why Cryptonote loses.

[robinwilliams]

Also by Zoid announcing the decision to retain the Boolberry name, it is possible that he might have caused those who invested in the new name choices to sell.

Boolberrium, Auroolberry, Boolberrius. Compromise.  

I'll invest my bitcent in BBR if they change the name. Even though Boolberry is a cute name on it's own.

It would have been interesting to see the effect on the market though if in fact they did change it. DuckNote changed to DarkNote. DuckNote is a shit name though, so I'm not surprised they wanted to change it. Funny that they chose to go with the 2014 altcoin vogue tag of 'Dark' though.

DarkNote is a branding disaster - they should have stuck with duckNote which is in keeping with the random quirky anarchic and meaningless nature of modern branding, if not the universe in general.

In short, duckNote was harmless.

A successful anonymous coin should have a harmless name, so when it makes the case for the libertarian argument on Capitol Hill everyone will rally around and say YES. Anti-anonymity sorts will be throwing all kinds of words around like terrorism, child porn, drugs, money laundering, tax evasion....but thankfully, due to the cute nature of the particular ducks involved, liberty wins over an accommodating (and a little idiotic) heart.

But DarkNote? Darkcoin? Yeh good luck with that. The first objective of an anonymous coin would be to disassociate yourselves in the eyes of the media, public and government, of the "evils" of the darkweb... And look what you just done did? Handed it to them right on a plate.

Where's the cute ducks masquerading for the 2.3 trillion mafioso terror campaign? Did Gus Fring teach you nothing??

This is why Monero wins.

 or boolberry

[TheFascistMind]

Paypal is your pal.

Apple Pay is so white, fangurlz and boiz.

[smoothie]

The name shouldn't have any thing to do with anonymity because ≈99% of the people have no clue what they would need anonymity for. That percent will improve over time, but far too late for us to scale up usership before Paypal, Apple Pay, etc.. take over.

And that is why the anonymity has to be automatic and it can't interfere (nor cause any tradeoffs) with the use as a currency.

This is why Monero wins.

This is why Cryptonote loses.

You forget that increasing the difficulty to crack a private key is simply in the length of the key while allowing all normal charActers for creating private keys today.

Time and resources is the issue. Eventually the limits of technology will not be able to ever feasibly keep up in cracking private keys of crypto coins.

Any one interested in cracking private keys will need to employ tons of resources and time while the users and owners of crypto coins only need to implement a longer private key to disallow such cracks to occur in any meaningful amount of time.

What is the point of cracking a private key if you are dead by the time it is cracked? Lol

[TheFascistMind]

The name shouldn't have any thing to do with anonymity because ≈99% of the people have no clue what they would need anonymity for. That percent will improve over time, but far too late for us to scale up usership before Paypal, Apple Pay, etc.. take over.

And that is why the anonymity has to be automatic and it can't interfere (nor cause any tradeoffs) with the use as a currency.

This is why Monero wins.

This is why Cryptonote loses.

You forget that increasing the difficulty to crack a private key is simply in the length of the key while allowing all normal charActers for creating private keys today.

Time and resources is the issue. Eventually the limits of technology will not be able to ever feasibly keep up in cracking private keys of crypto coins.

Any one interested in cracking private keys will need to employ tons of resources and time while the users and owners of crypto coins only need to implement a longer private key to disallow such cracks to occur in any meaningful amount of time.

What is the point of cracking a private key if you are dead by the time it is cracked? Lol

Sir, I suggest you re-read the linked thread. It seems you entirely missed the point.

1. You can't increase the key size of the historic chain.
2. Cracking historically spent coins is not a threat. The threat is cracking anonymity history at any time in the future.
3. The crack threats are not just due to key length. Key length won't help you in some cases against math discoveries, and certainly won't help against quantum computers.
4. Your heirs won't be dead in 10 - 15 years (or less or slightly more).
5. Why risk it when there are possible designs where you don't have to.