Topic: delete - page 2. (Read 5233 times)

Some of the changes in the reported hash rate are just random. The hash rate can't be measured directly it is just inferred from how fast the network is solving blocks, but that is a random process with significant estimation error.

That happened 2 weeks ago. Could've been a botnet, but there were improvements to tsiv's ccminer fork + fixes to Claymore's AMD miner etc. that could equally be responsible for it. A "mysterious" rise would be for it to double up in an hour.

The hashrate of Monero did *mysteriously* rise from the mid 14MH/s to over 19MH/s and the price didn't even rise to warrant the rise in hashrate so someone out there must be doing something.

We aren't squirming or writhing, we're merely rolling our eyes at those constantly returning to eat their own vomit on the topic. It gets tiresome.

It took Bitcoin 5.5 years to reach those transaction volumes, and loads of merchant adoption.

I'm confident we will have solved the "problem", or it will be shown to be a non-issue, long before we reach the middle of 2019. Until then, there are far more important things for us to focus on than rush out a compromise that "solves" the issue but has the nasty side-effect of compromising privacy. If we do solve this it will be a collective effort from us and some terribly clever people, and it will be a verifiably cryptographically sound method that does not reduce the anonymity set.

300 mb a day at Bitcoin volumes? Holy shit, it's worse than I thought. I'd say the project's success or failure hinges nearly 100% on your ability to reduce bloat. Anonymint said it won't happen, but it'll be fun to watch you guys squirm and writhe as you try. I'm still open to making an investment in Monero, it all depends on whether you guys are useless or not.

smooth isn't an idiot. Those are two separate points he's making and they are unrelated, you're conflating them:

1. Monero's average daily transactions are currently at around 3.3% of Bitcoin's average daily transactions.

2. Monero is consistently in the top 10 coins by exchange volume (often 3rd or 4th). CoinGecko gives a nice overview of liquidity, or Coinmarketcap -> sort by volume is also a good indicator. Exchange volume is very variable, of course.

Exchange volume is not a blockchain transaction. The number of transactions occurring on the Monero blockchain per day compared to bitcoin is minuscule.

The true ratio is closer to 3%

Because it has happened so fast people do not understand how Monero has eclipsed 99% of altcoins. It is now #3 or #4 in terms of exchange volume. Blockchain volume ranking is probably comparable. http://www.coingecko.com/

We've already pointed out that the difficulty flaw he found is incorrect (until demonstrably proven otherwise), and the blockchain "bloat" attack is something that we are aware of and are monitoring. Any coin with sufficiently low value (ie. new) is susceptible to a bloat attack until it becomes too expensive to do so.

BCX does not have some magical power to "kill MRO dead". We have not "attacked" anyone who "spoke of these issues" in the past (although I certainly can get snappy when an argument becomes circuitous). Nobody has ever raised an issue with the difficulty retarget algorithm (because there is none that anyone has demonstrably found), and the general issue of blockchain bloat (inasmuch as the blockchain is linearly larger than Bitcoin's) has been discussed at length and various solutions / non-solutions suggested. Again: it's something we are going to solve, but it will not be something we solve right now.


I have dealt with BigVern quite a bit, and so I asked him about it directly. He spoke to BitJohn, who said the following:


Any conclusions drawn from this is an exercise best left to the reader.

I am going to mention this thread https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/share-your-ideas-on-what-to-replace-the-1-mb-block-size-limit-with-709970 because these issues also as well apply to Monero. The difference with Bitcoin is that I am on the opposite side of the argument here. We need to reduce the growth of the blocksize, rather than allow for its increase as is the case for Bitcoin. For this reason I am making the same suggestion here as I did in the above thread; namely to in addition require an increase in difficulty in order to allow for an increase in blocksize. So an increase in blocksize or the use of the fee penalty rule is only permissible if the difficulty is higher than the median difficulty of the last N blocks.

No - read what was discussed above, Monero fundamentals are NOT sound with its current issues. The issues are large and at this current time put a halt to any adoption what so ever.

Once again we shall thank BCX.

Seriously though, is there something special about monero? I saw Cryptonote having a bottun in their page "create your own cryptonote currency" or something similar. If monero could be attacked could it be that all other cryptonote copycats are vulnerable as well? I feel like history is repeating itself. After litecoin, we had hundreds of coins that had simply fork the code. Some of them had some "new features" but those were so badly developed that later discovered vulnerabilities forced them to hardfork. Making them go down in value and causing thousands of people to lose their money. I really hope that BCX is not joking around this time. We should maybe be thankfull about what he's doing this time. Because if you don't see what the devs of this coin are trying to do, then you might deserve to get burned. Trying to perserve a feeling of comfort and telling everyone that there's a bright future... BULLSHIT, no one is going to the moon. Especially not monero. A copycat that bases it's value to previously existing innovation. I thaught that I'd might never say that but this time I'm with BCX's side.

Here, invest in my spaceship company. I have these designs I got from some other guys and 20 tons of aluminum. The foundation is all there, so my first spaceship should be good to go in no time!

No, most "investors" simply see the Monero fundamentals are sound.

I am glad you are grounded enough to understand the position Monero is in.

I think the pockets of the Monero community however is different as they rush to make blanket statements which infer Monero is somehow already leagues above all other coins whilst turning a blind eye to the core issues that stand in the way of adoption.

You're conflating - web wallets do not promote centralisation in and of themselves. Satoshi even theorised that there would be a reduction in the number of full nodes, and for convenience sake SPV would become more popular. At any rate, even if there were only a few non-mining full nodes it would largely be irrelevant - centralisation is only a concern on the mining side, hence the 51% pool problem that has plagued Bitcoin.

I'm quite unsure as to why you're talking about "mainstream". We have alpha-level software that requires some comfort with the command line to operate. We keep saying this, but everyone keeps talking about "adoption" and "mainstream use". We're solving fundamental, extremely low-level problems, and well after they are solved we can consider "adoption" and "mainstream use".

Thankfully, Bitcoin is also pretty impossible for "mainstream" use, so it's probably a good idea to either clearly define "mainstream" or get off the merry-go-round.

At any rate, let me make this as clear as mud to everyone: Monero is far from ready for general consumption. We don't need to be reminded of that, since we're the ones saying it! Of course, usability is a long-term goal, and finding a solution to "bloat" (such as it is) falls squarely in the "usability" camp.

Monero is a different league to bloat. We are talking 100+gb in a very short timeframe. Long term 5+ years even worse

And web wallets etc promotes centralization. Everyone will depend on a minor few for the blockchain. DDoS it and watch the coin die.

The Monero bloat is fine for now when you have like 100 users. For mainstream, the cryptonote tech isn't anywhere close to being a viable solution.

What do you think happens in those countries with Bitcoin's current 20gb blockchain?

Web wallets, SPV-style wallets, off-chain services, etc. etc.

Absolute horseshit, let me tell you - NOBODY will download a 100 GB blockchain to use a currency. What about countries where internet speeds are not very high?

MRO? I dont know.
XMR? All good.