LMFAO... brilliant even tho i'm too in me sauce now to keep up with these maths peoples!!
Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 1519. (Read 4670972 times)
August 29, 2014, 07:48:49 PM
LMFAO... brilliant even tho i'm too in me sauce now to keep up with these maths peoples!!
August 29, 2014, 07:45:06 PM
August 29, 2014, 07:37:02 PM
The risk of not holding monero is infinitely bigger than that of holding it.
With not holding, you can lose a sum equal to 1000x your net worth.
With holding, you can maximum lose the amount invested.
Sounds like Pascal's wager. That can never be the reason to do it.
I may be strange in that it seems perfectly valid to me. I pay taxes, because by paying, I lose only the sum invested, but by not paying, I risk unforeseen consequences. With Monero there is at least some upside, unlike in paying taxes which is a genuine lose-lose...
Yes, but the same is true for any other altcoin (even the most junky ones),
take the following assumption:
1.) you cannot invest
2.) you can buy a basket which is filled in an equal distribution with the top200 decentralized currencies
what would you do?
the same is true for the existence of any god. This is just not how logic works though.
even following the wikipedia article - pascals wager is not a proof of god - I always understood it that way: even if there is a tiny possibility for an infinite outcome, it is rational to take the bet . I see nothing wrong with that.
If I follow your idea correctly you say that if you observe 1000 ravens, and they are all black you can neither conclude that all ravens are black nor can you conclude that the next observed raven is black. This is obviously true; but don't you think you can at least partially conclude that the next raven is black?
To come back to xmr and I usually do not take much out of ristos predictions: but what he is essentially saying is that he has observed 1000 ravens which were all black, and xmr is the 1001 he is seeing; his estimation of the likelyhood that this raven is being black is quite high.
"If I follow your idea correctly you say that if you observe 1000 ravens, and they are all black you can neither conclude that all ravens are black nor can you conclude that the next observed raven is black. This is obviously true; but don't you think you can at least partially conclude that the next raven is black?"
Let's say there were originally 10 black ravens, and you concluded that every new raven would Not be black, you would be wrong upto the point of there being 1,000 ravens(990 after the original 10 or 990 times you were wrong). To continue concluding that the next raven would Not be black would mean that you're insane in Einstein's definition of the word.
It's overwhelmingly logical and rational to estimate that the 1001th raven would be black, given that the previous 1000 were.
However, there is still a chance that the 1001 raven would Not be black, though the odds are 1000 to 1.
August 29, 2014, 07:31:55 PM
The risk of not holding monero is infinitely bigger than that of holding it.
With not holding, you can lose a sum equal to 1000x your net worth.
With holding, you can maximum lose the amount invested.
Sounds like Pascal's wager. That can never be the reason to do it.
I may be strange in that it seems perfectly valid to me. I pay taxes, because by paying, I lose only the sum invested, but by not paying, I risk unforeseen consequences. With Monero there is at least some upside, unlike in paying taxes which is a genuine lose-lose...
Yes, but the same is true for any other altcoin (even the most junky ones),
take the following assumption:
1.) you cannot invest
2.) you can buy a basket which is filled in an equal distribution with the top200 decentralized currencies
what would you do?
the same is true for the existence of any god. This is just not how logic works though.
even following the wikipedia article - pascals wager is not a proof of god - I always understood it that way: even if there is a tiny possibility for an infinite outcome, it is rational to take the bet . I see nothing wrong with that.
If I follow your idea correctly you say that if you observe 1000 ravens, and they are all black you can neither conclude that all ravens are black nor can you conclude that the next observed raven is black. This is obviously true; but don't you think you can at least partially conclude that the next raven is black?
To come back to xmr and I usually do not take much out of ristos predictions: but what he is essentially saying is that he has observed 1000 ravens which were all black, and xmr is the 1001 he is seeing; his estimation of the likelyhood that this raven is being black is quite high.
August 29, 2014, 07:21:34 PM
Since some of the Bytecoin/CryptoNote devs seem to have been scammers, how can we trust that the elliptic curve constants in Monero were not chosen maliciously? If they were chosen maliciously, could that be determined somehow? Should a new curve be chosen, just in case?
I'm not a cryptographer, so please excuse me if this is a stupid question.
I'm not a cryptographer, so please excuse me if this is a stupid question.
Hi. I have read about that as well, as i've read all the whitepapers and the phony bcn premine based on rethink-your-strategy's epic post about it etc, but I keep forgetting to ask any devs here. Fluffy, smooth, taco.. can anyone elaborate on your mathematician's review of the code in that regard to constants from nowhere? they seem very wary about those constants and why they were chosen etc.
i do know some C, but i'm old/rusty, so i never looked at any of the code based on the fact that i heard it was an absolute mess to undo.
thank you!
The cryptography primitives are being carefully reviewed right now. Reviewing the cryptography code was the next planned step after reviewing the white paper.
We have not discovered anything dangerous, yet, but we are still looking.
August 29, 2014, 07:19:20 PM
Since some of the Bytecoin/CryptoNote devs seem to have been scammers, how can we trust that the elliptic curve constants in Monero were not chosen maliciously? If they were chosen maliciously, could that be determined somehow? Should a new curve be chosen, just in case?
I'm not a cryptographer, so please excuse me if this is a stupid question.
I'm not a cryptographer, so please excuse me if this is a stupid question.
Hi. I have read about that as well, as i've read all the whitepapers and the phony bcn premine based on rethink-your-strategy's epic post about it etc, but I keep forgetting to ask any devs here. Fluffy, smooth, taco.. can anyone elaborate on your mathematician's review of the code in that regard to constants from nowhere, or what you think/are planning/whatever/to do about it? they seem very wary about those constants and why they were chosen, like suggesting maybe NSA etc.
i do know some C, but i'm old/rusty, so i never looked at any of the code based on the fact that i heard it was an absolute mess to undo.
thank you!
August 29, 2014, 07:14:01 PM
Since some of the Bytecoin/CryptoNote devs seem to have been scammers, how can we trust that the elliptic curve constants in Monero were not chosen maliciously? If they were chosen maliciously, could that be determined somehow? Should a new curve be chosen, just in case?
I'm not a cryptographer, so please excuse me if this is a stupid question.
I'm not a cryptographer, so please excuse me if this is a stupid question.
August 29, 2014, 07:10:11 PM
@statdude:
Do you think you could also post the relative % of the emitted coins that is represented in your stats? Think it would just be interesting to learn what percentage of the monero currently in circulation is being represented/stated by people filling the form.
Cheers,
~ Myagui
Do you think you could also post the relative % of the emitted coins that is represented in your stats? Think it would just be interesting to learn what percentage of the monero currently in circulation is being represented/stated by people filling the form.
Cheers,
~ Myagui
+1
That would be a great feature
August 29, 2014, 06:41:34 PM
@statdude:
Do you think you could also post the relative % of the emitted coins that is represented in your stats? Think it would just be interesting to learn what percentage of the monero currently in circulation is being represented/stated by people filling the form.
Cheers,
~ Myagui
Do you think you could also post the relative % of the emitted coins that is represented in your stats? Think it would just be interesting to learn what percentage of the monero currently in circulation is being represented/stated by people filling the form.
Cheers,
~ Myagui
August 29, 2014, 06:21:23 PM
Median by month (starting April): 6851,3049,5135,1478,524
Count by month (starting April): 19,28,28,17,9
Count by month (starting April): 19,28,28,17,9
August 29, 2014, 06:19:14 PM
Update:
Survey Link:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/10FFq_viVaY_THsToPNEwgTxrBSGVxW1EzeYPHX_2nuQ/viewform?usp=send_form
Count 119
Average 7,935
Median 2,080
Survey Link:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/10FFq_viVaY_THsToPNEwgTxrBSGVxW1EzeYPHX_2nuQ/viewform?usp=send_form
Count 119
Average 7,935
Median 2,080
New Update:
Count 139
Average 7,554
Median 1,500
Thanks Risto, i missed the survey earlier but just added myself. thanks again for all you do here!
August 29, 2014, 06:15:29 PM
Update:
Survey Link:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/10FFq_viVaY_THsToPNEwgTxrBSGVxW1EzeYPHX_2nuQ/viewform?usp=send_form
Count 119
Average 7,935
Median 2,080
Survey Link:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/10FFq_viVaY_THsToPNEwgTxrBSGVxW1EzeYPHX_2nuQ/viewform?usp=send_form
Count 119
Average 7,935
Median 2,080
New Update:
Count 139
Average 7,554
Median 1,500
August 29, 2014, 06:12:01 PM
Quote
LFMAO... nah man, i'm good. i'm not out to get rich quick here, im in it to win it, done with alt/scam coins. and i am definitely not buying anything named Fckbanks... fck me!?
Did even one person "invest" in that coin? Oh well, I guess if you look at it one way, a person could benefit from the endless sea of shitcoins in that they more effectively hide gems like XMR at first so that early adopters who know what to look for can buy large amounts for cheap early on.
August 29, 2014, 06:10:19 PM
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager It's one of the most famous examples of incorrectly applied logic.
Ah.. thanks, makes sense now. Even though i'm an atheist and don't believe in either, i get it. but still. I'm with Risto on this one, guess i'm nuts too. time will tell and maybe you can come back someday and say "Hey yo, i was right, and you ignored me!" ...
How could I say that? I'm not saying Monero is bad. I'm saying this specific reasoning is wrong.
I'm sorry, that is exactly what i meant, i was not clear, it was not about monero, but about Pascal's wager and the reasoning/logic etc. thanks again for the link, very good stuff, never heard of it before.
August 29, 2014, 06:08:57 PM
The risk of not holding monero is infinitely bigger than that of holding it.
With not holding, you can lose a sum equal to 1000x your net worth.
With holding, you can maximum lose the amount invested.
Sounds like Pascal's wager. That can never be the reason to do it.
I may be strange in that it seems perfectly valid to me. I pay taxes, because by paying, I lose only the sum invested, but by not paying, I risk unforeseen consequences. With Monero there is at least some upside, unlike in paying taxes which is a genuine lose-lose...
The same is true of many alternative cryptocurrencies. Whilst there are a lot of hopeless ones, you can never tell what circumstances will lead to a winner. Some great ideas just fail for reasons beyond their control, or from competition and changing conditions. Naturally everyone thinks theirs is the best, and very few people have done proper investigation of all coins.
So therefore, I believe , to truly mitigate that risk, you need to hold 50+ different altcoins, carefully researched and selected. That dilutes the ROI a bit.
August 29, 2014, 06:03:53 PM
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager It's one of the most famous examples of incorrectly applied logic.
Ah.. thanks, makes sense now. Even though i'm an atheist and don't believe in either, i get it. but still. I'm with Risto on this one, guess i'm nuts too. time will tell and maybe you can come back someday and say "Hey yo, i was right, and you ignored me!" ...
How could I say that? I'm not saying Monero is bad. I'm saying this specific reasoning is wrong.
August 29, 2014, 06:02:19 PM
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager It's one of the most famous examples of incorrectly applied logic.
Ah.. thanks, makes sense now. Even though i'm an atheist and don't believe in either, i get it. but still. I'm with Risto on this one, guess i'm nuts too. time will tell and maybe you can come back someday and say "Hey yo, i was right, and you ignored me!" ...
August 29, 2014, 05:58:51 PM
The risk of not holding monero is infinitely bigger than that of holding it.
With not holding, you can lose a sum equal to 1000x your net worth.
With holding, you can maximum lose the amount invested.
Sounds like Pascal's wager. That can never be the reason to do it.
I may be strange in that it seems perfectly valid to me. I pay taxes, because by paying, I lose only the sum invested, but by not paying, I risk unforeseen consequences. With Monero there is at least some upside, unlike in paying taxes which is a genuine lose-lose...
Yes, but the same is true for any other altcoin (even the most junky ones), the same is true for the existence of any god. This is just not how logic works though.
Mind that Bitcoin and Monero are the only cryptocurrencies I currently hold.
Disclaimer - I only hold Bitcoin and Monero as well. Seems to be common around here for some reason..
Thanks!
Not holding Fckbanks coin? Sheesh. It's like you don't want to make money bro. Going to miss the train!
Lol that name. At least spell fuck properly for fck's sake
LFMAO... nah man, i'm good. i'm not out to get rich quick here, im in it to win it, done with alt/scam coins. and i am definitely not buying anything named Fckbanks... fck me!?
August 29, 2014, 05:27:22 PM
The risk of not holding monero is infinitely bigger than that of holding it.
With not holding, you can lose a sum equal to 1000x your net worth.
With holding, you can maximum lose the amount invested.
Sounds like Pascal's wager. That can never be the reason to do it.
I may be strange in that it seems perfectly valid to me. I pay taxes, because by paying, I lose only the sum invested, but by not paying, I risk unforeseen consequences. With Monero there is at least some upside, unlike in paying taxes which is a genuine lose-lose...
Yes, but the same is true for any other altcoin (even the most junky ones), the same is true for the existence of any god. This is just not how logic works though.
Mind that Bitcoin and Monero are the only cryptocurrencies I currently hold.
Disclaimer - I only hold Bitcoin and Monero as well. Seems to be common around here for some reason..
Thanks!
Not holding Fckbanks coin? Sheesh. It's like you don't want to make money bro. Going to miss the train!
Lol that name. At least spell fuck properly for fck's sake
August 29, 2014, 05:21:12 PM
The risk of not holding monero is infinitely bigger than that of holding it.
With not holding, you can lose a sum equal to 1000x your net worth.
With holding, you can maximum lose the amount invested.
Sounds like Pascal's wager. That can never be the reason to do it.
I may be strange in that it seems perfectly valid to me. I pay taxes, because by paying, I lose only the sum invested, but by not paying, I risk unforeseen consequences. With Monero there is at least some upside, unlike in paying taxes which is a genuine lose-lose...
Yes, but the same is true for any other altcoin (even the most junky ones), the same is true for the existence of any god. This is just not how logic works though.
Mind that Bitcoin and Monero are the only cryptocurrencies I currently hold.
Disclaimer - I only hold Bitcoin and Monero as well. Seems to be common around here for some reason..
Thanks!
Not holding Fckbanks coin? Sheesh. It's like you don't want to make money bro. Going to miss the train!
Jump to: