Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 1197. (Read 4671924 times)

I'd just suggest that if you did come up with a plan of your own design with your own choice of milestones, you would likely be able to raise more funding from more people. But it is your choice as project organizer how to do it. If you just want to do simple donations and can make that work, go for it. I've already donated and I said I'd donate more later, so this isn't an issue for me, just my opinion.

This a common misconception. Avoiding address reuse is a good practice that improves your privacy by reduced linking (somewhat similar to stealth addresses) but does not prevent tracing. Every coin still has a history that can be traced back to the coinbase where it was created. To get around that you need some kind of mixing (either centralized or decentralized), but that won't be very effective as long as mixing is an unusual thing that is only done when people want to mix because the anonymity set will be small.

The sidechain with ring signatures is called XMR.

I agree with that objection that Monero should stay away from direct contact with potentially illegal markets, for the sake of the coin we should never talk about condoning its use here, but if Monero is used there is nothing we can do about that.

But thats not what I want to talk about, its about Tacotime, he is cozy with Bitcoin developers, we all know they dislike Monero because its a threat to Bitcoin, he will probably leave Monero one day to work in a sidechain with ring signature on Bitcoin, mark my words, it also will in my opinion fail but thats also conjecture.

Just be glad the Monero github is under a public and more trustworthy person.

Some can be traced - the ones where addresses are reused.  It's all up to the user and his address habits.

anonymous crypto area is the ground of distrust for every party..
what conditions do you suggest for escrow, who will decide whether the work corresponds with donator's expectation and vision? the issue is that is not an ordered project with a well-defined detailed technical specifications. no fixed conception of how it should look like, in which way can be realized... many unknown variables. there is NO "" exactly plan with details on exactly what and when something will be completed ""
this is rather a creative project, I choose in process the most optimal in my opinion details, but that could be many different opinions disagreed with each other..

Seems silly to chime in in this discussion amongst these 4-5 gold coin peeps.

But I agree with the sentiment that the Monero GUI wallet should not contain an integrated marketplace. I don't do my shopping at the bank. And I don't do my banking at a store.

Of course, obviously, this is the world of open source development we're talking about, so its not like somebody can stop the development of a marketplace + wallet app down the road.

Also in reference to some of the discussed points, I had an interesting discussion with one of my in-laws over the new years holiday. This is a guy who teaches economics to college students. He essentially only knows that bitcoin exists - nothing of their underlying technology, etc, or the fact that other cryptocurrencies exist.

The one thing he commented on - the ONE thing - was that bitcoin won't function as a currency because it can be traced.

Again - this is a guy who professes economics to students, has only the most fleeting understanding or knowledge of bitcoin, and the one thing he knows is that it can be traced, and this is enough for him to know that it won't be a great currency.

Hmm, ty for ideas.

My understanding from his response was a total rejection to placing the decentralized marketplace in the upcoming gui wallet, a slight objection toward using Monero in a decentralized marketplace due to lack of academic understanding and audit, and a large objection toward using Monero to purchase illegal goods on a decentralzied marketplace due to the illegality.

I would be very doubtful of duress, the sentence included "computational attacks or by intimidation", which .. well let's be honest here it wouldn't take much. We've got some publicly traceable developers, a protocol with no IP obfuscation, full disclosure for the most part over open channels on IRC and this board ... intimidation wouldn't be hard if it were to assume a role as the goto currency for illicit activity at this point in time. It's just not a big project yet. And crypto has no guns.

Monero*--a decentralized anonymous currency.

Freebazaar*--a decentralized market for Monero that IS NOT part of the official GUI.


*The devs are not responsible for the use of this technology for good or evil--especially since one man's evil is another man's good and vice versa depending on where, when and how you live.

To make my point as clear as possible, openBazaar devs could easily make the same exact statement about Monero as TacoTime did about openBazaar:


See what I mean?

And I contend that building a p2p marketplace is not "condoning illicit activity", it is trying to build a better, more efficient way to conduct trade.

But I also think it is rather absurd to think about the Monero core team building any kind of marketplace in the forseeable future. That is so far outside of our charter it isn't worth discussing. We're focused on Monero the distributed cryptocurrency.

I agree that including open/free bazaar features in the official wallet is not a good move. I also don't expect the core team to condone illicit activity in any way.

What alarms me is TacoTime's hasty objection to decentralized marketplaces, but not to the decentralized private currency he's currently working on.

He then throws out the word 'intimidation' in a statement that alone could be interpreted as threatening or intimidating. It makes me wonder if he himself is under some kind of duress.

If it were anyone else, I'd assume his comments were made in bad judgement. But this is a person who seems to choose his words very carefully.

Sorry, just a difference of opinion.

IMO it's not so much a moral issue as much as it is going to be a hierarchy dictating which decentralized marketplaces I'm allowed to use and which ones I'm not...

Do you see what I'm trying to say here?

I don't mind at all that people use the currency for whatever they want to use it for (I would; however, be just as disturbed that people use Monero to pay for illicit activities as I would be if someone were to use fiat/cash for the same), but asking someone to shove a marketplace in my face when I may want to use another, may never want to use it, may want to make my own, or may just consider Monero solely a store of value, or whatever..

We're asking a group of elected officials to tell us what's right, and put it in software we use, rather than leave the software they provide as bare essentials as possible, and painting our own picture.

I understand that the marketplace may be used for both good and evil, but it wasn't from the earth that I demanded my neighbor trade my stones for wood, and it wasn't from my god or king that I demanded the merchant trade me gold for diamonds.

I get that we're not the police, but placing a decentralized marketplace right in the software, rather than having two complimentary software packages, limits future options.

What happens when the world used openbazaar only and we're stuck on freebazaar? I've already posted what I'd like to donate, so I'm definitely in favor of it existing, but having it as an integral part of this is something I don't really agree with.

Who are we to dictate that people must trade on a marketplace we tell them is the best decentralized marketplace? Isn't that a little contradictory?


Yeah, sorry if the response seemed pretty limited. Please let me know if the above sentences help clarify my position?

Only accepting 100% prepayment/refusing escrow are red flags for many of us, and requires everyone to trust you completely.

Luckily, most of the pledges so far are unconditional so you can prepay your helper and cover other expenses.  The escrowed funds are a bonus and possible source of profit, which is a standard, reasonable risk-sharing arrangement used by many contractors.

It would be an insane idea to incorporate such functionality (Dark Market Payments Integration) directly into the Monero wallet.  It would forever taint the image.  Such functionality is not needed in the least for Monero to be used by Dark Market folks.

just to clarify, we are talking about the "secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency" as mentioned in the title for the past 9 months, right?

Untrue, Just because something can be used for evil does not mean it will be and can't be used for good. We are not the Moral POLICE. I am of the opinion that I should be able to buy a joint for my dieing mother, I'm sorry you feel I don't have that right.

How is this being made into an issue?

People are literally asking the developers to put into place a function in the wallet that will 100% be used to rape, murder, pillage, sell drugs, assassinate, pay for theft, etc, and this is the point that is being resisted currently.

The fact that you say, oh well we're just giving them an avenue to conduct transactions privately on a neutral ground doesn't change this fact. Sure, private transactions are great, but I wouldn't want that kinda shit on my computer.

All of this can be coded to use Monero, and none of it has to be inside the wallet software that the developers provide.

Let them provide the multisig, unadulterated wallet software, eliminate security flaws and refine the core functionality of the software .. but I wouldn't expect them to start picking and choosing apps to put into it.

I wouldn't want an ebay bank account ... why would I?

Has this account been hijacked?

So what your saying is you don't support fiat? It is used daily to murder rape and pillage.