Topic: . (Read 3178 times)

So you are neutral about Poloniex having an separate XMR market?

Do you foresee "actively" trading on the other exchanges XMR is registered at?

So you are neutral about Poloniex having an separate XMR market?

That seems quite advantageous to just be neutral about it.

Do you foresee "actively" trading on the other exchanges XMR is registered at?

Does Monero have any plans of trading more on other platforms besides Poloniex?

So nothing on paper then.

Just a relationship that gives them more financial gain than other coins on their exchange.

Just to be clear I'm not knocking Monero here.

I'm more interested in what motivates the exchange.

Given the news with Cryptsy and other exchanges in the past I just like to stay vigilant on where I do my trading.

I wonder what they have to say about it?

Does Monero have any plans of trading more on other platforms besides Poloniex?

Its like the eggs are all in one basket when you look at the percentages.

You're just fine with criminals hacking into innocent peoples' computers running botnets as long as they "protect" your investment. In fact, you "expect botnets to secure the network" of your chosen coin. Anything goes as long as it's for your benefit.

Can someone from the Monero team tell me what their relationship is with Poloniex?

I find it interesting that when I click on the "exchange" button on their main page that it takes me directly to XMR.

Is there some type of exclusive arrangement here between Poloniex and the Monero team?.

Of course i'm not fine with it. botnets are a fact regardless of my feelings are you really this naive?

Speaking of criminal acts and "anything goes", apparently you're not only "fine with" but actually advocate murder for hire if it potentially interferes with your investment. How's that hit fund coming along? It really does take a special kind of stupid to threaten someone on the open internet.

Perhaps after thread participants do a bitcointalk.org backround check on me this thread can continue.


As mentioned in an earlier post I am interested in the tail emission.

From what I read it states "perpetual" but at a low rate.

This concept is foreign to me because I'm so use to hearing a definitive coin count.

Does Monero have transaction fees?

I will elaborate on this.

The first question one needs to ask before even considering adaptive blocksize limits is: Can a fee market actually work in the absence of a base emission?

1) We first consider a blocksize large enough (or effectively infinite). In this scenario competition among miners will drive fees towards zero since there is no scarcity. This will in turn cause the difficulty and consequently the security of the crypto currency to collapse. We must keep in mind that orphan block based arguments will also fail since these are based on the presence of a base emission. This is in fact the very legitimate fear of the small block proponents.

2) In the second case we consider a fixed blocksize, where the blocksize is small enough to impact fees. In this scenario we have a potentially infinite demand with a fixed supply. In theory fees therefore would go to infinity. We must keep in mind that as the legitimate demand rises towards the fixed limit, It becomes economically attractive for miners with a even small percentage of the hash rate to spam the network in order to profit by raising the overall fees.  At this point only external competitive factors can stop the fees from rising to infinity. These take the form of fiat payment methods and other crypto currencies with the latter being not affected by a fixed blocksize limit. The impact of these external competitive factors is to reduce demand by devaluing the entire crypto currency. This will be delayed by miner spam, as miners will increase the spam in order to preserve the dwindling purchasing power of their fees until the system collapses to little or no transaction demand leading the first case above.

The problem as I see it is that the system is inherently unstable. Either the mining revenue collapses first or the purchasing power of the mining revenue collapses first. We now come to the next question. Can one create an adaptive blocksize limit formula that does not converge as time increases towards (1) or (2) above? My instinct tells me no, particularly since the network has no way to measure the key parameter namely the amount of fees collected per block due to out of bound payments to miners. Furthermore there have been many brilliant minds looking at this issue and they have not come up with a solution. Proving this negative, in a rigorous mathematical sense, is of course another matter entirely.

What the tail emission in Monero does is provide a stable anchor outside of the control of the miners on top of which an adaptive blocksize limit and a fee market can actually develop, by avoiding the instability above.

One final note. Why is this posted in the Monero speculation thread? The answer is very simple: Monero is the other crypto currency with the latter being not affected by a fixed blocksize limit above. In the collapsing valuation of (2) the valuation has to go somewhere and there a good possibility that Monero will capture some of this valuation.

ROFL illodin.. defending botnets?  that post is me calling out someone claiming XMR wasn't botnet mined since it wasn't profitable when it obviously was

There's also a reason that other post is deleted, i'm no longer "in for the long haul". Believe it or not i did make a small profit on XMR. Now that the price is a lot lower i may begin accumulating again.

Because I choose to.

There are other Monero threads that are not the ANN topic.

Examples:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/xmr-monero-speculation-753252
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/cryptonote-technical-discussion-and-chess-challenge-1190988
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/shadowcash-vs-monero-an-unbiased-debate-1140006
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/monero-support-652305

Is something wrong?

Pretty much this, Alpha goy is a known Dash shill and bagholder.. he feels the need to blame his heavy losses on other coins

I'm afraid the people (well respected contributors no less) saying it makes no sense for botnet owners to mine Monero are mistaken. Sure, other coins might be more profitable in small volumes, but there's no way a botnet will be able to exchange out of a thinly traded premined shitnote and into BTC without bringing the price to zero. Same for VTC

Don't get me wrong, im in this coin for the long haul. I've exchanged all my alts for XMR. I expect botnets securing the network. As the network grow to include more efficient hardware, this will be less and less of an issue. It's a little disheartening to see this kind of misinformation here. Understand that there is no better coin for botnet operators to mine right now, and this is to be expected. Not sure if there are ulterior motives at play or if you're simply not taking volumes into consideration when claiming otherwise

Got it.

When it says <1% is that fixed or can it fluctuate?

Perhaps after thread participants do a bitcointalk.org backround check on me this thread can continue.


As mentioned in an earlier post I am interested in the tail emission.

From what I read it states "perpetual" but at a low rate.

This concept is foreign to me because I'm so use to hearing a definitive coin count.

Does Monero have transaction fees?

I'm waiting one of you guys wear a Monero t-shirt and behead someone in public square next but I'm afraid this too will have the opposite effect.

LTC

After the last straggling speculators realized that the halving party was over price has seen some downward pressure.

August 27th marked the time of the slide.

Currently sitting at around .0125 the price is getting dangerously close to 1:1 with DASH.

Hashrate averages as of yesterday = 957.05 Ghash/s

It will be interesting to see just how low it goes.

What will be on the LTC short term horizon now that halving is history?


DASH

The Bitfinex trading shutdown is right around the corner.

Tommorow all trading is to cease there.

They are still facilitating about 10% of the DASH/BTC trading volume.

Here is how the rest of the spread looks according to CMC (http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/dash/#markets)

1    Bittrex           DASH/BTC    $ 6,548   $ 2.56    20.71 %    
2    useCryptos   DASH/BTC    $ 6,462   $ 2.56    20.44 %    
3    Poloniex           DASH/BTC    $ 5,568   $ 2.57    17.62 %    
4    Cryptsy           DASH/BTC    $ 3,831   $ 2.56    12.12 %    
5    Bitfinex           DASH/BTC    $ 3,271   $ 2.56    10.35 %    
6    Bitfinex           DASH/USD    $ 2,581   $ 2.58    8.17 %    
7    CEX.IO           DASH/BTC    $ 1,422   $ 2.58    4.50 %    
8    CEX.IO           DASH/LTC    $ 1,133   $ 2.54    3.58 %    

Things have changed a bit since the last time I checked this.

Cryptsy does not appear to be handling so much of the trading load anymore.

Starting to see a more even spread.

Nonetheless, price has been hovering around the .0112 range for the past few days.

The door is still open for LTC holders to switch investments.

If the DASH/LTC ratio flips in favor of DASH in the coming days LTC holders will only have moments before a wave starts picking up steam.

Speaking of waves let's analyze the drawback and compare it to the pump that took place in March.

March's drawback followed by Tsunami:



August's potential drawback with an unknown future: