Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 1487. (Read 4671660 times)

If you want to be taken seriously (I have no idea) then you need to educate yourself at least a little about the history and status of this project.

1. We have always described it as alpha-quality software. Perhaps some day we will promote that to beta-quality.

2. We took over the project, which was a fork of a promising coin with a fraudulent hidden premine. It turns out that they guy who did the fork was probably in collusion with the original group of scammers. The project only became anything other than a scam when a bunch of interested people from the community decided that despite the mess there was enough promise here to take it and run with it. If any of this makes you uncomfortable, this is most certainly not the coin for you.

3. I don't give a fuck about pandering to investors. They are free to speculate or short terms swings or to invest in the long term possibility that we are able to develop this project to something much greater than it is today. You are also perfectly free to do neither.

Have a nice day.

Anyway, I never realized there was something about the cryptonote (CN?) outfit itself that is fishy. they seemed pretty corporate to me, but never did quite understand their biz model. Is there some URL with specific info on what sorts of things they have done?

This is a reasonable question. Perhaps ask Peter Todd?

Am I not entitled to hold a number of coins at the same time? First rule of investing is: don't put all your eggs in one basket.

As an Monero investor for some time, am I not allowed to say what I think?

Am I not entitled to hold a number of coins at the same time? First rule of investing is: don't put all your eggs in one basket.

As an Monero investor for some time, am I not allowed to say what I think?

Mintpal price is about 0.00415 now, HitBTC was frozen at 0.00380 after some had dumped on low volume (2,500 XMR) at the last moment.

All I ask is that the most reputable and highest-volume exchange, Poloniex, would:
- announce the resumption of trading at least 1 hour in advance;
- allow traders to enter orders during this time;
- arrange a market-clearing procedure at the moment when the trading starts, so that the existing bids and asks that coincide, would be matched with each other at the midprice that clears all of them, to not favor sellers or buyers.

Your comment was basically an insult and provocation towards Monero devs and everyone trying to fix the attacks. It deserved a much worst response.

Implies - We haven't got a clue. So we are paying for temporary help.

Get some sleep. For investors, this sort of loose talk, from someone that is an established part of the team, gives zero confidence in the project.

I'm more bringing it to the attention of the devs who brought PT on board....

I think you need to take a break. You are unintentionally saying stupid things.


Implies - so other attacks are still possible?



Implies - don't trust Monero with your anonymity just yet.



Where do you start with this statement.

Implies

- We didn't have the technical skill in the first place, so we are just using anything we could find
- Quality assurance in the code was never a priority


Implies - We haven't got a clue. So we are paying for temporary help.

Get some sleep. For investors, this sort of loose talk, from someone that is an established part of the team, gives zero confidence in the project.

Your comment was basically an insult and provocation towards Monero devs and everyone trying to fix the attacks. It deserved a much worst response.

Real investors have already stated their confidence are at all times high with the Monero project, who do you think people are going to hear.

now go back to your darkcoin thread

I'll answer both at the same time. This particular attack can't be mounted again. We haven't pushed out the official fix yet, but exploit it requires growing the blocks sizes, which takes time. We'd never let that happen. The full fix will be out soon. This hole is plugged.

Any software can have vulnerabilities and exploits. This is exacerbated by the fact that we got the code from a bunch of lying scammers who despite that character flaw, happen to have some talent when it comes to cryptography and to a lesser extent coding. We are reviewing the code and paying qualified people to review the code in order to identify and correct problems to the greatest extent possible. Further we will be restructuring, refactoring, and/or replacing some of the code in order to further increase its robustness and trustworthiness (removing obfuscation for example).

This particular attack can't be mounted again.

Any software can have vulnerabilities and exploits.

we got the code from a bunch of lying scammers who despite that character flaw, happen to have some talent when it comes to cryptography and to a lesser extent coding.

We are reviewing the code and paying qualified people to review the code in order to identify and correct problems

With price-discovery in the markets, the definition of "artificial" is vague. In one sense, the decline from 510 to 400 and below was "artificial" (if we assume it was, at least partly, a product of preknowledge of the coming attack and speculation that it would further hurt the price). In the other sense, the essence of markets is that all knowledge is taken into account, information is not perfect, and seldom even the best informed players have access to many information that some of the others have, in turn.

If we discount the last week downturn altogether, the price should be much higher by now. The attack failed - it could not damage the confidence towards XMR, it exposed the old scammers more, and proved how capable the devteam is. "Rolling back" the preparation of the attack from price history would lift us to 600 by tomorrow.

But if the market collectively decides that a selloff is in order, we might found ourselves at 300 instead. That some buyers openly like XMR at 400, is no more artificial than others vowing in the trollbox that they will sell every one of theirs, at whatever price they can get once the trading starts. Depending who will prevail, buying at 400 may be the last opportunity to buy at 400, or the last opportunity to sell at 400. Most likely, given the meager actual effect of the attack, it won't be neither, and anyone making decisions based on what others have already done, is just impoverishing himself as a result.

I have a largish number of XMR and BTC in the exchange, ready to react. But my reaction will be to buy if the price goes down, and sell if it goes up. This is my way of making slow and steady profit. Others have their way, and without panickers, my income would be significantly lower.

I'm more bringing it to the attention of the devs who brought PT on board....

This is a reasonable question. Perhaps ask Peter Todd?

I don't know who Peter Todd is but if he was HIRED to be a consultant for Monero it is really really unprofessional for him to be publicly defaming the code on twitter before privately giving his input to the devs. In the corporate world if say IBM were having some issues with their books and hired an outside accounting firm to come audit and straighten things out, then said firm went on twitter and publicly went "Hoo Boy! It's amazing IBM functions at all considering they basically use monkeys with crayons to do their accounting!" That would not fly and would immediately tank the price of the stock. When people have money on the line, why would this guy be publicly slandering the code when he has been hired as a consultant???