[XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 1637.

Anon136

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1217

Quote from: AnonyMint on July 15, 2014, 09:54:01 PM

Quote from: Anon136 on July 15, 2014, 09:48:52 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on July 15, 2014, 09:17:55 PM

Quote from: aminorex on July 15, 2014, 09:13:43 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on July 15, 2014, 08:36:18 PM

You have a habit of misapplying generalizations. The % is not growing exponentially.

A constant % rate of growth is the exact definition of exponential. I would take your critques more seriously if you did not exemplify them so well.

Don't conflate the growth of the value and adoption of the coin, with a fixed percentage. Come on now. Your IQ is higher than this.

You are strawmanning. He only said a constant % rate of growth causes exponential growth. Nothing about the value of anything.

Incorrect. He was arguing against a constant % rate of perpetual mining rewards (a.k.a. debasement). He conflated this with the exponential growth of the value and adoption of the coin.

I getting close to putting you on ignore because you are causing me to make noise posts in order to correct your careless noise. You don't read and comprehend before you post.

Hey before you do that though can you take a look at my response to your claim that miniblockchain addresses the scalability problem.

Anon136

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1217

Quote from: AnonyMint on July 15, 2014, 09:54:01 PM

Quote from: Anon136 on July 15, 2014, 09:48:52 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on July 15, 2014, 09:17:55 PM

Quote from: aminorex on July 15, 2014, 09:13:43 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on July 15, 2014, 08:36:18 PM

You have a habit of misapplying generalizations. The % is not growing exponentially.

A constant % rate of growth is the exact definition of exponential. I would take your critques more seriously if you did not exemplify them so well.

Don't conflate the growth of the value and adoption of the coin, with a fixed percentage. Come on now. Your IQ is higher than this.

You are strawmanning. He only said a constant % rate of growth causes exponential growth. Nothing about the value of anything.

Incorrect. He was arguing against a constant % rate of perpetual mining rewards (a.k.a. debasement). He conflated this with the exponential growth of the value and adoption of the coin.

I getting close to putting you on ignore because you are causing me to make noise posts in order to correct your careless noise. You don't read and comprehend before you post.

You are getting very close to my ignore list as well. Maybe we are a good match for each others ignore lists.

AnonyMint

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 521

Quote from: Anon136 on July 15, 2014, 09:48:52 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on July 15, 2014, 09:17:55 PM

Quote from: aminorex on July 15, 2014, 09:13:43 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on July 15, 2014, 08:36:18 PM

You have a habit of misapplying generalizations. The % is not growing exponentially.

A constant % rate of growth is the exact definition of exponential. I would take your critques more seriously if you did not exemplify them so well.

Don't conflate the growth of the value and adoption of the coin, with a fixed percentage. Come on now. Your IQ is higher than this.

You are strawmanning. He only said a constant % rate of growth causes exponential growth. Nothing about the value of anything.

Incorrect. He was arguing against a constant % rate of perpetual mining rewards (a.k.a. debasement). He conflated this with the exponential growth of the value and adoption of the coin.

I getting close to putting you on ignore because you are causing me to make noise posts in order to correct your careless noise. You don't read and comprehend before you post.

Anon136

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1217

My computer broke and I'm on a tablet now so I won't be very active for a few days. See you guys in a few days

Anon136

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1217

Quote from: AnonyMint on July 15, 2014, 09:17:55 PM

Quote from: aminorex on July 15, 2014, 09:13:43 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on July 15, 2014, 08:36:18 PM

You have a habit of misapplying generalizations. The % is not growing exponentially.

A constant % rate of growth is the exact definition of exponential. I would take your critques more seriously if you did not exemplify them so well.

Don't conflate the growth of the value and adoption of the coin, with a fixed percentage. Come on now. Your IQ is higher than this.

You are strawmanning. He only said a constant % rate of growth causes exponential growth. Nothing about the value of anything.

AnonyMint

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 521

Quote from: aminorex on July 15, 2014, 09:13:43 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on July 15, 2014, 08:36:18 PM

You have a habit of misapplying generalizations. The % is not growing exponentially.

A constant % rate of growth is the exact definition of exponential. I would take your critques more seriously if you did not exemplify them so well.

Don't conflate the growth of the value and adoption of the coin, with a fixed percentage. Come on now. Your IQ is higher than this.

aminorex

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1030

Sine secretum non libertas

Quote from: AnonyMint on July 15, 2014, 08:36:18 PM

You have a habit of misapplying generalizations. The % is not growing exponentially.

A constant % rate of growth is the exact definition of exponential. I would take your critques more seriously if you did not exemplify them so well.

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: thefunkybits on July 15, 2014, 08:33:46 PM

Why isnt this coin in consideration for being added to Cryptsy? I mean its not even on the list of potential coins to add Huh

Because they are lazy and don't want to add anything but 100 more worthless copy-paste bitcoin clones.

Johnny Mnemonic

hero member

Activity: 795

Merit: 514

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: rpietila on July 15, 2014, 10:54:06 AM

Quote from: drawingthesun on July 15, 2014, 10:42:28 AM

(I still maintain the lowest block reward should be at least 1 monero.)

What are the inputs that must be considered when setting the eternal inflation parameters for a PoW coin? From technical perspective, I mean.

From economical perspective, 100 years of growth at 2% APR is 624% per century. Granted, century is a long time, but also the current system with its wasteful resource acquisition and general footprint on pristine nature, cannot continue 1-2 more centuries with this growth rate.

On the other hand, gold production of about 1.2% (historically higher ~2%) can be regarded as near optimal, because gold has held its value vs. oil in the last decades.

If the economic and population growth abate, 0% is of course optimal as you cannot go lower.

=> The quick thinking would point to 0.5%-2% bracket, and it must be percentage, not a fixed amount.

This is a really important matter. A 1%-point fail can easily destroy the coin. (see silver inflation in 1850-1870 for instance how a precious metal was destroyed)

I totally agree and I'm watching with caution any news of inflationary emission after the planned 18m, dogecoin tried to do the same fooling everyone that it had a 100bi cap, the day they announced doges would be minted forever is the day dogecoin started dropping like a rock, I hope XMR doesnt make this mistake

Quote from: AnonyMint on July 15, 2014, 11:31:36 AM

Hey guys, let's say 10% of coins are lost, then 1% of 10% is 0.1%. You are worried about nothing.

Man you really want to destroy this coin, Im watching your posts and if you mean what you just said you are really not that smart, you don't create new crypto-coins because some are lost, this is part of the environment and the market is well aware, the 1% will destroy Monero as rpietila said.

I think you need to read rpietila's quote one more time. You completely missed his point.

AnonyMint

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 521

Quote from: aminorex on July 15, 2014, 08:15:56 PM

I absolutely abhor fixed % inflation. It serves no useful purpose and creates great danger. Fixed reward is ideal because the value of the reward increases with the value of the coin, which is insured to happen because of economic growth. Thus securing the network does not depend on xn fee inflation. It is the most stable and sustainable scenario possible. Since it is a fixed quantity, it does not lead to supply inflation.

The idea of perpetual % inflation being necessary to protect network originates from me. Long ago I blew up your argument.

The value of reward from double-spends presumably rises too, thus a % of the total value of the network rises consumerately whereas a perpetual fixed block reward doesn't.

By increasing the cost to rent a double-spend attack, you decrease the number of confirmations that transactions must wait before being final. This is hugely significant consideration.

Quote from: aminorex on July 15, 2014, 08:15:56 PM

Exponential growth is never sustainable, ever.

You have a habit of misapplying generalizations. The % is not growing exponentially.

thefunkybits

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1000

Why isnt this coin in consideration for being added to Cryptsy? I mean its not even on the list of potential coins to add Huh

aminorex

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1030

Sine secretum non libertas

Quote from: tacotime on July 15, 2014, 05:04:45 PM

I've been perpetually confused as to how the finite miniblockchain scheme can possibly be used to enforce data consensus in a byzantine generals problem-like network. I'd appreciate it if someone could ELI5 it to me.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's the same as the bitcoin algorithm, except that at a certain age you roll up old blocks into a ledger state. The same consensus algorithm applies to the blockchain. There is no enforcement per se any more than there is in any blockchain: The majority will reject your blocks if you don't commit the same ledger state, just like having the best chain. I confess I haven't read any whitepaper, so I may be in left field, but it seems pretty obvious.

AnonyMint

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 521

Quote from: iloveny161 on July 15, 2014, 04:50:01 PM

...the whitepaper review? http://monero.cc/downloads/whitepaper_review.pdf

I also studied the zero-knowledge algorithm (protocol) of the unlinkable ring signatures and I concur with the conclusions of that review. Adam Back, G. Maxwell and others have apparently reviewed it as well.

Can anyone give me a pointer to where the following is being discussed?

Quote from: Surae Noether @ whitepaper review

Anyway, some other guy may come along
and figure out that it needs a hatch so you can lighten it up occasionally.
Apparently Andrew Poelstra and G. Maxwell
are both working on that now, using Merkle trees and required prefixes for one
half of the Cryptonote private keys (the half you would give away to a payment
processor)

One quote from the whitepaper review could be misconstrued:

Quote from: Surae Noether @ whitepaper review

The CN protocol implements a piece of cryptography un-
seen in cryptocurrencies before, in particular, the idea of using
key images to protect against double spending

Key images don't protect against double-spending attacks.

Rather they identify an attempt to double-spend a one-time ring signature (they are what make it "one-time"). But the acceptance is still game-able the same as an attempt to double-spend in Bitcoin is.

The key image is recorded in the block chain and attempts to double-spend are checked against it. Ditto in Bitcoin, the address of the spender is recorded in the block chain and attempts to double-spend are checked against it. The difference is the key image provides unlinkability via the ring signature and the zero-knowledge protocol, but this doesn't make it more hardened against double-spends than Bitcoin.

And with my proposal, linkable block chains such as Bitcoin could gain much more resistance to double-spends than unlinkable block chains such as Cryptonote and Zerocash.

dga

hero member

Activity: 737

Merit: 511

Quote from: fluffypony on July 15, 2014, 04:53:43 PM

Quote from: iloveny161 on July 15, 2014, 04:50:01 PM

Dev team, could you guys give some more info on who wrote the whitepaper review? http://monero.cc/downloads/whitepaper_review.pdf

It just says that he is a mathematician, but that's pretty vague and it would be great if we could look at some of his research/other papers.

I can't find anything about him on google either.

It's a pseudonym (hence the shout out to Emmy Noether), same as Satoshi Nakamoto, same as Nicolas van Saberhagen. If he chooses to identify himself in future that is his prerogative, but he has asked to remain under the guise of a pseudonym at this stage.

Rehearse Unto Surae Noether
Ethane Sourer, counting Earthen Euros
Sauterne Hero, one of Nature Heroes,
my Ears Hereunto will listen well.
Mathematics? Ashore Tenure!
Another Reuse will only her Treasure Hone.
And thus we find the Author Serene.

Brilliantrocket

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 500

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Brilliantrocket on July 15, 2014, 08:14:41 PM

If you don't have perpetual emission of coins, the cost of mounting an attack will drop to the point that it becomes trivial. Not sure why everyone fears a low perpetual inflation.

hahaha and here we have the proof I wanted, a know troll and monero basher wanting perpetual emission of coins because, of course, it will kill the coin for investors instantly, well I'm not worried, I dumped doge at 250 when I saw this coming and many will do the same if Monero chose this route.

That's rather shortsighted.

aminorex

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1030

Sine secretum non libertas

I absolutely abhor fixed % inflation. It serves no useful purpose and creates great danger. Fixed reward is ideal because the value of the reward increases with the value of the coin, which is insured to happen because of economic growth. Thus securing the network does not depend on xn fee inflation. It is the most stable and sustainable scenario possible. Since it is a fixed quantity, it does not lead to supply inflation.

Exponential growth is never sustainable, ever.

Brilliantrocket

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 500

If you don't have perpetual emission of coins, the cost of mounting an attack will drop to the point that it becomes trivial. Not sure why everyone fears a low perpetual inflation.

dga

hero member

Activity: 737

Merit: 511

Quote from: AnonyMint on July 15, 2014, 01:13:31 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on July 15, 2014, 12:32:30 PM

Btw, there is no way to prevent ASICs. But the problem with ASICs is not their existence, but rather that they are not readily available on time to everyone in the same efficiencies. So if you want to defeat this problem, you've got to think about it a totally different way.

You think I haven't been working eh. Wink

Hint: does every user in the world need the most power efficient implementation of SHA-2 such that Intel would make it happen in every PC? No. This is why there is an ASICs problem for Bitcoin, wherein there isn't anymore equal access to efficiencies in mining.

Funny you'd say that, because the answer is: Yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_SHA_extensions

They'll probably be available some time in 2015.

But if I were to make a *completely* wild guess based upon the relative speed of AES, it won't bring CPUs into anything near parity with ASICs -- but it might just narrow the gap with GPUs to a factor of two.

statdude

legendary

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Anon136 on July 15, 2014, 07:23:29 PM

Quote from: binaryFate on July 15, 2014, 07:21:50 PM

Quote from: Anon136 on July 15, 2014, 07:15:49 PM

So I've been trying to think what I could do to help the community. My last idea didn't work out. So I was thinking, what if I made it super easy for people to acquire monero.

1) Send bitcoin to address through blockchain.info with a note attached containing your monero address. (or alternatively digitally sign your monero address with what ever bitcoin address you send from)
2) I use that much bitcoin to perform a market order on the exchange
3) I send how ever much monero I am able to buy to your monero address

Would anyone be interested in this service. You benefit because you don't have to make an account a poloniex or find people in the otc. I benefit because people buying pushes up the price and i hold a monero or two myself.

The only thing is that maybe going onto the exchange and buying yourself is easy enough that this isnt worth it but im curious what you guys think. if this sounds like a service that would be super valuable to you than who am I to judge.

Would probably be more interesting if you make it as automatic as possible (ie, immediate) with a fixed price. Fixed price not being absolute of course, but something like poloniex + N%.
Not knowing how much XMR you'll get when sending your BTC would be very hard to most people, I think.

I don't know enough about security to make something liek this and not get hacked.

Ive been pinged more than once buy buyers not willing to use exchange.

Anon136

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1217

Quote from: binaryFate on July 15, 2014, 07:21:50 PM

Quote from: Anon136 on July 15, 2014, 07:15:49 PM

So I've been trying to think what I could do to help the community. My last idea didn't work out. So I was thinking, what if I made it super easy for people to acquire monero.

1) Send bitcoin to address through blockchain.info with a note attached containing your monero address. (or alternatively digitally sign your monero address with what ever bitcoin address you send from)
2) I use that much bitcoin to perform a market order on the exchange
3) I send how ever much monero I am able to buy to your monero address

Would anyone be interested in this service. You benefit because you don't have to make an account a poloniex or find people in the otc. I benefit because people buying pushes up the price and i hold a monero or two myself.

The only thing is that maybe going onto the exchange and buying yourself is easy enough that this isnt worth it but im curious what you guys think. if this sounds like a service that would be super valuable to you than who am I to judge.

Would probably be more interesting if you make it as automatic as possible (ie, immediate) with a fixed price. Fixed price not being absolute of course, but something like poloniex + N%.
Not knowing how much XMR you'll get when sending your BTC would be very hard to most people, I think.

I don't know enough about security to make something like this and not get hacked.

Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 1637. (Read 4671953 times)