It was nice to hear Andreas take a non-bias approach at Monero.
He does appear to have some more research he needs to do before giving it the nod of approval.
Will be cool to see a section of the podcast where Monero is discussed in great depth.
Topic: [XMR] Community effort to get Monero airtime on Lets talk Bitcoin. (Read 3037 times)
September 16, 2014, 01:56:39 PM
September 16, 2014, 01:05:29 PM
Do we have a volunteer from the core team that would want to be on LTB? I feel that the key talking points will be tech related. For example explaining ring signatures in simple terms will be important as will comparing Monero against BTC, DRK, Zerocash/Zerocoin, ANC, BBr, etc, etc. I'd say that only someone with a strong tech background would be up to the task.
I'm busy with relocating to Malla for the moment. But by mid-October, I will be available.I'll try and get something setup for then.
September 10, 2014, 09:34:46 PM
the mere site of the word Monero is really starting to make me sick..
September 04, 2014, 06:58:56 PM
Do we have a volunteer from the core team that would want to be on LTB? I feel that the key talking points will be tech related. For example explaining ring signatures in simple terms will be important as will comparing Monero against BTC, DRK, Zerocash/Zerocoin, ANC, BBr, etc, etc. I'd say that only someone with a strong tech background would be up to the task.
I'm busy with relocating to Malla for the moment. But by mid-October, I will be available. September 02, 2014, 07:29:03 PM
One of the devs or rpietila should do the interview if it is a possibility. An actual interview and discussion on the podcast makes more sense.
Yes, ths would be interesting.Contact Adam right away!
Adam's on a rare vacation at the moment, but I imagine that once he gets back we could get in the queue for next week or the following without much trouble. I'm sure there are plenty of other people that are friendly with Adam, but if not I'll be happy to bring it up with him.
That sounds like a great idea!
Maybe we can use this as a plan B instead.
Do we have a volunteer from the core team that would want to be on LTB? I feel that the key talking points will be tech related. For example explaining ring signatures in simple terms will be important as will comparing Monero against BTC, DRK, Zerocash/Zerocoin, ANC, BBr, etc, etc. I'd say that only someone with a strong tech background would be up to the task.
August 28, 2014, 01:42:08 PM
One of the devs or rpietila should do the interview if it is a possibility. An actual interview and discussion on the podcast makes more sense.
Yes, ths would be interesting.Contact Adam right away!
Adam's on a rare vacation at the moment, but I imagine that once he gets back we could get in the queue for next week or the following without much trouble. I'm sure there are plenty of other people that are friendly with Adam, but if not I'll be happy to bring it up with him.
That sounds like a great idea!
Maybe we can use this as a plan B instead.
August 28, 2014, 12:26:26 PM
One of the devs or rpietila should do the interview if it is a possibility. An actual interview and discussion on the podcast makes more sense.
Yes, ths would be interesting.Contact Adam right away!
Adam's on a rare vacation at the moment, but I imagine that once he gets back we could get in the queue for next week or the following without much trouble. I'm sure there are plenty of other people that are friendly with Adam, but if not I'll be happy to bring it up with him.
August 27, 2014, 08:23:44 PM
I have some LTBcoin I'm willing to donate, but indeed, I would rather like an interview with one of the devs in stead of a 45sec advertisement
August 27, 2014, 06:45:20 PM
One of the devs or rpietila should do the interview if it is a possibility. An actual interview and discussion on the podcast makes more sense.
Yes, ths would be interesting.Contact Adam right away!
August 27, 2014, 06:39:52 PM
One of the devs or rpietila should do the interview if it is a possibility. An actual interview and discussion on the podcast makes more sense.
Yes it does, and anyone would want to hear that. But are the mutually exclusive?
It's not strictly mutually exclusive, but getting the former (payed interview) wouldn't help to get a good later (deep discussion). People knowing it would be payed mention, would put it in same category as shitcoins that are seeking any possible hype so hard.
Given the technological breakthrough we're talking about here, they should find out sooner or later anyway...
Trying to get the word out to Adam, Stephanie or Andreas (who in particular seems to be in a good mood to appreciate privacy aspects lately) is definitely an awesome idea!
August 27, 2014, 06:21:06 PM
...
Regulating BTC does not mean regulating all altcoins, though.
...
Regulating BTC does not mean regulating all altcoins, though.
...
Since you apparently didn't read the BitLicense draft language, here's section 200.2(m) for your review:
Quote
Virtual Currency means any type of digital unit that is used as a medium of exchange or a form of
digitally stored value or that is incorporated into payment system technology. Virtual Currency shall be broadly
construed to include digital units of exchange that (i) have a centralized repository or administrator; (ii) are
decentralized and have no centralized repository or administrator; or (iii) may be created or obtained by
computing or manufacturing effort. Virtual Currency shall not be construed to include digital units that are used
solely within online gaming platforms with no market or application outside of those gaming platforms, nor
shall Virtual Currency be construed to include digital units that are used exclusively as part of a customer
affinity or rewards program, and can be applied solely as payment for purchases with the issuer and/or other
designated merchants, but cannot be converted into, or redeemed for, Fiat Currency;"
digitally stored value or that is incorporated into payment system technology. Virtual Currency shall be broadly
construed to include digital units of exchange that (i) have a centralized repository or administrator; (ii) are
decentralized and have no centralized repository or administrator; or (iii) may be created or obtained by
computing or manufacturing effort. Virtual Currency shall not be construed to include digital units that are used
solely within online gaming platforms with no market or application outside of those gaming platforms, nor
shall Virtual Currency be construed to include digital units that are used exclusively as part of a customer
affinity or rewards program, and can be applied solely as payment for purchases with the issuer and/or other
designated merchants, but cannot be converted into, or redeemed for, Fiat Currency;"
http://www.dfs.ny.gov/about/press2014/pr1407171-vc.pdf
August 27, 2014, 06:03:05 PM
One of the devs or rpietila should do the interview if it is a possibility. An actual interview and discussion on the podcast makes more sense.
Yes it does, and anyone would want to hear that. But are the mutually exclusive?
August 27, 2014, 05:59:19 PM
One of the devs or rpietila should do the interview if it is a possibility. An actual interview and discussion on the podcast makes more sense.
August 27, 2014, 05:27:19 PM
I think that this is a good idea, but that XMR would be better served by doing a full interview with a key dev or community member. Monero is worth more than just a <1 minute mention by Adam. It's exactly the kind of thing that Stephanie and/or Andreas would be happy to talk about but it needs a subject matter expert to be the other part of the interview.
Adam's pretty accessible - who's willing to step up and be on an interview about an anonymous crypto?
+1 maybe fluffypony is up for it Adam's pretty accessible - who's willing to step up and be on an interview about an anonymous crypto?
August 27, 2014, 05:06:37 PM
The topic deserves its own show/discussion. Andreas already went on a tirade (in that recent LTB episode with Jeffery Tucker) about how bitcoin is a very benign cryptocurrency, from a regulatory perspective, compared to what else is out there. He was making the point that if regulation, such as the BitLicense, gets enacted, it's just going to push demand for the new crop of native-privacy-focused coins, which will be even more trouble from a regulator's perspective.
They can delve into the landscape of privacy coins more fully, and it should be clear at this point that Monero leads the pack. Further, an interesting topic of discussion would probably be what that all means for bitcoin. For example, one can make the case that a certain level of adoption of privacy-coins is inevitable, and that regulators will see that and start to crack down on them, choosing to effectively *promote* bitcoin instead. Lawsky was already at least thinking briefly down those lines during the DFS hearings earlier this year when he commented something to the effect of: "...maybe we should require all virtual currencies to have a transparent ledger.".
I think the above could be a pretty interesting discussion.
They can delve into the landscape of privacy coins more fully, and it should be clear at this point that Monero leads the pack. Further, an interesting topic of discussion would probably be what that all means for bitcoin. For example, one can make the case that a certain level of adoption of privacy-coins is inevitable, and that regulators will see that and start to crack down on them, choosing to effectively *promote* bitcoin instead. Lawsky was already at least thinking briefly down those lines during the DFS hearings earlier this year when he commented something to the effect of: "...maybe we should require all virtual currencies to have a transparent ledger.".
I think the above could be a pretty interesting discussion.
Regulating BTC does not mean regulating all altcoins, though.
So the secret ones don't gain an advantage when or if BTC becomes regulated.
Plus, the amount of noise made by Monero people is not an indication that they know how to keep quiet about their secret activities of buying XMR to be used to .. erm ...
There are already so many threads to discuss XMR. Please stay on topic.
August 27, 2014, 05:01:04 PM
The topic deserves its own show/discussion. Andreas already went on a tirade (in that recent LTB episode with Jeffery Tucker) about how bitcoin is a very benign cryptocurrency, from a regulatory perspective, compared to what else is out there. He was making the point that if regulation, such as the BitLicense, gets enacted, it's just going to push demand for the new crop of native-privacy-focused coins, which will be even more trouble from a regulator's perspective.
They can delve into the landscape of privacy coins more fully, and it should be clear at this point that Monero leads the pack. Further, an interesting topic of discussion would probably be what that all means for bitcoin. For example, one can make the case that a certain level of adoption of privacy-coins is inevitable, and that regulators will see that and start to crack down on them, choosing to effectively *promote* bitcoin instead. Lawsky was already at least thinking briefly down those lines during the DFS hearings earlier this year when he commented something to the effect of: "...maybe we should require all virtual currencies to have a transparent ledger.".
I think the above could be a pretty interesting discussion.
They can delve into the landscape of privacy coins more fully, and it should be clear at this point that Monero leads the pack. Further, an interesting topic of discussion would probably be what that all means for bitcoin. For example, one can make the case that a certain level of adoption of privacy-coins is inevitable, and that regulators will see that and start to crack down on them, choosing to effectively *promote* bitcoin instead. Lawsky was already at least thinking briefly down those lines during the DFS hearings earlier this year when he commented something to the effect of: "...maybe we should require all virtual currencies to have a transparent ledger.".
I think the above could be a pretty interesting discussion.
Regulating BTC does not mean regulating all altcoins, though.
So the secret ones don't gain an advantage when or if BTC becomes regulated.
Plus, the amount of noise made by Monero people is not an indication that they know how to keep quiet about their secret activities of buying XMR to be used to .. erm ...
August 27, 2014, 04:38:57 PM
The topic deserves its own show/discussion. Andreas already went on a tirade (in that recent LTB episode with Jeffery Tucker) about how bitcoin is a very benign cryptocurrency, from a regulatory perspective, compared to what else is out there. He was making the point that if regulation, such as the BitLicense, gets enacted, it's just going to push demand for the new crop of native-privacy-focused coins, which will be even more trouble from a regulator's perspective.
They can delve into the landscape of privacy coins more fully, and it should be clear at this point that Monero leads the pack. Further, an interesting topic of discussion would probably be what that all means for bitcoin. For example, one can make the case that a certain level of adoption of privacy-coins is inevitable, and that regulators will see that and start to crack down on them, choosing to effectively *promote* bitcoin instead. Lawsky was already at least thinking briefly down those lines during the DFS hearings earlier this year when he commented something to the effect of: "...maybe we should require all virtual currencies to have a transparent ledger.".
I think the above could be a pretty interesting discussion.
They can delve into the landscape of privacy coins more fully, and it should be clear at this point that Monero leads the pack. Further, an interesting topic of discussion would probably be what that all means for bitcoin. For example, one can make the case that a certain level of adoption of privacy-coins is inevitable, and that regulators will see that and start to crack down on them, choosing to effectively *promote* bitcoin instead. Lawsky was already at least thinking briefly down those lines during the DFS hearings earlier this year when he commented something to the effect of: "...maybe we should require all virtual currencies to have a transparent ledger.".
I think the above could be a pretty interesting discussion.
August 27, 2014, 04:32:04 PM
Your comments about XMR being deserving of greater than 45 seconds of paid dialogue make sense to me,
but if the 45 seconds is just the first of many mentions, it would work as a great stepping-stone.
but if the 45 seconds is just the first of many mentions, it would work as a great stepping-stone.
August 27, 2014, 04:31:42 PM
I keep thinking Andreas Antonopoulos not talking about Monero is simply because he didn't research about it yet, for instance
Or perhaps he is not done buying..
August 27, 2014, 04:20:53 PM
I think that this is a good idea, but that XMR would be better served by doing a full interview with a key dev or community member. Monero is worth more than just a <1 minute mention by Adam. It's exactly the kind of thing that Stephanie and/or Andreas would be happy to talk about but it needs a subject matter expert to be the other part of the interview.
Adam's pretty accessible - who's willing to step up and be on an interview about an anonymous crypto?
Adam's pretty accessible - who's willing to step up and be on an interview about an anonymous crypto?
Jump to: