Pages:
Author

Topic: Petition for Monero to have its own board, so we don't bother the altcoins. - page 3. (Read 8317 times)

hero member
Activity: 798
Merit: 500
Monero needs it's own board on Bitcointalk.  
  
I'm pretty sure we can all agree on that.  

Well, following the logic you present in this thread, Monero ought to use its own Monerotalk and stay away from Bitcointalk. If it's as important and significant as you think it is, Bitcointalk will become obsolete and Monerotalk will be number one anyway. Right?
hero member
Activity: 714
Merit: 504
i don't know much about monero tech but the name is sound like gay shit. it's already turn me off to even try it  Grin

Well, nazis and homophobes aren't really our target userbase.
hero member
Activity: 672
Merit: 500
i don't know much about monero tech but the name is sound like gay shit. it's already turn me off to even try it  Grin

You posted yesterday too but didnt receive a reply, trying to troll again?

Dell, Braintree, newegg.com.. plus thousands of mom and pop stores
monero = what's that? never heard of it = gay name #no offence to gay people#

According to your signature -  if we're all love crypto and altcoins then buy into old coin with legitimate dev team which do pushing out the techs

Monero is 1 year old with honest devs with technology theymos, gmaxwell, petertodd BTC devs found interesting

Trolling Confirmed
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1000
i don't know much about monero tech but the name is sound like gay shit. it's already turn me off to even try it  Grin
hero member
Activity: 798
Merit: 500
I think it's probably fair to say that the Monero community is the most annoying and delusional of all wannabe-Bitcoin "replacements".

But then again, it's all pretty obsolete either way (given that the world doesn't and most likely won't ever care about cryptocurrency on a significant scale)...

Someone who talks about privacy finds Monero delusional Cheesy

Where do I say Monero is delusional? Monero isn't (it's a currency), but a (large?) part of its community apparently is, for thinking it would somehow "revolutionize the world", "be the successor to Bitcoin", "become global reserve currency" etc...

Wait what? What are you doing here on this forum? Raking in Fiat?

No, just being realistic -- plus I'm not emotionally attached to any cryptocoin, you see.
legendary
Activity: 2128
Merit: 1119
Just use a forum dedicated to your coin if you want it to be separate....this is Bitcointalk.org not altcointalk.org.
sr. member
Activity: 770
Merit: 250
Toknormal, you are clueless. You said that fungibility isn't "invisible money", and further went on to say that the money changing hands validates the system(No money, no trust or something similar). That is Monero, with Monero you see money moving, but you don't know where. One one hand you're explaining how fungibility is in your view, and that's exactly how Monero works. Then, on the other hand you're saying Monero is "invisible money", thereby contradicting everything you've previously said. I know you're doing this because you're a Dash fanboy, and the coins are in competition, but at least don't contradict yourself.

You seriously need to go and rethink your arguments, you're contradicting yourself like a fool.

repost-


Go learn cryptography.

It isn't me you need to sell this idea. It's the universe of potential adopters.

They are not interested in cryptography and have no intentions of "learning" it. Thats why - in the absence of a trusted third party - you need public consensus to assert the veracity of any monetary medium.


Look, you're quite honestly...clueless on the concept of fungibility. It looks as when you describe "opaque" blockchains like Monero's, you think of a brick wall or a black hole. In case you didn't know, that's not what it is. By Opaque, it means that transactions done between sender and receiver are unable to be connected to each other. So the money can be seen, but the beginning and end destinations cannot i.e, you can see just money, nothing else but money moving back and forth.


This is what you said:
"What inhibits Bitcoin's fungibility is not the fact that the blockchain is transparent, it's the fact that detectable patterns can build up over time which allows certain parts of the money supply to be identified distinctly from others. The answer to this problem isn't to bury the whole blockchain and make it invisible - because then you don't have money any more - it is to mitigate the formation of sustainably traceable patterns of monetary movement."

--- Monero does exactly that. With Monero there is no "sustainable traceable patterns of monetary movement". With Monero the only thing that's visible, is the money supply, and the things that are invisible is... well everything else.

You've basically explained that Monero fits your definition and view of fungibility perfectly. Do you see that now? Absolutely clueless, and very, very disappointing on your part.
edit-
legendary
Activity: 3066
Merit: 1188

I don't want to live in a world where my paycheck can be viewed on the public ledger, my purchases can be viewed, etc etc. My life and the subsequent acquisition of material goods for my sustenance is not a commodity

I'm sorry but they already are - at least in the sense that thousands of third parties require to access and view your entire banking and credit card history in order for it to function. In the fiat world you can’t operate financially without handing your data over to third parties.

Cryptocurrency has a different privacy model - some things are more private than fiat and others are less so, but the balance is far better, even with bitcoin. In this case you can operate without any counterparty support because your private key has to be known only by you. The fact that the other half of the blockchain (the 'public addresses') has a public manifestation is irrelevant. ALL monetary media do otherwise they can't act as monetary media.

The fungibility issue is a separate matter but I don't think people can even begin to address that without understanding the existing satoshi privacy model and how powerfully it supports classic monetary properties. In essence, the beauty of it is that it optimises public consensus (and therefor confidence & value) independently of privacy which is consistent with all monetary media since the dawn of man. The answer to the fungibility problem IMO is to enhance this model, not throw it out the window.

To hack your metaphor, people trusted flight because they SAW it happen. They didn't just blindly go "i'm a prole, peeps be getting onto planes, guess I'll do that too". Nowadays people trust flight because it has a track record, just like bitcoin is proving its track record.

You seem to be saying that people will implicitly "trust this blockchain because they saw that other one work" and therefore don't need to support public confidence on an ongoing basis. Returning to the plane metaphor, a technology's "track record" is only as good as its last flight. What happens when people have billions of dollars of value at stake in an opaque blockchain and rumours start up left right and centre about hacks, faulty wallets, double spends, cracked cryptography and heists ? Where’s the accountability supposed to come from to mitigate such attacks on confidence ? Everybody swaps viewkeys with everybody else ?

I’m afraid the challenges involved in sustaining monetary confidence in the absence of any trusted countarparty are massive. There is not one inch of room for manoeuvre on this and it’s infinitely more important than privacy. Bitcoin has been able to withstand a 5-year kicking and drubbing because of its transparent blockchain, not in spite of it.

also on your public consensus bit, or "monetary veracity", I'm always fascinated by this argument because I can guarantee you its damn near impossible to find any of this information out in our current financial system. I.e., if I were to go to a bank and demand proof that my funds are real, fungible, etc., etc - I doubt that 1) i would be convinced and 2) it would take less than a day. So, people don't care.

That’s because the funds in your bank account are not so called “base money”, like metals or commodities. They are basically derivatives which are levered off a capital base and managed for you in bookkeeping accounts. With cryptocurrencies, however, we are re-inventing base money. We’re effectively going back through the whole process (albeit at timelapse photography rates) by which gold went from a piece of rock to a universally accepted monetary medium and in that regard things like public consensus, fungibility and other monetary properties very much DO matter.

If crypto eventually takes hold, banking concepts may be re-invented where you no longer hold the private keys to actual blockchain addresses. Instead you simply operate an account maintained by a third party containing money backed by cryptocurrency as its capital base. We would then have come full circle - who knows - but I see this as kind of likely in the long run because at the moment fiat money is backed by counterparty debt which is effectively unlimited, so crypto would at least be an improvement.

You can do your financials on the public ledger and get blasted with advertisements based on your financial habits, get insurance readjustments based on scrutiny of your daily life, etc etc.

This just is not a fair appraisal of how crypto (any blockchain) works IMO.

You are not connected to an address in the way that you are with a fiat bank account. Blockchain addresses have no association with individuals other than transient ones and certainly never at a protocol level. De-anonymisation has to be done from sources other than the blockchain. For example, people post their tipping addresses in forum posts or they register withdrawal addresses from an exchange. There are three reasons I can see why that is a million miles away from having your “paycheck viewed on the public ledger”:

[1] - mixing technologies will enhance the fungibility of the coin supply without adversely impacting on its transparency, thereby optimising its existing privacy model way beyond the threshold where it might adversely impact on its value

[2] - blockchain addresses do not correspond to our existing notion of bank accounts. You can create 100 of them in an instant just by opening a new wallet

[3] - if crypto ever gets to the point where you’re getting your paycheck denominated in it, you probably won’t be getting paid with a blockchain transaction anyway because there’ll be an entire meta infrastructure payments system in place that is only backed by crypto, (such as exists in supermarket payment processors today)

On purely privacy aspects, you make some valid points. But you're making two humungous assumptions with very little basis:

[1] - that what you're keeping private has any value
[2] - that it will be endowed with value simply by virtue of it being private

Thats why I say, "address privacy over confidence and value at your peril"  Wink

hero member
Activity: 672
Merit: 500
I'm pretty sure Monero developers are just a bunch of trolls. They created a coin to fill their greedy self, not to make crypto a better place. Monero offers NO advantages that are different from other Altcoin's. They need to get their head out of their a** and realize they are just another Altcoin, and that Litecoin will always be better than them no matter how much they hate it.

There are only two DECENT coins on that list, and that'd be NEM & Unobtanium. I would like the writer of that article explain to me how a CLONE of DOGECOIN is good? Lol'ed

So do these coins offer any advantages which seem to be decent to you? Were you just trolling and spamming this thread?
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008
these points are fine if you want to live in that world. I don't. I don't want to live in a world where my paycheck can be viewed on the public ledger, my purchases can be viewed, etc etc. My life and the subsequent acquisition of material goods for my sustenance is not a commodity.

primarily, and this is possibly the most salient point in all of this, is that if Monero (or cryptonote) came first - then yes, people would have looked at cryptocurrencies and gone "thats a bunch of nonsense". So here, bitcoin served to introduce the concept of a cryptocurrency because people could watch it work very easily. To hack your metaphor, people trusted flight because they SAW it happen. They didn't just blindly go "i'm a prole, peeps be getting onto planes, guess I'll do that too". Nowadays people trust flight because it has a track record, just like bitcoin is proving its track record.

As mentioned before, you can watch how cryptonote works - in your words, "the veracity of the very transaction machinery", it just requires more diving into the machinery.

also on your public consensus bit, or "monetary veracity", I'm always fascinated by this argument because I can guarantee you its damn near impossible to find any of this information out in our current financial system. I.e., if I were to go to a bank and demand proof that my funds are real, fungible, etc., etc - I doubt that 1) i would be convinced and 2) it would take less than a day. So, people don't care.

And as I've mentioned before, if you really think financial privacy is not a problem then please post your fiat bank account numbers, transaction history, etc etc.

As mentioned before, both will work and more likely than not they will co exist somehow. You can do your financials on the public ledger and get blasted with advertisements based on your financial habits, get insurance readjustments based on scrutiny of your daily life, etc etc.

I won't. Its that simple.
legendary
Activity: 3066
Merit: 1188

I'm going to try to explain this like you're five.....you might not be quite at that mental level yet

Show the bitcoin blockchain to the Average Joe, and he doesn't see a damn thing, just a bunch of letters and numbers.......Understanding, interpreting, and verifying that blockchain requires an understanding of the protocol, and being able to do things like verify secp256k1 signatures and sha256 hashes (two bits of complex cryptographic math) in order to tell that the blocks are valid, the transactions are valid, and the outputs (coins) you receive are legitimate.

Given that smooth sees the entire the financial world through a pair of cryptographic specs I suppose this glaringly myopic post is understandable. Lets spell out the 2 concepts concerned here.

Achieving Monetary Veracity through Public Consensus
User sees a balance in their wallet. User goes to blockchain.info to verify that its "understanding" of that address balance agrees with what their (potentially hacked) wallet is telling them. They also check other sources on the internet. The fact that the rest of the world can see that balance and that multiple other sources around the cryptocurrency sphere also report it convinces the user that:

a) the balance is genuine
b) the balance represents an indigenous part of the network money supply because we can follow an (albeit anonymous) monetary audit trail back to other similarly verified addresses on the network
c) following from (b), the address balance is substitutable for and equivalent to the rest of the money supply for that currency
d) their subjective opinion on points a) b) and c) is consistent with the view of all other network users

The aggregation of those four points across the whole network is what gives rise to the fact that a simple bunch of 'numbers' floating around can accrue exchangeable monetary value endorsed by public consensus.

Cryptography and ‘math’ are no substitute for public consensus. People do not get on planes because some engineer handed them a sheet of aerodynamic equations. They do so because they see other people getting on them and not dropping out of the sky like bricks.

Viewkeys and “What is an Audit ?”
This brings us to the wild idea that somehow the much vaunted viewkey is a vehicle for audit and "statutory compliance". When I first saw this feature I thought it must be some kind of joke. For a start, no compliance auditor is going to be convinced of anything when the veracity of the very transaction machinery itself can’t even be audited.

Secondly, compliance audits in the fiat world involve complex analyses of internal bookkeeping, tax records and mutual squaring of multiple reporting sources and banking records. They only have any statutory significance because there is a legal contract of ownership covering every asset including bank accounts. In crypto, no such contractual association exists between a legal entity and a blockchain address. Handing a compliance auditor a bunch of “viewkeys” is meaningless. The only type of audit which has any significance in crypto is the one that replaces the banking system’s role in the oversight of the financial machinery - i.e. the public consensus audit I described above.

In that regard and consistent with classic principles of audit going back centuries, we are talking about verifying 2 perspectives: [1] - the current state of balances, [2] - how they got there. In Bitcoin, this requirement is supported (for example) by trotting off to blockchain.info and verifying exactly those parameters: i.e.:

[1] - the originating address balance prior to the transaction
[2] - the destination address balance prior to the transaction
[3] - the originating address balance post transaction
[4] - the destination address balance post transaction
[5] - the documented transaction record and amount

Thats a transaction audit and the fact that it’s open is what makes Bitcoin a viable monetary medium independently of a trusted third party since public consensus can act as arbiter in its place. Ditch that and all you're left with is an encrypted bookkeeping program.

member
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
★YoBit.Net★ 100+ Coins Exchange & Dice
I'm pretty sure Monero developers are just a bunch of trolls. They created a coin to fill their greedy self, not to make crypto a better place. Monero offers NO advantages that are different from other Altcoin's. They need to get their head out of their a** and realize they are just another Altcoin, and that Litecoin will always be better than them no matter how much they hate it.
hero member
Activity: 672
Merit: 500
I think it's probably fair to say that the Monero community is the most annoying and delusional of all wannabe-Bitcoin "replacements".

But then again, it's all pretty obsolete either way (given that the world doesn't and most likely won't ever care about cryptocurrency on a significant scale)...

Someone who talks about privacy finds Monero delusional  Cheesy

If you want a peaceful quiet life, you wouldn't want to be rich and famous (=> a lot of trouble).

I'm pretty sure enjoying your privacy and observing your own creation anonymously is the smarter decision -- much more fun too.

You can rest assured cash is not going to be replaced by any cryptocurrency.

Going cashless is all about increasing the influence of central banks. And it makes sense: why pay with cash if one can pay via card or phone...

Keep in mind that the world's financial system doesn't really have any place for Bitcoin or any of its alternatives at all. It's a tiny little drop of "alternative culture" in a vast ocean of power. What we'll definitely see is a big(ger) international role of the Renminbi...

Wait what? What are you doing here on this forum? Raking in Fiat?
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1000
The monero guys should do something with the memory hogging client first. When that's done then I don't mind if they get a child board Smiley.

Compile and use Github head instead of the previous tagged release, and you'll end up with this:



That's testnet and mainnet.

Thanks I'm going to try that Smiley.
donator
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1060
GetMonero.org / MyMonero.com
The monero guys should do something with the memory hogging client first. When that's done then I don't mind if they get a child board Smiley.

Compile and use Github head instead of the previous tagged release, and you'll end up with this:



That's testnet and mainnet.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1000
The monero guys should do something with the memory hogging client first. When that's done then I don't mind if they get a child board Smiley.
sr. member
Activity: 327
Merit: 250

Or maybe you should be judging the currency based on its merits and not a single proponent of the technology who's writing style you find distasteful?  


Oh *snap*

I wish more people would do DD before buying into crypto instead of just buying because of "community support" etc...if they did, they would see the great things that Monero has going for it.
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 504
Are you sure you aren't someone who hates Monero trying to obnoxiously question my motives while pretending you honestly don't know that I like Monero? You definitely look like that to me 
  If you want higher quality responses, then give me higher quality conversation as input.  My responses aren't going to be of a higher caliber than the useless drivel that the trolls are tossing around. 
 
I don't care too much about Monero. I owned some last year or very early this year when they had that big run, but sold out. I just bought some more. One of the things that made me interested was the way the Dev team handled themselves, in general. Most of the followers handled themselves well too.

Seeing idiots hyping them up makes them look less attractive, to me.
 
 
Are you suggesting that I should completely change my personality to make you feel more comfortable with your speculatory investment? 
 
And are you sure my master plan is not to pretend to be annoyingly in love with Monero to the point where it turns you off to it, and I am able to scoop up your Monero for cheaper because you are no longer a factor...? 
 
Or maybe you should be judging the currency based on its merits and not a single proponent of the technology who's writing style you find distasteful? 
 
I assure you I am as informed (or better) about Monero as you, and I'm sorry you dislike my exuberance. 
 
If you decide not to hold Monero as a result of your disdain, I'm sorry for your loss.
legendary
Activity: 1190
Merit: 1000
Are you sure you aren't someone who hates Monero trying to obnoxiously question my motives while pretending you honestly don't know that I like Monero? You definitely look like that to me 
  If you want higher quality responses, then give me higher quality conversation as input.  My responses aren't going to be of a higher caliber than the useless drivel that the trolls are tossing around. 
 
I don't care too much about Monero. I owned some last year or very early this year when they had that big run, but sold out. I just bought some more. One of the things that made me interested was the way the Dev team handled themselves, in general. Most of the followers handled themselves well too.

Seeing idiots hyping them up makes them look less attractive, to me.
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 504
 
  
About what I would expect from you.  
  
Trying to use some kind of middle-school edgy language, and then not even having the guts to stand behind it without some kind of disclaimer.  What are you, 13 years old?  Go do your algebra homework, and maybe one day understanding cryptography will be within your grasp.  
  
By your terrible logic, bitcoin was doomed in 2009 because no one had ever heard of it.  
  
This thread is about how Monero needs its own board because we are tired of trolls from other alts getting annoyed at our success.  Your unwanted invasion into a successful petition only validates our claim that Monero definitely needs its own section on Bitcointalk.

Are you sure you aren't someone who hates Monero trying to be obnoxious while pretending you like Monero. You definitely look like that to me

Are you sure you aren't someone who hates Monero trying to obnoxiously question my motives while pretending you honestly don't know that I like Monero? You definitely look like that to me 
 
If you want higher quality responses, then give me higher quality conversation as input.  My responses aren't going to be of a higher caliber than the useless drivel that the trolls are tossing around. 
 
Pages:
Jump to: