Pages:
Author

Topic: Could Monero replace Bitcoin soon? - page 9. (Read 33659 times)

legendary
Activity: 3066
Merit: 1188
September 22, 2016, 03:58:21 PM

Scrutiny can control Bitcoin if a state coerces businesses to blacklist/flag certain tainted bitcoins (yes it's happened).

You can't "hide" the blockchain form the state without simultaneously hiding it from everyone else as well - i.e. the majority of the population who don't hold private keys and on who'm you're depending to endorse its value.

Anyway, this whole idea of treating blockchain "cash" as if it's a credit paradigm - where bookkeeping for an individual's state of credit doubles up as 'money' and therefore needs to be hidden from view is slightly ludicrous.

The obvious solution is to de-couple the problem of fungibility from the priorities of transparency (as every other cash medium since the dawn of man has done) and create a fully transparent AND fungible blockchain. That objective is achieved by showing the outputs but mitigating the build up of regular patterns in the blockchain such that one balance is practically indistinguishable from another in all respects other than address.
legendary
Activity: 1834
Merit: 1019
September 22, 2016, 03:40:46 PM

Quote Goldman Sachs all you like. They didn’t invent cryptocurrencies and no-doubt make exactly the same mistake as people in this therad are doing - of projecting a banking model where a person is sysnonymous with an account onto a public blockchain, which is nothing like a bank.

“Your money” is not stored on a blockchain. “Your money” is stored in a bank account with your name on it. On the other hand a blockchain is a public resource that may or may not have some value. By obscuring the outputs, all you’re doing is diminishing that value.

Bitcoin has people crawling all over it day in day out, scrutinising every last address and dialoging over it. The fact that thats possible is about the only thing that actually turns such an unbacked resource into “money” because although every nook and cranny can be scrutinised, it can’t be controlled. That fact is what makes your private key have some power - and therefore value.

With blockchain based unbacked “money”, you do not endorse the value - everyone else does. So turn that into a little “private club” where you need a private key to even see it, let alone touch it and you can have your provacy but forget it being worth anything Wink

All money is is some arbitrary medium people use to transfer things of value for other things of value.
Does it matter what the medium is?
By obscuring the outputs in a medium, one increases the value in said medium for people that want those outputs obscured. Transparent options still exist.

Scrutiny can control Bitcoin if a state coerces businesses to blacklist/flag certain tainted bitcoins (yes it's happened).

We can continue leaving the market to decide the value of privacy in a blockchain.
legendary
Activity: 3066
Merit: 1188
September 22, 2016, 03:36:20 PM

Quote Goldman Sachs all you like. They didn’t invent cryptocurrencies and no-doubt make exactly the same mistake as people in this therad are doing - of projecting a banking model where a person is sysnonymous with an account onto a public blockchain, which is nothing like a bank.

“Your money” is not stored on a blockchain. “Your money” is stored in a bank account with your name on it. On the other hand a blockchain is a public resource that may or may not have some value. By obscuring the outputs, all you’re doing is diminishing that value.

Bitcoin has people crawling all over it day in day out, scrutinising every last address and dialoging over it. The fact that thats possible is about the only thing that actually turns such an unbacked resource into “money” because although every nook and cranny can be scrutinised, it can’t be controlled. That fact is what makes your private key have some power - and therefore value.

With blockchain based unbacked “money”, you do not endorse the value - everyone else does. So turn that into a little “private club” where you need a private key to even see it, let alone touch it and you can have your provacy but forget it being worth anything Wink

Privacy is something that each individual manages in their own way. It's not the job of the "money to support privacy. (Fungibility is a different thing). Give people something of value and they'll soon find their own ways to keep it private  Smiley
legendary
Activity: 1834
Merit: 1019
September 22, 2016, 03:27:38 PM

A lot of dreaming going on in here.

Well, dream on but sorry to tell you that an obscured blockchain does not ever have a snowball's hope in h*ll of becoming more valuable than a transparent one - not where unbacked "money" is concerned at least.

All they are good for is being a decentralised private bookkeeper, or transporting something that already has value (such as fiat or bitcoin  Grin ).

You do not support "privacy" in a blockchain by obscuring the very thing that endorses its value. See if you can get a look-in on the steady drip of business development that goes on in transparent blockchain - until then I'd say that exchange-based pumping & dumping remains the best hope Wink



[...]

To wit, the firm sees blockchain technology as nothing more than a “fundamentally new type of database technology.” And as far as Goldman’s interests are concerned such as high-volume commercial transactions and sharing data between partners, it expects private blockchains to reign supreme.

[...]

The report further explains
Private or ‘permissioned’ blockchains behave in the same way as the public blockchain, except that the identity of anyone who attempts to access the blockchain must be validated against a list of pre-validated market IDs. We believe that the vast majority of commercial blockchain applications – particularly in capital markets – are likely to use private or permissioned blockchains.

legendary
Activity: 3066
Merit: 1188
September 22, 2016, 03:13:37 PM

A lot of dreaming going on in here.

Well, dream on but sorry to tell you that an obscured blockchain does not ever have a snowball's hope in h*ll of becoming more valuable than a transparent one - not where unbacked "money" is concerned at least.

All they are good for is being a decentralised private bookkeeper, or transporting something that already has value (such as fiat or bitcoin  Grin ).

You do not support "privacy" in a blockchain by obscuring the very thing that endorses its value. See if you can get a look-in on the steady drip of business development that goes on in transparent blockchain - until then I'd say that exchange-based pumping & dumping remains the best hope Wink
legendary
Activity: 1245
Merit: 1004
September 22, 2016, 02:30:27 PM
Mining makes the difference. If Bitcoin further insists on staying inside China mostly, will just fail.
legendary
Activity: 1834
Merit: 1019
September 22, 2016, 02:27:11 PM
Well we dont know but i heard that bitcoin is the only one can stay remain.. and monero is just alternative.. or other altcoin is just alternative that can never replace bitcoins.

You heard... from who?
legendary
Activity: 2016
Merit: 1030
Privacy is always important
September 22, 2016, 02:26:35 PM
Well we dont know but i heard that bitcoin is the only one can stay remain.. and monero is just alternative.. or other altcoin is just alternative that can never replace bitcoins.
legendary
Activity: 1834
Merit: 1019
September 22, 2016, 02:19:23 PM
I have been following the recent block size debates through the mailing list.  I had hoped the debate would resolve and that a fork proposal would achieve widespread consensus.  However with the formal release of Bitcoin XT 0.11A, this looks unlikely to happen, and so I am forced to share my concerns about this very dangerous fork.

The developers of this pretender-Bitcoin claim to be following my original vision, but nothing could be further from the truth.  When I designed Bitcoin, I designed it in such a way as to make future modifications to the consensus rules difficult without near unanimous agreement.  Bitcoin was designed to be protected from the influence of charismatic leaders, even if their name is Gavin Andresen, Barack Obama, or Satoshi Nakamoto.  Nearly everyone has to agree on a change, and they have to do it without being forced or pressured into it.  By doing a fork in this way, these developers are violating the "original vision" they claim to honour.

They use my old writings to make claims about what Bitcoin was supposed to be.  However I acknowledge that a lot has changed since that time, and new knowledge has been gained that contradicts some of my early opinions.  For example I didn't anticipate pooled mining and its effects on the security of the network.  Making Bitcoin a competitive monetary system while also preserving its security properties is not a trivial problem, and we should take more time to come up with a robust solution.  I suspect we need a better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relying solely on altruism.

If two developers can fork Bitcoin and succeed in redefining what "Bitcoin" is, in the face of widespread technical criticism and through the use of populist tactics, then I will have no choice but to declare Bitcoin a failed project.  Bitcoin was meant to be both technically and socially robust.  This present situation has been very disappointing to watch unfold.

Satoshi Nakamoto

PS well done Team Monero, pretty smooth hard fork from what I can tell
newbie
Activity: 1
Merit: 250
September 22, 2016, 11:02:25 AM
The ideal happening is Bitcoin getting to 1 Trillion USD MC and Monero where Bitcoin is now (10 billion USD). I think Bitcoin earned its status as digital gold but its not enough to be used as cash as it can't scale, gold is heavy and slow to move and so is Bitcoin. Monero is private, fungible and light like cash.
legendary
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1217
September 22, 2016, 01:22:42 PM
I really think it could. Its superior in so many ways.

Jap, same here, not saying it WILL happen, but there's a chance...

XMR is better technologically and 'monetarilly'...
BTC has the network-effect though...

let's see what's more important in the long run...



Network effect is the only advantage BTC has pretty much. And if the price of Monero keeps growing faster than the price of btc people certainly has not even one reasson to dump their bitcoins  into Monero and that transfers the network effect to XMR.

You might consider brand to fall under network effects but I think it is different enough of a thing and bitcoin has monero beaten there too.

I used to be more skeptical about whether or not monero would ever gain traction despite being superior, for previously mentioned reasons. I saw it as having a good risk reward profile but expected it to languish in total absurdity for all time because the world isnt always fair.

Since its started to gain some momentum and take a foot hold in the minds of many more people, I don't consider it to be a long shot any more. In fact at this point I put it at better than a 50/50 for long term success. (which is probably like a decade in this business)

The likely hood of beating bitcoin though? Still definitely less than half. We have a lot of room between long term success and beating bitcoin.
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1029
Sine secretum non libertas
September 22, 2016, 01:16:10 PM
The ideal happening is Bitcoin getting to 1 Trillion USD MC and Monero where Bitcoin is now (10 billion USD). I think Bitcoin earned its status as digital gold but its not enough to be used as cash as it can't scale, gold is heavy and slow to move and so is Bitcoin. Monero is private, fungible and light like cash.

That's a reasonable scenario, but I think there is a problem:  I don't want anyone to know how much gold I have.  Or even to know that I own gold.  It does me no good to use the transparent chain, only harm.  The larger my net worth, the more harm it does. 

I see bitcoin as the currency of kickstarters, charities, governments, and maybe public companies in certain transparent public operations.  I see Monero as the currency of, well, everyone else.

legendary
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1000
September 22, 2016, 11:23:00 AM
I really think it could. Its superior in so many ways.

Jap, same here, not saying it WILL happen, but there's a chance...

XMR is better technologically and 'monetarilly'...
BTC has the network-effect though...

let's see what's more important in the long run...



Network effect is the only advantage BTC has pretty much. And if the price of Monero keeps growing faster than the price of btc people certainly has not even one reasson to dump their bitcoins  into Monero and that transfers the network effect to XMR.
full member
Activity: 168
Merit: 100
September 22, 2016, 10:48:32 AM
No, i think btc will never replace with another coin. Moreover, BTC has become the benchmark for all cryptocoin.
legendary
Activity: 3108
Merit: 1115
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
September 22, 2016, 10:36:35 AM
I really think it could. Its superior in so many ways.

Jap, same here, not saying it WILL happen, but there's a chance...

XMR is better technologically and 'monetarilly'...
BTC has the network-effect though...

let's see what's more important in the long run...



Btc planted a good seed. XMR did it too. It is long shot to reach bitcoin at its value but if you believe in it then why not. Supporting more crypto is fine with me too.
member
Activity: 110
Merit: 14
September 22, 2016, 10:30:46 AM
Yes it could. The fungibility issue does not get enough play.

Bitcoin would crash tomorrow were the FBI to announce that such and such specific Bitcoins were forfeit because they had been used in a drug transaction/kidnapping/etc. Of course the agency would be unable to actually seize the coins, but they would immediately become toxic on any exchange and worthless for any purpose. This would break Bitcoin as a whole.

Were this to occur I think Bitcoin and the anonymous altcoins would exchange market caps in a very short period of time.
sr. member
Activity: 514
Merit: 258
September 22, 2016, 10:02:52 AM
I really think it could. Its superior in so many ways.

Jap, same here, not saying it WILL happen, but there's a chance...

XMR is better technologically and 'monetarilly'...
BTC has the network-effect though...

let's see what's more important in the long run...

legendary
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1217
September 22, 2016, 09:45:13 AM
I really think it could. Its superior in so many ways.
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
September 20, 2016, 03:50:27 PM
Monero will not go anywhere until it is easy to use. Anonymous coins will not become immensely popular until a significantly large amount of people are concerned enough about their privacy. I never understood what monero has that isn't in the other crypto note coins (with all respect to monero devs). All they have is more publicity and therefore a larger community.
Yes monero is not gonna get any way near to bitcoin and i would say it has no comparison to be made with bitcoins.Monero is totally anonymous coin and cant become that much popular.But neither monero nor any other altcoin in any way near to be able to compete with bitcoin.
sr. member
Activity: 514
Merit: 258
September 20, 2016, 03:47:06 PM
Re: Could Monero replace Bitcoin soon?

Short answer, No.
Long answer, Fuck no.

Don't you have anything else to waste time on?

like euh, I don't know, searching for evidence to prove your empty claims: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/i-wonder-how-much-xmr-is-actually-used-on-the-dnm-1621525

Your credibility is nill...

best regards


I can care less about proving myself to you or the other low rollers here in the forums.  I just feel bad for people getting scammed and cant bring myself to allow people to peddle scams and take peoples money. Just want newbs to WAKE UP and be aware of these scams in the altcoin world.

oh please, a 3-month-old shill account wanting to defend newbies... guess what, you're the newbie here, and it's obvious you know jack shit about monero and didn't do any due diligence at all... If you want to come over as serious, then please, start backing your claims with some proof, otherwise you gonna be called out for what you are, a shilling newbie who knows nothing and is just throwing empty airballs in the air trying to spread FUD...

your credibility is now less than nill, well done!

best regards
Pages:
Jump to: