Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 1319. (Read 4671978 times)

That's a great idea.

Sounds cool, ambitious. I like it. It'll give Monero a wider market, not just techies. I'm up for it. Someone mentioned earlier in this thread how Supercoin failed due to lack of marketing and stuff even though it had good technology. Don't want the same thing to happen to Monero.

So you decided to leave things the way they are?

How about a http://strawpoll.me/

 
Hey what if we make a Monero movie like "The rise and rise of Bitcoin" ?

Something simple like the devs working and explaining what they are doing with human understandable sentences and Monero supporters explaining their vision and ideas and also some miners building crazy big rigs.

Maybe, but there is still a DSH/XMR market. Dashcoin actually has the most volume in the XMR markets.
https://poloniex.com/exchange/xmr_dsh

I thought DSH was delisted from Poloniex.

No. More like everyone had a different opinion.

How so? Minergate has been fairly reliable for me to calculate profits of mining. I've been using it ever since it launched.

yea minergate ........
calculations are wrong

Crap, I guess I missed it. Do you remember what the conclusion was? Did everyone come to some sort of agreement?

It's recently been discussed IIT, a few weeks back.  Sorry I can't link you to it but I'm sure you can find it.

I just did the calculation on Minergate and



500h/s = 0.48573 XMR a day

or 500h/s = 751,408 DSH a day (751,408 DSH = 0.55604192 XMR)

Dashcoin is therefore 14.5% more profitable


Although that's still not really profitable at all, I can't believe how unprofitable mining is these days.

So who here thinks that the emission rate of Monero should be reduced? (Emission rate = The amount of Monero rewarded to Miners per day)



As far as I can tell there would be two likely outcomes, one positive and one negative:


Positive: solve the issue of overwhelming sell pressure (which would most probably lead to higher/stable prices also less fear and doubt)

Negative: miners would get angry about the mining rewards being lowered

burnbabyburn71

actualy is the same
500 hs
in a day are mined
778.000 dsh == 0,57 xmr
on xmr in a day
0,58
so you are wrong

Right now I would mine Dashcoin right now (most profitable cryptonote coin), and you can trade Dashcoin for Monero on Poloniex like I'm doing. Check out minergate.com. Its really easy to setup and good for beginners. The GUI miner they have will work for your GPU too. Selling your Monero for BTC isn't really good right now though, since there are already too many people selling Monero causing the price to decrease. But you're free to do what you like.

so its monero a good coin to mine ?
i have a fx  6300 and gt 430.I can have almost 500/h/s
Where can i exchange my monero? or is it good to stay in my wallet till it increases

I'm pretty sure there is a forum rule against pool advertisements. Not sure if one announcement for new pools is allowed, that might be the case.

This isn't even true. I estimated the break even for CPU mining on a conventional desktop CPU at about 0.09 USD/kwh a few days ago, and lower higher on some more power-efficient CPUs. The numbers might be a bit different now, I'm not sure. That exists for many people at least in cheaper US markets and probably some other markets, and certainly exists for anyone using electric space heaters (which makes the effective rate 0/kwh)

GPUs are somewhat more power efficient than CPUs, so the break even electricity rate is higher, though the opportunity cost of mining something else on the GPUs may also be higher (I'm not sure since I'm not involved in that right now).

EDIT:

These profit margins leave little room for recovering capital costs, which as xulescu points out is exactly where we want to be, because it precludes building big dedicated mining farms. You can mine slightly profitably or at a small loss using equipment you already own for some other purpose, but there is little to no incentive to scale up.

Although the Cryptonote group seems to be scammers that I despise, I still applaud the ingenuity of the designers having achieved something that is quite unique and remarkable in the mining space.

Here is my take on the Botnet Argument. I generally agree with smooth and iCEBREAKER.

I believe botnets are healthy for Monero and represent a desirable balancing factor in the whole network security and coin distribution incentives debate.

The security argument is that botnets make the network antifragile. From the point of view of the network, there are more entities and more CPUs doing PoW. From the very beginning Monero attempted to be a CPU-only coin ("one CPU one vote") and largely managed to do so. It is currently at the point where (1) enthusiasts and benefactors can mine on their CPUs and GPUs (they never mine at profitability, they gain utility from securing the network at a loss), where (2) unsecured computers can mine for botnet operators with about 5-20x lower hash rate per unit, and where (3) professional mining enterprise is crowded out by the first two groups.

Botnets effectively externalize part of the network security to the owners of the unsecured computers. They gain by learning the hard way (and would have been infected by some botnet at some point anyway). The network gains by using their computers. The internet at large becomes more secure. The only party that is losing are the professional miners. They can't just throw more money at Monero to get even more money back. Thus all the network is mined by parties that are, financially, at a loss. I believe this is a very healthy place to be, because it doesn't encourage the race to the bottom ("mining wars") in the hands of a few professional miners (I'm not saying is stops the race, but doesn't further encourage it. It's a balancing factor). Moreover, botnets are not zero-cost either and, because of everyone's incentives to keep botnets away, they cannot scale as well as professional mining. Thus, the network is more decentralized than in their absence. A final point to make here is that whether botnets should or should not be stopped is a normative matter, and therefore subject to moral judgements. I think we should reason about incentives and not necessarily morals.

The coin distribution argument is that it doesn't matter who does the mining, since the emission rate is the same anyway. At the same time, it does matter who sells the mining output. This is a market that can be cornered; indeed, that's exactly what a pump and dump implies. Given that botnets decentralize the sellers of mining output compared to professional miners, the Monero emission is harder to corner and harder to pump and dump. This is also a healthy place to be.

TL;DR: Botnets make the network more secure and keep professional miners out. This way, the Monero emission market is harder to corner and harder to pump and dump. The downside is that the ride will be more painful. This is also a good thing.

vapid scamcoin chipmunk