Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 337. (Read 2032265 times)

I like your posts but IPs is one of the least worries for privacy in a coin, the "worst" they could ascertain is that you made a transaction to... somewhere, a Monero crackdown would only Straisant effect it, they can't even block torrents, how would a ban take place? They can't ban it everywhere in the world at same time.

The problem is not cryptocurrencies being illegal but illegal transactions to obtain illegal services and goods, what Bitcoin too enable and can't fix, the fix for this is going after the bad guys offering illegal services and goods, the same way torrents are not illegal but what you share on them can be, well you can't know what people are "sharing" in the Monero network so you either ban everything or try work around the regulatory aspects Monero enable, then we'll know what is being anti-fragile, what is being disruptive, no matter how TPTB try to handle Monero it won't crack and turn back on its users in form a digital financial panopticon like Bitcoin is already.

now more general: being anti-Monero because it enables privacy is doing what the enemy wants, when did hardcores bitcoiners became the enemies of our true financial freedom? I have each day more respect for the bitcoiners that get it not mattering if they are in Monero or not, then for ones that say Monero won't make it for being "too anonymous"

i hope the 1MB cap core devs realize that their new customer, the NASDAQ, will require ongoing cheap tx fees:

Under a colored coin system, small fractions of bitcoin can be designated to represent much larger values. Users need to purchase some amount of bitcoins in order to move them, but bitcoins are divisible to eight decimal places. With the bitcoin exchange rate around $230 today, an issuer could purchase a thousandth of one for less than 25 cents and subdivide it into smaller pieces for distribution to investors.

http://www.americanbanker.com/news/bank-technology/nasdaq-signals-confidence-in-bitcoin-not-just-the-blockchain-1074405-1.html

Uh, no. You are misreading something.


No you can't. It is totally different cryptography at the transaction level, and would require at least a soft fork, but that is very messy and far more complex than any existing or proposed soft forks, meaning it has essentially zero chance to happen in practice. It could and probably will happen on a side chain, but that raises various other issues.

There are other differences like an actual deployed (and somewhat stress tested) mechanism for managing the blocksize without a hard limit.

He can't say I didn't warn him not to make such pronouncements (did he really call for $300K price for Monero  I doubt it.) and handhold investors in HODLing during the downturn.

They need a market case. Maybe the game coin idea (but not understanding why game players want an anonymous coin). Maybe the idea that when the first fungibility violations hit the newswire, then investors will start flooding in (but I argue against TPTB shooting themselves in the foot). Maybe investors wanting their gains to be anonymous given the war on cash coming (just seems like most investors are complacent on this point at this time).

Monero has lost ~90% of it's value vs. BTC since last September and doesn't seem to even be listed on cryptsy. Not exactly overtaking Bitcoin here.

The only difference I can see with it compared to Bitcoin is it offers decentralized and trustless mixing, as per these diagrams.






You can implement the exact same distributed and trustless mixing mechanisms in wallets that live on top of Bitcoin. Sorry but I see nothing innovative or unique here. Just a price pump.

Sometimes I feel you should have some acid to relieve yourself of the irrational fear of government (it helps). You are the most government-fearing person that I know, and that is not fitting for an alpha-male. You should conduct your life such that the government anticipates how much they lose if they try to harass you, and leave you alone.

The game is not associated with any government, jurisdiction or law. It is just a game. Like playing Monopoly. It is your problem if you feel that the government has the right to infringe your playing a game. I don't give them such a right concerning mine.

The distasteful voice is because I have a distaste for government, and would rather not speak about it. I also seldom speak about shit that sticks to the sole of my shoe. And I don't lift my hand to remove it, same as I don't lift my hand to remove the government. But I don't touch it either.

yeah, i thought of that too.

i think it's going to be a huge win.

Well, there's a pretty decent argument that coins that share little to no code with Bitcoin and break significantly with its design principles with Bitcoin aren't really "altcoins" at all in the original sense (which was more like Bitcoin forks). That doesn't make them good technologies or good investments, but they're at least different. That's a start.

This is exactly what 21 Inc. will be doing…adding bitcoin miners to devices like cellphones, thereby giving "mined morsels" to potentially millions of new devices.  I'm very excited to see how this plays out!

Many of Monero's new adopters/investors come from outside the Bitcoin community, though I'm not entirely sure it is for the right reasons. The most common is being vaguely aware of Bitcoin but feeling they missed it. That may be an indication of a problem with Bitcoin's speculative pumping being getting ahead of its (nearly non-existent) adoption. I question whether these are the right reasons because I saw a lot of the same thing happening in 2013 when people looked for cheaper altcoins (generally pure trash like LTC or worse) and got slaughtered.

Some (e.g. Krawitz) claim that the bigger the better and investment drives adoption, but I'm not sure about that. At some point it becomes too expensive, the fundamentals don't support it (or at least, don't appear to), that just scares people off, discouraging further adoption and encouraging (smart and dumb both) investment elsewhere.

Bitcoin investors really should hedge though. The logic of that is as about as close to infallible as you can get. Underweight if you like, but still hedge.

To be honest, that's probably the way to go for true altcoins (alt-ledgers, not spinoffs). If you take my arguments posted over the past few days on altcoins seriously, the conclusion seems to be either abandon the investment before it cools off (gets spun off or sidechained by Bitcoin) or aim for the "Hail Mary pass" from outside virgin investors and users. Note that near term I think Monero will rise against the other alts; I'm talking strictly long term here.

Even I, Mr. Bitcoin Maximalist, would invest in an altcoin if it looked like it would somehow be successfully pushed to a huge audience that was separate and much bigger than Bitcoin's community,* assuming it had utility. That would be because, in a very real sense, it would not be an altcoin at all. To those people, to that new population, it would be exactly what Bitcoin was to us. Sui generis. "The WWL." However, it would be a tough trick at this stage to get them to forget/ignore Bitcoin enough to make this dynamic work. Ripple can kind of do it even though everyone knows Bitcoin now, because their product (giving them the benefit of the doubt that their product is even a thing) is different enough. Add in the need for a track record and the hurdle is even higher.

*Extreme example to make the point: you find an alien planet that won't interface with Earth for many more decades/centuries and launch it there. What purpose would there be in referring to it as an "altcoin" anymore? It's the WWL. It's THE blockchain.

Thank you very much. It is the second pic I've seen of Szabo which reaffirms the first.

That and it enables the state to steal property, not just through negative real rates that comes from inflation, but also from negative nominal rates.

Forcing everyone off of cash and onto bank accounts with negative interest rates, starts to look an awful lot like illegal seizure of property and a 4th amendment violation. Not that that matters at all today.

Yes, there will be. Monero will be $300k at the end of this year. :-) Do not forget to take your meds.

skimmed the current site but couldn't find any specifics on initial distribution or supply.

It seems reasonable, and afair TPTB have cracked down on exchanges for game currencies because they do realize this threat.

Is Monero ready to resist such crackdowns? Does it have decentralized exchanges? Can the authorities not track down IP addresses and make examples to discourage others from subverting a ban?

Might work.

My idea is an area that is more targeted to the market of those who need anonymity and thus might be more willing to fight. Not sure if game players want to pick an unnecessary fight with the government.

There'll be a new monero investments website soon as well, which presents the investment case in XMR without basing it on BTC, and also lists the options to buy it directly with fiat.

the disingenuous thing about that policy is that it is an attempt not to force consumers to buy things in the real economy, but to force them to speculate in assets like stocks and bonds so that the current holders (the financial elite) can dump to the masses at a higher top.

I don't disagree, but I have assumed the usual context here is basically Bitcoin investors "branching out" into some altcoins. One could make a somewhat valid criticism that this context is changing to small degree, the best examples being Ripple and Ethereum and maybe Dogecoin, where they are actively trying to source users and investors from outside the Bitcoin community (BitShares to an extent as well). As long as Bitcoin is "the main attraction" into the space, which as far as I can tell it overwhelmingly is, the points I made seem to hold.