Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 1324. (Read 4671575 times)

@BanditryAndLoot

Good answers, thank you!


Does this really set Monero apart from other anon cryptocurrencies though? Both Monero and other anon cryptocurrencies ultimately do the same thing, transfer value anonymously, unless I'm mistaken. Also, Monero wasn't the first to do this so it doesn't get the advantage of being first like Bitcoin does.


I think most people do this. Other than the DSH/XMR etc markets on Poloniex, there isn't much else reason to buy Monero. Just because you believe in Monero you don't have to buy it.


I do agree that people are concerned to an extent, but I think the large majority of people would be content with the psuedo anonymity that Bitcoin provides. Especially when using Bitcoin is just easier. Monero does really lack ease of use and there is quite a steep learning curve. I never hear people talk about how easy to use Monero is.

All of them
Exactly 100% useful, every single Monero ever produced will have value. Value is useful.
This is confirmation bias. Surely you didn't purchase a crypto currency in 2014 thinking that your neighbors were using them at the grocery store downtown?
You can already purchase anything you would like with any currency.
Very concerned. For example, I'm wearing clothes right this very second. You also are not aware of my name. I'm sure the same will go for the majority of people you will ever interact with over the internet.
Totes agree
Brand new code base, using different cryptography implementations than the Satoshi client or any of its derivatives.
Fuck yeah!
I don't think anyone here is a fortune teller, or diviner. If you do find one, please do let the rest of us know.
Right this minute - $ 3,040,959 as 23% of the total emission which would yield $13,200,000 at 100% emission, plus whatever value you place on hopes and dreams (CMC doesn't list those).
Personally, I don't think you're having increasing doubts, yet more decreasing beliefs. The doubts were likely always there. Seeing as how your main belief you held in buying into this was to only attain profit, obviously your beliefs have decreased in your relative position to your doubts. In that case, I highly suggest you become motivated to discover some more legitimate beliefs, rather than let them shrink in scale to your doubt, lest you will then be in a position to really lose money.

What services would benefit from anonymous transactions?

Practically speaking, how useful is Monero exactly? There are hardly any services that accept Monero, making it basically worthless as a currency. what's the point of a currency if you can't buy anything with it?

How concerned are people about privacy and anonymity? Just because we are supposed to be concerned, doesn't mean we will/are concerned.

Other cryptocurrencies boast anonymity too, what sets Monero apart from the crowd exactly?

Does Monero have a future? Or will it soon die like most cryptocurrencies?

How much value does Monero really have?

I bought into this coin because so many people have convinced themselves and me that this is the next best thing, and I wanted to profit from it. The lowering price is obviously not profitable to me, and now I'm starting to have doubts about this coin.

Alternative XMR pools
If you are using Claymore or Yam miners you can configure backup pools so you dont waste any hash if we have to restart for an update or anything. Please do not use pools with more than 30% of the network hashrate, since it is bad for the network to be too centralised

Pool   Hashrate   Last block   
minexmr.com   333.31 KH/s   
cryptonotepool.org.uk   54.64 KH/s
hashinvest.net   1.07 MH/s   
moneropool.com   12.45 MH/s   
extremepool.org   42.06 KH/s   
monero.crypto-pool.fr   3.84 MH/s
xmr.poolto.be   48.03 KH/s   



Network
Hash Rate: 18.89 MH/sec

i would get into blocknet and forgetting all these shits altogether.

Fair enough. It was me who posted the news story, and Cryptsy hadn't responded at that point I think. Sounds like a weak case if it's true the site wasn't responsible for the breach.
Q

you have to laugh though stored password locally and no 2fa

About that cryptsy law suit that someone posted earlier, it seems utter bullshit 

http://altcoinpress.com/2014/10/california-man-has-computer-hacked-then-blames-crypto-exchange/

who admin moneropool.com ? i see this pool handle more than 51% hashrate   of monero

Monero : Most speculative investment for me so far.
No user friendly wallet for mac yet. reddit readers 731, fb likes 226, no real homepage.. i suspect there are not many devs building on Monero as there are no services yet, no adoption, really nada, except highly speculative hope. Also the community is still very small as we speak, but that doesn't surprise me cause not enough work has been done yet to attract users (can't really use it yet, seems like in alfa phase).

So why did i invest? Mostly because of specualtion, the brand name Monero (might have a nice ring to it in SA and the hispanic world), anonymity, and a few loud voices.

Having lived and worked in SA, mainly Brazil, i know how many people have problems with paying txs (trying to avoid them), sending cash, inflation.. and cash in SA is still king for the majority. Monero could be very useful in SA indeed.

Why don't ypu all quit bitchin about sidechains and worry 'bout dat price?

Because smooth has better things to worry about. Thus,

development is just that. That which hath no meaning, is destined to fail.

Monero exists to buck the trend. A bucking bull is hard to ride, but every man who dare try it, is more of a man than not.

That works with a blacklist but it doesn't work with a scoring system that looks at how recently the coin has been involved with "evil" stuff or others sorts of sophisticated blockchain analysis. Resisting blockchain analysis is why Monero (Cryptonote) was created; tacking it on to Bitcoin is neither easy nor necessarily feasible at all.

I'm not really singling out Coinbase here, I just happen to be aware of what they have been doing. I doubt that other major Bitcoin companies are much different (perhaps using the same third party services, but again I'm just speculating on that). This will all probably get worse with BitLicense, etc.

taint all the coins

They specifically try to avoid that, at least in the federated model. They are trying to make side chain transactions look like ordinary multisigs to avoid censoring or blacklisting transactions to "evil" sidechains.

There is always some plausible deniability in Bitcoin really, since every time the coins move to a new address it can't really be proven that they didn't change owner (at least not from blockchain analysis). But tracing to you can still be an issue, and tracing on the chain at large can be a bigger issue, by identifying clusters of activity associated with various "evil" things. That could cause problems even if it couldn't be used to convict you. For example, Coinbase has been banning people whose Bitcoins seem to seem to transit "evil" parts of the blockchain. I don't know for sure, but I suspect they are using either a third party scoring system for this or they built their own.

There is no answer for "how they work" since they don't exist apart from some secret experiments apparently done by the sidechain developers using the trusted (federated) model.

There is nothing in the sidechain paper about mixing or other measures to inhibit tracing of coins to or from a sidechain. They do offer a method of avoiding address reuse making it harder to identify as an observer which transactions involve a side chain (what we call avoiding linking i.e. stealth). Linking alone isn't enough for real anonymity though. If you send coins to a sidechain and then those coins move, you know someone pulled coins off the sidechain and got your (former) coins. If you do that a lot, you could see a lot of these. Likewise when you pull coins off the sidechain, you will get coins somone sent there, which are also traceable.

You could personally mix your coins before sending to a sidechain, or ask that your coins from a sidechain be sent to a mixer address. But then it becomes questionable why you don't just use the mixer in the first place.

I think side chains will likely become a useful tool for building various things but I caution against making the leap from that to everything all of the sudden becomes a sidechain. I think even the developers overreach a bit in their paper, and people who haven't really looked carefully a the paper and are just responding to the buzz are overreaching even more.

What type of systems can be devised, possibly similar to coin mixing, that will prevent the accumulation of a measurable history of a particular bitcoins life if it were to be used in an alt-chain? Is that how they work?

Specifically I'm referring to keeping a recorded history on the usage of a certain amount of bitcoins, that possibly are 'tough' to be tied to any particular person, in an anonymous side chain that incorporates ring signatures? Would it be possible to recognize if someone had tried to pay someone (with resources available to them) with bitcoins received, even unknowingly, from such a chain after a certain date?

Yes. If your goal is to move into monero then back to BTC a side chain may make more sense since 1 BTC would always equal 1 SideChainRingSignatureCoin and you can move back and forth whenever you want.

A side chain could certainly be created whether it succeeds is not really any more clear than any other coin. In fact I don't think anonymity is really the best use case for side chains at all and other features are probably a better fit.

For example, if you can use a side chain for ultrafast possibly 0-conf transactions like XCN to safely pay for coffee, that could work quite well as long as you and the coffee seller have wallets supporting the side chain.

With anonymity things are a bit more complex, as you need a high level of usage (to create and replenish a large anonymity set) and you also need to not impair your anonymity at the entry/exit chokepoints, which is kind of hard to do as long as the (transparent) Bitcoin main chain remains dominant. Here are some of my earlier comments. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9298204

Also, eliminating exchange risk vs. Bitcoin is probably useless in the bigger picture unless Bitcoin becomes much bigger in the world at large. Exchange risk vs. fiat is what matters and Bitcoin certainly has that still.

Could a sidechain that uses ring signatures be created eliminating need for monero as there would be no exchange risk and the bitcoins are made anonymous with the sidechain?

Even if you get the same coins back you still added a bunch of plausible deniability as the coins would have been "marked" as going into the side chain and impossible to tell if you are the same person or not taking them out even if you get the same coins back.