Topic: Is GRIN still a thing? - page 2. (Read 1406 times)

Understanding the complexity of the crypto market is a very difficult task as market conditions can change at any time. As you deal with the current market situation because a few months back only red market could be seen. I think many people were able to make good profits during this period especially those who were holding bitcoin. Honestly the name sounds so weird to me that I've lost track of the best buys of many top altcoins. To get profit from crypto you have to invest so if you don't want to invest then you won't get profit.

i agree with totally. Except quick get rich scheme. If you look at hashrate and downward spiral price, some of them get quite RICH with insider info.

We have to decide whenever we want to please the regulators (at the cost of low privacy and limited freedom) or people's best interests. Bitcoin was created with a "cypherpunk vision" as an antithesis to Fiat (which is backed by corrupt banks and governments). The approval of spot ETFs and the institutionalization of crypto is definitely not a good sign. Even if that means higher market prices over the long term.

Was it always about making money? Or was it about making our world a better place? People seem to be missing the bigger picture. Many want to get rick quick, even if that means giving up their privacy and freedom. I see GRIN as a unique project not tied to the hands of "Wall Street", evil banks, governments, or corporations. Same goes with Monero. These coins may be hated by many, but they're our only escape route to government censorship and surveillance.

I'm fine with GRIN going down in market price, as long as the core Blockchain network remains actively developed and maintained by the community. Hopefully, decentralization will prevail in the long run.

I think people were initially drawn to Grin's similarities to Bitcoin in that it was a new technology with an anonymous founder. However a few things have contributed to it's current perception of abandonment. First was the launch date. Right in the middle of a bear market where crypto sentiment was low. I think this could have affected investors risk factor and subsequently grin's funding in its tender early days.

Next was the way the monetary policy played out. I guess it was no surprise to anyone that the price would flatten out but 5 years is a long time in crypto, so many lost patience.

Then there was the transaction graph scandal. I still hear people say that mimblewimble has a fundamental flaw and this narrative is still holding.

There is still a loyal following and the mining economy is strong so I think that grin is far from dead. However I believe that some significant changes are needed for it's situation to change, whether that be internally (new developments) or even externally (demand for privacy coins).

Brosef, the only thing "institutional investors" are buying is Bitcoin, maybe some eth now. Certainly not the #272 trash token with insiders owning the vast majority of supply making promises about tech that no one gives a duck about. Good luck coming into unrelated threads to shill your trash in the future.

While the EU directive is definitely hostile against privacy coins, this is not entirely correct. What's going (probably, if the directive passes the EU parliament's vote) to be banned is crypto assets service providers offering privacy coins accounts (at least this is an interpretation which can be made for the text I quote below), not the usage of privacy coins.

Source (Art. 58, 1)

Your interpretation that this could decrease the interest of institutional investors, however, should be correct, as these operate on CEXes and ETFs or other similar products on regulated exchanges would then be impossible. But did institutional investors invest at any time in privacy coins? Only case I could identify is some "altcoin basket" product which could include Monero. I don't consider them important in this market segment (and much less for a small coin like Grin).

Dusk had a private sale, not an ICO, but go ahead, you have right to ignore and dismiss it as a scam even if their lead cryptographer is Dmitry Khovratovich. I am assuming you know the name if you are into privacy coin tech. Or cryptocurrencies in general.

And maybe you should revisit and read more about those new laws to understand what i meant. Because it sounds like you are dismissing this as fud. As it's really not up to your opinion if insitutional investors put money into them or any centralized exchanges deals with them. And you are totally free to go back to p2p ages, but maybe expect that marketcap going back with it. No one can prevent or would care about that pocket money trading. But trying to cash large amounts of it to fiat money, it will become increasinly problematic in time. And FATF travel rule isn't only EU thing you know.

Well there's always a choice. If we want btc or coins with anonymous transactions to go up in value, we need high liquidity and that happens by complying with regulations. If we want total freedom, or even anonymity we don't expect financial insitutions or centralized exchanges to deal with them.

And i totally get, how what i am saying is against whole early cryptopunk money ethos, but we have came a long way from the start, and laws are catching up with the people who are stealing cryptos. So cashing large amounts out in fiat money will become harder and will need good old money laundering in fiat money side.

I am assuming that you already know that if something doesn't have a blanket anonymity it doesn't mean it couldn't have privacy via ZK. And you probably know that is for everyone's best interest if our financial sector DLT complies with strict privacy laws in EU.

Did we surprise ?
Another developer left Grin project.

Maybe he is trolling too ?

If a privacy coin complies with KYC/AML, then it's NOT a true privacy coin at all. Crypto projects should remain neutral to help fulfill Satoshi's original vision. I guess Monero and GRIN are (and will always be) the best privacy coins in the world. Who cares if market prices go down in the long run? Bitcoin was never meant to please the regulators. It was created as an antithesis to the existing Fiat system backed by corrupt banks and governments. A coin that's truly-decentralized and private is what we need to help achieve freedom and self-sovereignity.

I sure hope GRIN Gets the attention it deserves in the development community, so it can become a "force to reckon with". With constant network improvements, GRIN will be able to last a lifetime. That's assuming it doesn't move away from decentralization over time. The future can't be predicted, so lets hope for the best.

If you think privacy is "already there" with Bitcoin, Ethereum, or almost every other coin...then you deserve to go to jail for buying drugs on the dnm or whatever 😸

At first, I was very excited to this project but after that, I stopped because it seems the "privacy coin narrative" seems becoming non sense in the world of cryptocurrency because the essence of cryptocurrency being anonymous or having privacy is already there, so these kinds of project seems become more redundant.

Grin has not died. The price has been stabilized at a lower side and it has a sizeable community of volunteers and privacy focused users.
It's still one of the popular mineable coin. Miners are another community that are keeping the coin alive. A coin is dead when there's no transaction volume. Grin is still listed and traded on some centralized exchange like Gate.io. The problem with privacy focused coins are being unlisted from every popular exchange. There surely would be some unknown centralized exchange listing them but coinmarketcap won't track it and people would forget it.

Oh no the govt is going to ban Monero and Grin   I guess we better pack it up boys, o48o says we need to respect the EUSSR and their draconian bullshit, let's all pile into the ICO scam compliance bro "privacy" shitcoin that he's shilling.

Maybe, in the meanwhile new AML law in EU is going to ban all anonymous crypto payments. Only privacy preserving coin that i know that will be safe is Dusk, as their tech is going to be complying with eu AML laws, and their citadel tech can be used to identify the wallets, meaning that auditing is transactions is possible. But everything stays confidential to outsiders because kyc is build into zk tech.

Privacy coins being illegal means that there won't be any insitutional investors left and i don't see how privacy coins could have much liquidity value when it's gets harder and harder to convert to fiat money. So maybe it will stay hidden as money between people who won't mind possible criminal record. Who knows.

 
 GRIN MimbleWimble March developments and News #47

• GUI wallet import functionality.  
• MimbleWimble-python slatepacks.
• Ledger Hardware wallet bounty.
• Grinwish List.

Crypto land is always in need of privacy coins. Each has their unique approach for obfuscating transactions. Monero may be the most popular privacy coin, but that doesn't mean it's perfect. Grin is different from Monero and has its own set of advantages/disadvantages. It's very unfortunate to see it being abandoned by the original developer. It had potential to become a great XMR alternative with its "Mimblewimble" privacy technique. Not sure if there will be a community takeover for Grin. But at least, it does the job it's supposed to.

Maybe people will pay attention to it after governments increase their surveillance methods? With CBDCs on the brink of launch, privacy coins could become an option for those used to anonymous transactions with paper money. The future can't be predicted, so lets hope for the best.

I am planning to use Grin because I like the concept, and have downloaded Grin++. At a first glance it looks quite good (it's even one of the more visually attractive altcoin wallets I saw, I like the yellow-black combination) and easy to use, so I don't understand that much the problem some of you folks have with the GUI. Yes, I know it's not "official". And it seems to be at least partly based on Electron. But AFAIK on Ethereum the GUI wallets are also provided by third parties.

I don't know why Grin is so low valued. Perhaps it has to do with the general problem of decentralized altcoins to have less funds for marketing, in particular for social media shilling. Perhaps it's due to the 51% attack it suffered some years ago, or even the perception of people that governments are taking action against privacy coins (Monero's performance was also underwhelming this year). But it can be seen currently as an opportunity to onboard new people - and what is valued very low can provide good profits even if it doesn't reach the top coins.

And no, I don't think Grin "isn't necessary" because Monero exists. The privacy technology is very different, with unique advantages and disadvantages. If Monero for example fails because of some kind of attack, perhaps the Grin algorithm has characteristics which make it less vulnerable.

For example, in the last days Monero network saw a lot of activity which may be spam transactions. It is possible that these came from chain analysis companies trying to lower the privacy level of the Monero users, because in the "ring signature" model the more "known" participants of a ring-signed transaction there are, the less private are the remaining ones. I still don't think Monero is unsafe or not private enough due to this reason, because afaik if you're cautious you can still have a much higher level of privacy than with Bitcoin even if 50% of the txes were chain analysis spam permanently (and also this spam would be expensive if sustained for a long time). But afaik this kind of attack isn't possible with Grin in this way (correct me if I'm wrong, I have only a rudimentary understanding of MimbleWimble), so it has an advantage.

Ok you fucking Eloncoin chatgpt spambot, thanks for your informed and enlightening opinion

It has unique tech features but unfortunately it just couldn’t catch up
with all the hype.
It also had lots of competition back then hence why after
a few years, its value decreased. It never improved and was blocked by a lot
of other newer and better coins.

Seeing as not a lot of people are still interested, I think it’s not gonna be able
to recover anymore or anytime soon.

One of Grin's selling points is that the underlying machinery is even simpler than Bitcoin, so I don't know that added complexity at the user interface level currently is meaningful if it is really simpler at its core. And it is certainly much much simpler machinery than Monero.

Another issue that a critic might raise about Monero (or Bitcoin) is the rapidity of its emission schedule and unfairly rewarding insiders (and this is doubly true about Monero because of its even faster emission than BTC and the issue of crippleminer, claymore, etc.).

I think there's plenty of space for something that is simpler and lighter weight than BTC, maybe almost as private as XMR, and offering a much more fair emission schedule to late comers than any other project in the whole cryptoverse.