Topic: Could Monero replace Bitcoin soon? - page 19. (Read 33721 times)
No, it will not remove Bitcoin, no alternative cryptocurrency will ever replace Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the first and only good cryptocurrency around, others are just wannabe copies or scam coins. Monero is not good even as an alternatice cryptocurrency.
Darknet markets are implementing XMR....could be huge
It could be. Still, the more adoption a crypto currency has the more its price and marketcap will rise towards reaching higher rankings. In my opinion, I think that there would be no crypto to replace Bitcoin for now (unless it manages to solve scalability, and other issues first as well as develop a truly unique technology). Bitcoin will remain the #1 original crypto for a pretty long time, and who knows maybe even the price will be above $1000 by then. Just sharing my thoughts
I guess we now will be having some headlines in mainstream media about how evil Monero network is.
About that position of king of crypto I doubt that bitcoin will be ever dethroned. Bitcoin has something that any of new coins cannot recreate - almost perfect initial distribution of coins.
Darknet markets are implementing XMR....could be huge
It could be. Still, the more adoption a crypto currency has the more its price and marketcap will rise towards reaching higher rankings. In my opinion, I think that there would be no crypto to replace Bitcoin for now (unless it manages to solve scalability, and other issues first as well as develop a truly unique technology). Bitcoin will remain the #1 original crypto for a pretty long time, and who knows maybe even the price will be above $1000 by then. Just sharing my thoughts
I've seen this asked in other places too even though i've never even heard of it. Going to look into as this alt seems to be getting more attention.
My idea is that technically and objectively speaking, monero should have replaced bitcoin, but it won't. It is not because it is technically superior, and solves big issues of something, that it gets adopted, if people don't see the issue. It is not the first example of a superior system not breaking through, and an inferior system (especially if "first mover") keeping the market.
Linux vs. windows comes to mind, and that comparison is very, very close to the monero-bitcoin comparison.
Bitcoin is like windows: it is the first mover on personal computer systems. It has a GAPING SECURITY HOLE: the total lack of anonymity. People don't seem to care. They will once it is too late, and regulation sets in severely (ask Ulbricht !).
Monero is like linux. The small crowd of geeks understanding the difference will not steer the market against the marketing and publicity muscle of the first mover and the start of its vested interests. I wouldn't even be surprised if the "anonymity hype" will be won by DASH, even though it is totally inferior technology. Again, windows vs. linux comes to mind. Or should we say: apple against linux.
Monero is much more grass roots, and DASH is now in the process of setting up a financial hierarchy and vested interests which will do what is needed to sell their inferior although somewhat working product.
But actually, as with linux, it doesn't matter in the end. The market cap of monero should be high enough (it isn't, for the moment) for it to be a sufficiently strong means of exchange with anonymity. It shouldn't necessarily be the market leader. Like linux, the market share of linux is large enough for linux users to use it. We don't care that windows has the lion's share, and we don't care that an inferior imitation with a lot of marketing (Apple) is also having its cake.
From the moment it is big enough to be a player, that's good enough.
Linux vs. windows comes to mind, and that comparison is very, very close to the monero-bitcoin comparison.
Bitcoin is like windows: it is the first mover on personal computer systems. It has a GAPING SECURITY HOLE: the total lack of anonymity. People don't seem to care. They will once it is too late, and regulation sets in severely (ask Ulbricht !).
Monero is like linux. The small crowd of geeks understanding the difference will not steer the market against the marketing and publicity muscle of the first mover and the start of its vested interests. I wouldn't even be surprised if the "anonymity hype" will be won by DASH, even though it is totally inferior technology. Again, windows vs. linux comes to mind. Or should we say: apple against linux.
Monero is much more grass roots, and DASH is now in the process of setting up a financial hierarchy and vested interests which will do what is needed to sell their inferior although somewhat working product.
But actually, as with linux, it doesn't matter in the end. The market cap of monero should be high enough (it isn't, for the moment) for it to be a sufficiently strong means of exchange with anonymity. It shouldn't necessarily be the market leader. Like linux, the market share of linux is large enough for linux users to use it. We don't care that windows has the lion's share, and we don't care that an inferior imitation with a lot of marketing (Apple) is also having its cake.
From the moment it is big enough to be a player, that's good enough.
I don't think so, the main reason is adoption.
Darknet markets are implementing XMR....could be huge
Monero is a good coin but not good enough for BTC,
In a certain way, one could say that Monero has already replaced bitcoin in its original conception, namely as an anarchist currency. Bitcoin has, unfortenately, become an half-institutionalized gambling/speculating tool with more and more demand for state justice, legal interference, and "mainstream regulation". Most of the market cap of bitcoin is made of speculation as just another financial tool in the big toolbox of financial gamblers, and only a minuscule tiny fraction is devoted to the original goal of bitcoin, which was freedom from state, law and finance. Monero still has most of that promise, as I don't think that its market cap is mainly driven by financial gamblers. However, it is true that monero is, as far as I know, not (yet ?) used as a genuine currency, as bitcoin was at a certain point, on the dark net.
So, yes, of course, Monero will never replace bitcoin in the market cap range, as most people with a lot of money actually love state and law (which made them rich in the first place). Market cap as bitcoin sees it now, measures actually compliance with the state and fiat system, and not its anarchist purpose which will probably remain a tiny fraction of all accumulated wealth in this world, which will stay for stil a long, long time in state and law abiding and abusing hands.
That said, there's no reason why both cannot have a peaceful co-existence, where exchanging (with distributed exchanges) bitcoin into monero provides the way to get back the original purposes of bitcoin, which were freedom from state and law intervention (by statists, called money laundering and illegal financial transactions of course).
The big danger is that bitcoin will have such a thirst for regulation, that it will cause a lot of trouble for anarchist versions of it like monero. I wouldn't be surprised that at a certain point, anonymous cryptocurrencies will be outlawed, and traceable things like bitcoin will be imposed.
So, yes, of course, Monero will never replace bitcoin in the market cap range, as most people with a lot of money actually love state and law (which made them rich in the first place). Market cap as bitcoin sees it now, measures actually compliance with the state and fiat system, and not its anarchist purpose which will probably remain a tiny fraction of all accumulated wealth in this world, which will stay for stil a long, long time in state and law abiding and abusing hands.
That said, there's no reason why both cannot have a peaceful co-existence, where exchanging (with distributed exchanges) bitcoin into monero provides the way to get back the original purposes of bitcoin, which were freedom from state and law intervention (by statists, called money laundering and illegal financial transactions of course).
The big danger is that bitcoin will have such a thirst for regulation, that it will cause a lot of trouble for anarchist versions of it like monero. I wouldn't be surprised that at a certain point, anonymous cryptocurrencies will be outlawed, and traceable things like bitcoin will be imposed.
Why is everybody speaking of replacing? Or A vs B?
Some of you speak about the crypto development as if there would just be place for one, just a small piece of cake.
Crypto is still small and of tiny financial significance at the present moment. I simply hate this toxic crypto environment, which is caused by big greed and small brains.
Ethereum does not need to "replace" BTC in order to be successful. XMR doesn`t need to replace BTC either to function or to grow in value.
The XMR supply is not that high, if there is some interest peak for it due to more need for privacy and fungibility and easier use of XMR then of course the current price won`t hold.
Some of you speak about the crypto development as if there would just be place for one, just a small piece of cake.
Crypto is still small and of tiny financial significance at the present moment. I simply hate this toxic crypto environment, which is caused by big greed and small brains.
Ethereum does not need to "replace" BTC in order to be successful. XMR doesn`t need to replace BTC either to function or to grow in value.
The XMR supply is not that high, if there is some interest peak for it due to more need for privacy and fungibility and easier use of XMR then of course the current price won`t hold.
No i dont think any altcoin could replace bitcoin ever specially not seeing that happen in the near future.Yes i think Monero has the potential to rise but replacing bitcoin will be too much expectation from it.Any other coin is still very much far away from the bitcoin right now and no altcoin is gonna replace it.
Yes that would not be happen and how could a new altcoin would replace bitcoin? Its blurry situation and cannot be happen eventhough monero have high volume and community because i am very sure that they exchange it to become BTC, because we all really know that bitcoin is more usefull rather than any altcoin existinh out there, theirs no doubt that the price of monera will spike but it will remain there.
I really believe in this coin but I say no it can not replace bit coin soon, maybe one day in the very distant future but not soon
Never in my wildest dream that Monero replacing Bitcoin even in a thousand years.
Monero is nothing compare to bitcoin and for many years of its existence it gather more trust and it has many used in online markets and with monero i dont see any store accepts it or any merchant that we can use monero to buy some things that we need.
I really believe in this coin but I say no it can not replace bit coin soon, maybe one day in the very distant future but not soon
Never in my wildest dream that Monero replacing Bitcoin even in a thousand years.
No i dont think any altcoin could replace bitcoin ever specially not seeing that happen in the near future.Yes i think Monero has the potential to rise but replacing bitcoin will be too much expectation from it.Any other coin is still very much far away from the bitcoin right now and no altcoin is gonna replace it.
I really believe in this coin but I say no it can not replace bit coin soon, maybe one day in the very distant future but not soon
The world wide hash rate will be mostly from botnet. I see the developers do nothing to solve this issue.
Can you provide evidence?
Or better yet, show why this is preferable to centralized control via mining farms in China.
Or even better than that, show how the Devs could stop botnets from being used without the coin losing its ASIC resistance.
Blaming the Monero devs for one of the results of choosing a better decentralization method (ASIC resistance) is the equivalent of blaming BitTorrent for the proliferation of porn--it's a moral/political argument that ignores what the technology solves.
The world wide hash rate will be mostly from botnet. I see the developers do nothing to solve this issue.
Can you provide evidence?
When we reach the point that regulations are more noticeably harming bitcoin fungibility, Monero has a chance to become the most popular currency if the worldwide hashrate increases dramatically.
Right now there is not enough hashing power to properly secure Monero from a wealthy and motivated attacker.
I think there is no question that if Monero was launched at the same time as Bitcoin that Monero would be the dominant coin. Instead Bitcoin had a big head start and benefits from economies of scale (merchant adoption, user base and network hashrate).
Right now there is not enough hashing power to properly secure Monero from a wealthy and motivated attacker.
I think there is no question that if Monero was launched at the same time as Bitcoin that Monero would be the dominant coin. Instead Bitcoin had a big head start and benefits from economies of scale (merchant adoption, user base and network hashrate).
The world wide hash rate will be mostly from botnet. I see the developers do nothing to solve this issue.
When we reach the point that regulations are more noticeably harming bitcoin fungibility, Monero has a chance to become the most popular currency if the worldwide hashrate increases dramatically.
Right now there is not enough hashing power to properly secure Monero from a wealthy and motivated attacker.
I think there is no question that if Monero was launched at the same time as Bitcoin that Monero would be the dominant coin. Instead Bitcoin had a big head start and benefits from economies of scale (merchant adoption, user base and network hashrate).
Right now there is not enough hashing power to properly secure Monero from a wealthy and motivated attacker.
I think there is no question that if Monero was launched at the same time as Bitcoin that Monero would be the dominant coin. Instead Bitcoin had a big head start and benefits from economies of scale (merchant adoption, user base and network hashrate).
No, I do not think so. Monero can not replace BTC soon. BTC have multi years popularity as NR.1 crypto and worldwide coverage
...
I'm not sure. Those transactions will be fairly identifiable and will cause problems. I'm told that already Coinbase asks if you are sending coins to an exchange and if so asks for additional documentation. Sending coins to a non-compliant exchange will likely be a serious problem at some point, if not already.
I'm not sure. Those transactions will be fairly identifiable and will cause problems. I'm told that already Coinbase asks if you are sending coins to an exchange and if so asks for additional documentation. Sending coins to a non-compliant exchange will likely be a serious problem at some point, if not already.
One sends the coins to one's own address first. This is critical in every case. If one uses an exchange to send coins to a third party then in most cases the exchange has by law to ask questions about the third party. This is a very important difference that many miss. In this case it makes no difference if the coin is Bitcoin, Monero or even fiat. Withdraw 200 USD in cash form the bank. No problem. Now in the US ask the bank to send 200 US to your favourite non compliant gambling site and see what happens.
Edit: The problem with Coinbase is that their business model of sending Bitcoin payments on behalf of clients requires a much stricter level of regulatory compliance than if they just stuck to being an exchange and required clients to only withdraw from and deposit to a Bitcoin address under the client's control.
Maybe. I've seen reports of Coinbase and other regulated services tracking more than one hop to identify suspicious activity. There are really two issues here, one is transmitting to third parties and the other is "suspicious activity", the latter being extremely broad. I'm not sure a transparent chain can ever avoid this issue. If the information is accessible, regulated entities will be forced to look at it and interpret activity accordingly using risk scores and other methods that can never likely be fully compatible with fungibility. Then again, chains that lack the ability to make these "suspicious activity" determinations and offer stronger fungiblity may just be rejected by regulated entities altogether.
Jump to: